'17 GA DT Aubrey Solomon (NCAA IS A FAIR ORGANIZATION)

#2,253
#2,253
LA Vol said:
I think @Sleegro and @InVOLuntary are making the point that if the two schools agree to support the player, the waiver is approved. The burden of case prep is on the new school and compliance will build the right case. Communication and cooperation upfront makes it happen.
Click to expand...


@Sleegro is saying if playing time is the only criteria used it gets approved if the school approves

As you say the compliance of the new school would never use that as their only reason for the waiver. That would set it up for failure which We both have said.
 
#2,255
#2,255
LA Vol said:
I felt like I opened a can of worms and wanted to clarify. I think we've synthesized it.
Click to expand...


You didn’t open up the can of worms. It’s just crazy that all of a sudden posters think playing time is the same as extreme circumstances beyond the players control and can be used as the sole reason for transfer
 
#2,257
#2,257
BruinVol said:
You didn’t open up the can of worms. It’s just crazy that all of a sudden posters think playing time is the same as extreme circumstances beyond the players control and can be used as the sole reason for transfer
Click to expand...
The point was that there really doesn’t have to be given an extreme circumstance if both schools agree and work together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sleegro, SweetasSoda and volfanCLT
#2,258
#2,258
BearCat204 said:
The point was that there really doesn’t have to be given an extreme circumstance if both schools agree and work together.
Click to expand...


And that point is wrong

The school just has to support the extreme reason given for transfer and playing time isn’t going to work as the sole reason
 
#2,259
#2,259
I never claimed that the lack of playing time could be used as the sole reason for granting eligibility. All I stated was that the opportunity for more playing time wasn't a disqualifier for immediate eligibility. As much as I despise the NCAA, if a player has little to no chance of seeing the field at a school despite putting in the effort and the school backs that up and supports the player finding a place where they can contribute, I think the NCAA will probably support the transfer and grant immediate eligibility. I believe that to be the case even if the other reasons for transfer are iffy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sleegro, OrangeGlasses731 and SweetasSoda
#2,260
#2,260
BruinVol said:
It’s pretty clear Pruitt is for open transfers not sitting out. I can respect that opinion and am starting to lean more toward agreeing with him BUT for us to believe that all of our transfers met the criteria set forth by the current rules the ncaa is attempting(a poor attempt at that) to abide by is having blinders on.


From my seat Pruitt doesn’t agree with the current transfer rules and is willing to help ALL his players work around those rules. And Michigan is standing by the current rules and isn’t willing to fudge circumstances to help the players play immediately.
Click to expand...

But yet he wants to b!+ch and moan about the "cheaters".

Enjoy this biting you in the azz Jim recruiting football players. You more than earned it.
 
#2,262
#2,262
InVOLuntary said:
I never claimed that the lack of playing time could be used as the sole reason for granting eligibility. All I stated was that the opportunity for more playing time wasn't a disqualifier for immediate eligibility. As much as I despise the NCAA, if a player has little to no chance of seeing the field at a school despite putting in the effort and the school backs that up and supports the player finding a place where they can contribute, I think the NCAA will probably support the transfer and grant immediate eligibility. I believe that to be the case even if the other reasons for transfer are iffy.
Click to expand...


I agree. Your post have been good.
 
#2,263
#2,263
BearCat204 said:
It doesn’t have to be an “extreme reason”
Click to expand...


Yes there does. That is clear. He is the wording


New NCAA transfer guidelines include a provision for undergraduate transfers which states that a player may not have to spend one year-in-residence before taking the field for their new team if "the transfer is due to documented mitigating circumstances that are outside the student-athlete’s control and directly impact the health, safety and well-being of the student-athlete."
 
#2,266
#2,266
BruinVol said:
Yes there does. That is clear. He is the wording


New NCAA transfer guidelines include a provision for undergraduate transfers which states that a player may not have to spend one year-in-residence before taking the field for their new team if "the transfer is due to documented mitigating circumstances that are outside the student-athlete’s control and directly impact the health, safety and well-being of the student-athlete."
Click to expand...
Mitigating and extreme are two completely different things. You keep arguing this has to be some extreme reason and it doesn’t. I’m not going to argue with you about this all day lol, we can agree to disagree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SweetasSoda and Sleegro
#2,267
#2,267
BearCat204 said:
Mitigating and extreme are two completely different things. You keep arguing this has to be some extreme reason and it doesn’t. I’m not going to argue with you about this all day lol, we can agree to disagree.
Click to expand...


Ok the wording doesn’t matter you can change all my post to use the words mitigating circumstances if it makes you feel better

Playing time isn’t enough to count as mitigating circumstances and LA has said the same
 
#2,268
#2,268
utvols88 said:
With this kind of stories picking up steam:



I am willing to bet that if Soloman isn't cleared, it's all over gameday next week. Itd be a dumb move by Harbaugh imo.
Click to expand...



If he has any kind of strong reason for the waiver request it’s time to push that publicly.
The ncaa will cave
 
#2,269
#2,269
BruinVol said:
Ok the wording doesn’t matter you can change all my post to use the words mitigating circumstances if it makes you feel better

Playing time isn’t enough to count as mitigating circumstances and LA has said the same
Click to expand...
Makes me feel better? It’s like saying that red and blue are the same color. I never said playing time was enough or could be used at all really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#2,270
#2,270
BearCat204 said:
Makes me feel better? It’s like saying that red and blue are the same color. I never said playing time was enough or could be used at all really.
Click to expand...

So you agree it takes a mitigating circumstance and playing time doesn’t count for that?

If so we are on the same page
 
#2,272
#2,272
BearCat204 said:
Im glad that you have changed your narrative and started to make sense.
Click to expand...

I havent changed my narrative I was just using the word extreme instead of mitigating which is the same to me. Regardless I’ve said playing time isn’t good enough for either one regardless of wording

So you agree playing time isn’t mitigating circumstances?
 
#2,275
#2,275
BruinVol said:
Ok the wording doesn’t matter you can change all my post to use the words mitigating circumstances if it makes you feel better

Playing time isn’t enough to count as mitigating circumstances and LA has said the same
Click to expand...
You started this argument based on semantics and now yer wording shouldn't matter? Hahahaha toby gonna toby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna, Nash_Vol97, TrueVolsGBOInsider and 5 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top