¯\_(ツ)_/¯Right which means if Carl is really refusing to release Suriano what are the odds that he even gave him a release to contact RU in the first place??
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯Right which means if Carl is really refusing to release Suriano what are the odds that he even gave him a release to contact RU in the first place??
That's true. However, if the school a wrestler wants to go is within conference, why should he be prohibited? Transferring wrestlers want to go wherever they want, they don't want to be shackled by rules. I could see some wrestlers think, "well if Cael won't let me leave, then maybe I don't want to go there."
Also Pagano did not need a release(unless you are saying he was getting any type of Scholly money, which would seem highly unlikely)
Isn't this all just more speculation based off what CP said on his radio program (not the most accurate track record, mind you). Why don't we wait til we get definite confirmation from the parties involved, if that happens, and see what the real reasons are and then base our judgements off that?
You forgot the word legally. Otherwise that was EXACTLY what I was trying to convey.Uhhh...a kid needs a (separate) release just to discuss the transfer with that other school.
A kid cant???? He can have his scholarship reduced or taken away. Scholly money is year to year and coaches change up on kids all the time.
Also Pagano did not need a release(unless you are saying he was getting any type of Scholly money, which would seem highly unlikely)
The contract argument isn't viable. Coaches sign contracts all the time and then break them for better/different opportunities with little penalties. Highly sought after coaches are able to negotiate the terms of their contracts, college athletes cannot. I'm totally cool with a binding contract as long as both sides can negotiate terms. Top athletes like Hall and Suriano should be able to put waivers in the terms of their scholarship just like top coaches do in their contracts. PSU/others schools can then choose to agree or not agree. Scholarship percentage/admission should be part but not all of the negotiating points. Everything should be on the table. It's kind of like athletes negotiating no trade clauses into contracts. I realize this can get messy and I am not advocating financial incentives beyond a full scholarship but no reason not to be able to leverage freedoms including ability to transfer without penalty. Based on the current rules this seems to be a moot point but if I were repping Suriano/he really wants to leave I would be prepping an argument about unfair playing field for athletes in terms of scholarship rules and looking at legal options.
That's reasonable speculation, because it's pretty easy to infer that there's already been a lot of communication, given the excitement on the Rutgers board and the steady stream of fairly specific rumors. Not to mention the continued non-resolution (as I imagine the parties are investigating workarounds).So serious question, if Cael refuses to release Suriano, could it possibly have something to do with the fact that there appears to be massive communication going on with the RU staff with is a violation without a release to contact? at what point is it considered poaching? And maybe there is a real grievance in the way this situation is being handled (or mishandled)?? Just reading the tea leaves here.
3) Some Iowa /and certain Minny/ fans will jump to bash Cael and his policy, when nobody really knows what it is or what will be.
A lot of kids who transfer go to schools that had recruited them out of HS. So it's not a real stretch to think they were already familiar enough with those programs before requesting a discussion release.That's reasonable speculation, because it's pretty easy to infer that there's already been a lot of communication, given the excitement on the Rutgers board and the steady stream of fairly specific rumors. Not to mention the continued non-resolution (as I imagine the parties are investigating workarounds).
But it also raises a good chicken and egg question, because the NCAA rule prohibits communication between the athlete and the purported new school prior to the purported old school issuing a permission-to-contact letter.
You may write to a new school to let them know you are interested in transferring but coaches and athletics staff at the new school cannot discuss transfer opportunities with you until they have received the permission-to-contact letter from your current school.
But here's the chicken/egg problem: How can the student-athlete know, before he's asked for the permission-to-contact letter, that he's interested in transferring to the new school without first talking to the people most germane to making that decision, namely the coaches?
Maybe the play in the system is that the only restricted types of discussion are those that relate to "transfer opportunities," but it's easy to see where things can get fuzzy if you're, say, discussing with the coaches where you might fit in the lineup. It's not literally about transferring, but very much a prerequisite to the discussed scenario. My guess is that the NCAA would take a broad view of what constituted a "transfer opportunity" discussion and deem my hypothetical as circumvention and too cute.
But that still leaves you with a chicken/egg problem, where the rules implicitly require student-athletes to fly blind if they want a transfer to x school, unable to discern why it is they'd want to get a permission-to-contact letter to x particular school in the first place. But as others are rightly pointing out, there are a ton of assumptions and obligations that are baked into the existing relationship, including scholarship money, coaching considerations, recruiting considerations both long-term and short, and so on.
It'd be stupid to take a hard line position on who's in the right without knowing a ton of backstory (and $ numbers) we're not privy to, so I won't bother. But it's probably not an accident that recruiting drama seems to happen more often at each end of the lineup, where there's less flexibility. Nick leaving would leave PSU in the lurch at 125. Maybe Nick feels owed for stepping into the lineup without the benefit of a redshirt year, and maybe trapped at a weight class he would rather eat/build out of. But how many wrestlers are just handed a weight class for four years at the premier D1 program in the country? All that comes back to the greater difficulty in finding a 125 replacement than any other weight, and I bet this drama wouldn't play out anywhere else except HWT.
