Jeremy Clark Not Granted Sixth Year Comment Count

Ace January 23rd, 2017 at 11:30 AM


[Eric Upchurch]

According to Inside The Huddle's Michael Spath, the NCAA has denied Jeremy Clark's petition for a sixth year of eligibility:

Clark started seven games at cornerback in 2015 and three in 2016 before tearing his ACL against Penn State. The former three-star safety recruit was a critical component to the last couple secondaries, battling Channing Stribling to a relatively even draw for playing time until the injury.

Without Clark, Michigan will be very inexperienced at cornerback in 2017. Redshirt junior Brandon Watson, who's seen scattered snaps at nickel, is the only upperclassman at the position. Sophomore Lavert Hill and David Long are the favorites to earn starting spots; they'll compete with redshirt sophomore Keith Washington and freshmen Ambry Thomas and Benjamin St-Juste. Unless Michigan picks up another corner in the 2017 class—it looks like they'll get one more—that is the entire group of scholarship corners for next season.

Comments

Bambi

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:33 AM ^

Ed Davis gets a 6th year despite being practice team player of the week in one of his redshirt years. Matt Vandeberg gets a medical hardship despite also getting injured in the 4th game this year. What the fuck NCAA?

NRK

January 23rd, 2017 at 2:39 PM ^

Interesting note in this article on Vandeberg (Link) states:

 

NEWS: Without commenting on specific case, B1G confirms that injured player w/ 4 games in 1st half of season qualifies for medical hardship.

 

and

 

the Big Ten Conference title game counts, regardless if Iowa plays in it), he is at, but not over, the limit. For NCAA purposes, 30 percent is equal to 3.9 games and would round up to four.

Which would be news to me, saince I had been using 12 as the demoninator but interesting for Clark's case. Though I guess 30% x 12 = 3.6 which rounds to 4, and 30% x 13 = 3.9, which also rounds to 4, so I'm not even sure that matters...

Mick53

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:35 AM ^

It is as if the NCAA assumes we are not paying attention to other schools athletes and the rulings that they recieve. This is clearly bullshit when examined next to the 6th years granted elsewhere.

mGrowOld

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:33 PM ^

Until we grow a pair and stand up for ourselves. But we don't.  We sit quietly, take the abuse and basically say "thank you sir, may I have another?" each time we get the screws put to us.

I assure you that if this ever happened to an SEC school (not that I think that would ever happen) they would be screaming loudly and longly about the injustice.  From the Head Coach, through the Athletic Director and hell, if it happened in Mississippi, maybe even the state legislature would get involved.

As long as Michigan continues to take this shit the B1G and the NCAA will be more than happy to throw it at us and laugh.

 

Venom7541

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:48 PM ^

Harbaugh should just play him anyway. Give a big middle finger to the NCAA and when they try to call fall, publicaly call them out for their hypocricy on this compared to other schools and their lack of concern about student-atheletes. And point out their failures with UNC, Auburn, etc...

It would be up to other teams to not take the field against them. Playing a full slate with a player that the NCAA tries to say is inelligable with out saying sorry would completely expose them as frauds.

CalifExile

January 23rd, 2017 at 1:08 PM ^

Playing a player who you know is ineligible would result in serious sanctions - if done by Michigan. What could have been done was to file a lawsuit against the NCAA for making a decision that is arbitrary and capricious. That probably became moot when Clark retained an agent.

dragonchild

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:40 AM ^

We can debate the merits of Davis' case vs. Clark's, but it's all academic.  I mean, I can accept, in principle, that Clark's case wasn't valid.  I'm not saying that's what I think; I'm just saying that among honest people I can respect someone making that argument.

What I'm saying is that's the furthest from the case here.  Harbaugh embarrassed the NCAA, so they're gonna screw him and everyone he knows.  Given how they conduct themselves in, oh, literally everything, I don't see why they'd suddenly stop being the petty sociopaths they are and take a serious look at the case.

Bodogblog

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:47 AM ^

In strict read of the rules and application, yes.  But not in a relative view against other schools and players in similar situations.  In a legal arena, past case law is always cited for current disputes.  The "case law" here includes Davis and Vandenberg and others cited in this thread.  In a common sense arena, you can't do for one or two or a few, and not do for another.  It doesn't make any sense. 

Since they've already walked away from their strict read of the rules, I can't accept this in principle without knowing why the others were granted exceptions and not Clark. 

schreibee

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:32 PM ^

That all sounds awesome, learned counsel - but is there an alternative appeal since you "can't accept" this ruling?

Do they ever site precedence in ruling on "medical" years, comparing it to other cases? Or detail their application of the rules of their own damn handbook?

There seems to be a general sense on this Michigan blog that the ncaa wants to screw Michigan - and it certainly appears that way. But are they required AT ALL to expalin and justify their decisions?

Miami (YTM) basically told the ncaa to fuck themselves and refused to cooperate with an investigation - this after video evidence improper benefits and bank records of payments where delivered to them. Why do we appear to be the ONLY school abiding by these increasingly arbitrary rulings and rules?

jmblue

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:51 AM ^

In order to receive a 6th year, you need to submit medical evidence of having missed two seasons due to injury.  We know he missed most of 2016 with the knee injury, but we may not have had evidence that his other redshirt (in 2012) was medically-related.

It may be that he wasn't injured the other time, so the ruling is legitimate.  What has people frustrated that Ed Davis for MSU got a 6th year when it seemed that he wasn't injured the first time either.

maineandblue

January 23rd, 2017 at 1:11 PM ^

I wouldn't be surprised if MSU and other schools' doctors were willing to come up with post hoc medical conditions (due to pressure from the coach/AD), whereas UM's were not willing to make stuff up and didn't get that type of pressure from our admins. That's the only thing I can think of to explain the disparity...

ijohnb

January 23rd, 2017 at 1:32 PM ^

it possible that he has received feedback that he is draftable as is and really did not pursue the 6th year that hard? Maybe he did not want to come back as much as we wanted him to.

Garv

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:44 AM ^

No appeals process?
This makes me sad for Clark as I suspect with the larger resume he would have gone high in next year's draft. Any speculation on where he might go in this year's draft?

bronxblue

January 23rd, 2017 at 12:36 PM ^

Stoops listed his rehab treatment as a medical exemption. I mean, sure you want to help a kid get over alcoholism, but to use that really tragic incident to get another year of eligiblity makes...100% success for a guy who redshirted an assaulter and thought that was discipline.

SF Wolverine

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:48 AM ^

the NCAA Stretching Timing Investigation Task Foce was spotted getting on a plane headed for Detroit Metro.  Beware!

The douchenozzlery at the NCAA never ceases to amaze.

lhglrkwg

January 23rd, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^

These things would be far easier to swallow and would draw far less ire if the NCAA just stuck to a set of rules. As noted in several examples above me, it seems like the NCAA just does whatever the eff they want with these cases, granting and denying 6th years seemingly at random