At this point should we play one of Vescovi or Plavsic in spite of NCAA?

[csheaton]

My theory is that with Turner being out this will be a rebuilding year anyway. The season is nearly half over and we have 8 wins. Without Turner, Plavsic, or Vescovi we are staring a 7-11type SEC season right in the face.

Since Plavsic has already been denied once, I say we play Vescovi regardless of the consequences. What is the worst the NCAA will do to us? Vacate our 7 or 8 SEC wins this year? Big whoop...because that is what it is looking like. I would honestly rather have at least Vescovi, maybe Plavsic just go ahead and play to get the SEC experience for next year. Who really cares if we vacate ~8 SEC wins as long as we get these guys experience. We could easily make those up in ‘21 and ‘22 with veteran players.

Surely the NCAA wouldn’t put us on probation for playing players who are in good academic standing, and were recruited legally with no financial incentives. What is the risk reward at this point? Would you trade 7-9 vacated wins in SEC play just to get the guys experience for next year since we will have sooo much new enrolling talent? I would....because I don’t see us doing much better than that after losing Turner. Thoughts? It’s not like it’s a Wiseman situation at Memphis, not even close...

 

[golfballs]

No

 

[calban]

Say what?

 

[Zues1]

I'll have what your drinking

 

[csheaton]

Sure, you’re welcome to an O’douls

 

[lostsheep]

While I can appreciate the “F You” message this would send the NCAA, no way Barnes ever does something like this imo.
Doesn’t really jive with the type of program he runs.
Plus, doing something like this would ruin any future goodwill we could ever hope to have from them. Do something like this and the next thing you know you have a coach getting a show cause for hosting a kid at a bbq...wait a sec.
NM...F it...play them!!

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

No.

 

[csheaton]

I can agree with that. I don’t see Barnes doing it either, but the sad part is I could see other schools/ coaches trying it...and possibly getting away with it at certain universities

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

It’s not like it’s a Wiseman situation at Memphis, not even close...

If you knowingly play an ineligible player, that subjects you to a Level 1 rules violation investigation, which is exactly what Memphis may be looking at for the 3 games that it played Wiseman....

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

As effed up as the NCAA is, despite them being a joke of an organization, you still can't shoot them the bird. Obeying them can earn some good will that might be needed another day.

 

[csheaton]

Yes but are Vescovi and Plavsic both knowingly ineligle?? Plavsic maybe a little more so than Vescovi; since we are on the second appeal, however both are apparently still pending. If playing one was more feasible with the least possible consequences, Vescovi would be it. IMO. And probably a greater need at this point...

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Yes but are Vescovi and Plavaic both knowingly ineligle?? Plavaic maybe a little more so than Vescovi, however both are apparently still pending. If playing one was more feasible with least consequences, Vescovi would be it.

There is virtually no comparison between the 2 situations. Plavsic's is an appeal of an unfavorable appeal outcome. Plavsic loses a year, Vescovi can redshirt. Vescovi is just a signee trying to begin his career at his first school. It would be a very bad look for the NCAA to interfere with him playing.

 

[csheaton]

I agree. Vescovi should be eligible in January in a perfect world. Didn’t Stokes start his freshman year in January? I think I remember that being at UT at the time. Hope they’re not discriminating against Vescovi being an international recruit...as they’ve already somewhat done with Plavsic

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I agree. Vescovi should be eligible in January in a perfect world. Didn’t Stokes start his freshman year in January? I think I remember that being at UT at the time. Hope they’re not discriminating against Vescovi being an international recruit...as they’ve already somewhat done with Plavsic

They aren't discriminating against Uros. He transferred and has to sit out a year. TN has been trying to get an exception to the rule. Vescovi's situation is almost identical to Stokes except he was in the NBA program instead of graduating from high school mid-year.

 

[csheaton]

Ok, then my original thoughts of just playing Vescovi seem more legitimate if his and Stokes’ situations are that similar. We are hurting more at guard anyway. Just looking for some kind of help

 

[csheaton]

Ok, then I’m all in on playing Vescovi, but if the NCAA is going to punish us for that, we might as well play Plavsic too because I feel the accumulated punishment wouldn’t be much more than only playing Vescovi...and possibly worth it in the long run. But I would be happy with just 1 out of the 2

 

[Voltopia]

I feel like some of the posters in this thread do not understand how the NCAA or its philosophy on institutional punishment works.

 

[csheaton]

Well, being that the majority of this board probably does not work for the NCAA or in litigation of any kind, it somewhat makes sense. But please, enlighten us?

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

The NCAA hammered Pearl, and by association TN, for lying about entertaining a recruit. Had Pearl not tried to lie his way out of the infraction then the NCAA punishment would have likely been minor. Why poke at a bear with a stick?

 

[csheaton]

Yes, you are correct about the Pearl situation. But would you really compare the NCAA to a Bear at this point? Especially given recent events? I wouldn’t. Seems they are losing more and more credibility every year. North Carolina got away with far more, with less punishment

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Yes, you are correct about the Pearl situation. But would you really compare the NCAA to a Bear at this point? Especially given recent events? I wouldn’t. Seems they are losing more and more credibility every year

They are still the governing body. TN can't pull out and join a different association.

 

[csheaton]

You’re right, we can’t. But we wouldn’t be the only school giving the NCAA the finger as of late. It has become a trend like it or not, and will most likely continue. So why not. It’s not like we are going to receive a three year postseason ban, Barnes fired and recruiting restrictions just for playing Vescovi against the SEC.

Look at LSU last year. Compliance, and some fans are still waayyy too afraid of the NCAA at this point imo. If vacated wins are the worst punishment it is worth it to play Vescovi...being that there probably won’t be more than 9 or so of those in SEC play anyway

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

The final verdict on LSU may not be here yet. The NCAA can't jump in front of the FBI.

 

[LivinginthePast]

I thought Vescovi would be eligible first game in January?

 

[csheaton]

Well then even better. We can continue to build our program after playing Vescovi while a minor violation is tied up in appellate court for 8 years. It’s a win win in my book. Seems to work for everyone else...