1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Basketball Coaches (vindictive) Gone Wild Again...

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by qtlaw, Dec 19, 2011.

  1. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Maybe O'Brien should discuss his suspension, since he claims the denial is not due to his actions.
  2. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    The NCAA rule is crystal clear. You graduate with eligibility left, you can transfer with immediate eligibility to another school if the graduate courses you wish to take aren't offered at your current school. It doesn't matter if the kid wants to take graduate basket-weaving.

    I don't care what his reasons are, or what he may or may not have done at St. Joe's. He has followed the NCAA rules 100 percent. Screw St. Joe's and Martelli, who now seem intent on smearing the kid's reputation, but screw the NCAA's waiver committee even more so, since it obviously can't do its job and enforce its own rules.

    The NCAA is supposed to be an advocate for the student/athlete. It's generally anything but.
  3. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Since everyone wants to discuss the suspension now, I will again throw in Masoli's name -- Oregon could have stood in his way in this manner to punish him/show him who's boss. His offenses were greater and more numerous. They decided to let him go play his final year at a program that they weren't going to come in contact with.
  4. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    It's not a rule, it's a waiver, according to this blog post by Andy Katz, which stated the process changed in 2007. I'm guessing that's why there is a committee to deal with this because it's not a rule.

  5. Rhody31

    Rhody31 Well-Known Member

    If he was truly doing it for his education, not playing basketball wouldn't be a big deal.
    There's something missing from this story. I don't think O'Brien's telling the entire truth and I think Martelli's an asshole for not letting him go.
    If I'm wrong, i hope the kid gets to play, but there shouldn't be a rush to judgment based on one side of the story, even if the other side isn't telling theirs. We're journalists - shouldn't we know that?
  6. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    O'Brien's choice of a school is great for his education in public administration. He can learn on what not to do from Jefferson County's example.
  7. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    I think it's pretty obvious that O'Brien transferred because he wanted more playing time and, in looking at other schools, he found one that offered a major that fit in well with his educational goals. That's pretty much how I read his article. He admitted to being frustrated at sitting on the bench and it wasn't until his friend told him about the grad school exception that he even thought about transferring because he thought he would lose his final year of eligibility.

    That said, he played by NCAA rules and made a move that would benefit him on and off the court. St. Joe's is at no disadvantage to allow a player who was sitting on the bench to transfer to another school that the Hawks won't have to contend with.

    This is Martelli being a jackass for the sake of being a jackass. He needs to grow up.
  8. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    Waiver, rule, it's splitting hairs. The NCAA laid out a process. The kid followed it perfectly. The waiver should have been granted.

    And screw the NCAA for changing it from a rule to a waiver. In essense, they added a reserve clause for the athlete's original school.
  9. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    No I believe as journalists you write the facts and supposedly let the reader draw their own conclusions. You are drawing a conclusion based on speculation that is not currently supported by any reported facts. Even if there was a suspension, that's not grounds for withholding a release.
  10. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    St. Joseph's refusal to release O'Brien isn't the issue, anymore, is it? Shouldn't the focus be on the committee that deadlocked on the waiver. With a 2-2 vote, there must have been some reason for opposition to the waiver.
  11. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    Even money says someone on that committee is friendly with Martelli.
  12. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    The original story says it's a five-person committee. How can it deadlock 2-2?
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page