I almost put that same point in a parenthetical but it's not true across the board and so can't be relied on from a policy-making point of view by the NCAA.A lot of kids who transfer go to schools that had recruited them out of HS. So it's not a real stretch to think they were already familiar enough with those programs before requesting a discussion release.
Dice didn't say a decision was made, rather most fans are too impatient to wait for it.Dice, "a decision has been made", is that a decision as in Nick stays or Nick is going? If going, the whole release part and where he goes really doesn't matter. PSU needs to find another 125 pounder in that case and is still most likely winning a bunch of NCAA titles over the next decade.
That would be a first.You mean I need a reason?
The contract argument isn't viable. Coaches sign contracts all the time and then break them for better/different opportunities with little penalties. Highly sought after coaches are able to negotiate the terms of their contracts, college athletes cannot. I'm totally cool with a binding contract as long as both sides can negotiate terms. Top athletes like Hall and Suriano should be able to put waivers in the terms of their scholarship just like top coaches do in their contracts. PSU/others schools can then choose to agree or not agree. Scholarship percentage/admission should be part but not all of the negotiating points. Everything should be on the table. It's kind of like athletes negotiating no trade clauses into contracts. I realize this can get messy and I am not advocating financial incentives beyond a full scholarship but no reason not to be able to leverage freedoms including ability to transfer without penalty. Based on the current rules this seems to be a moot point but if I were repping Suriano/he really wants to leave I would be prepping an argument about unfair playing field for athletes in terms of scholarship rules and looking at legal options.
Agreed, but what I meant not clearly enough is that it's easier to ask for permission to talk with schools when you already know what schools based on prior relationships.I almost put that same point in a parenthetical but it's not true across the board and so can't be relied on from a policy-making point of view by the NCAA.
Ok, one way or another we will know by August 21st. Either is he is attending classes at PSU or he isn't.Dice didn't say a decision was made, rather most fans are too impatient to wait for it.
If Suriano leaves, I doubt the staff is going to be working hard looking for a transfer in. Highly, highly doubt it.Ok, one way or another we will know by August 21st. Either is he is attending classes at PSU or he isn't.
Obviously the staff would like to know sooner than later. If he is leaving the sooner they know the better the chance that somebody could transfer in at 125, even if for just the spring semester.
Ok, one way or another we will know by August 21st. Either is he is attending classes at PSU or he isn't.
Don't know the feasibility of this, but hypothetically, could Cael say no release this year, BUT, come back and man 125 this upcoming season and see how it goes and if he still wants out, he could approve it for next year? This way, PSU can try to recruit one of the upcoming HS seniors and Nick wouldn't have to sit out this season?I am not sure what the team's opinion of NS would be in that situation, but it is just a thought...
Highly unlikely...first he would need to get a release from PSU to formally talk to Rutgers. He might even have to enroll at Rutgers before Rutgers even approached the B1G. Not the hypothetical to go to the conference with, basically admitting tampering.Has he received the hardship waiver from the Big Ten?
Is it possible to ask for a waiver to the transfer rule prior to a transfer.Has he received the hardship waiver from the Big Ten?
with all of the theories floating around, has someone from PSU actually come out and said "We have not given Suriano a release to talk to Rutgers (or anyone)? As has been stated many times in many threads, information is hard to get from the staff or admin. Just another point of conjecture.Highly unlikely...first he would need to get a release from PSU to formally talk to Rutgers. He might even have to enroll at Rutgers before Rutgers even approached the B1G. Not the hypothetical to go to the conference with, basically admitting tampering.
If Rutgers approached the B1G without the release, they probably receive some kind of sanction from the NCAA/B1G...could go as far as Suriano being ineligible to wrestle at Rutgers all together.
Is it possible to ask for a waiver to the transfer rule prior to a transfer.
Thought it was bought up here that Suriano and/or Rutgers were looking for some type of assurances or positive feedback that they would get the waiver.
agree, it's a fine line. but without restraints of some kind, it 'd be chaos. not sure there's a fair way to do this. but then, life's not fair.I'm not sure, but I do think there are a lot of kids who want freedom to change schools in case something goes wrong.
That's ludicrous. I'm pretty sure the NCAA and B1G do not, like federal courts, issue advisory opinions.
The NCAA has nothing to do with the Big Ten hardship waiver so am not getting your point on that, and never did I say that the assurances or positive feedback would come directly from the Big Ten itself.
This^^^^^^^That's ludicrous. I'm pretty sure the NCAA and B1G do not, like federal courts, issue advisory opinions.
The point is neither governing body is going to give advisory opinions.