|
Post by sienafan1480 on Oct 14, 2015 6:52:49 GMT -5
Student loans are not financial aid. They are pure and simple loans that must be paid back with interest accrued. You apply for financial aid and the aid, in the form of grants, scholarships, work study, etc., are called out - you are expected to come up with the balance in either loans, savings or a combination of both. Financial aid does not have to be paid back - hence the term "aid"! Incorrect. As someone who financed most of Siena and all of law school with student loans, I can assure you that was what my financial aid package consisted of and it was referred to as such. When you are given any money, it's called financial aid - the fact that you have to pay it back doesn't change that designation. Grants and scholarships are the types of financial aid you don't pay back. But it's all under the same umbrella of terminology. This is absolutely correct. Was not sure where the idea that loans were not financial aid were coming from. I have a daughter who is a sophomore in college and upon filling out her FAFSA student loans were part of the offer sheet sent back, and needed to be accepted just as any other portion of the package was.
|
|
sky
Junior
Posts: 1,052
Dislikes:
|
Post by sky on Oct 14, 2015 7:08:45 GMT -5
Just some off the wall thoughts...if JO has a benefactor how does that effect things......
Was JO recruited to return to Siena...how does the semantics work here?
If JO was not recruited and not getting "financial aid" with NCAA approval can he be a walk on?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 7:30:32 GMT -5
Incorrect. As someone who financed most of Siena and all of law school with student loans, I can assure you that was what my financial aid package consisted of and it was referred to as such. When you are given any money, it's called financial aid - the fact that you have to pay it back doesn't change that designation. Grants and scholarships are the types of financial aid you don't pay back. But it's all under the same umbrella of terminology. This is absolutely correct. Was not sure where the idea that loans were not financial aid were coming from. I have a daughter who is a sophomore in college and upon filling out her FAFSA student loans were part of the offer sheet sent back, and needed to be accepted just as any other portion of the package was. The issue boils down to where the aid comes from - if Siena provides any aid from its own coffers, he would be a counter. There were early posts that he would qualify for an academic scholarship which would be coming from Siena and, that would not be allowed in terms of keeping him a non-counter. There were also media reports that said he would be paying his way with a combination of loans and financial aid - that was the distinction that I had difficulty with. If it meant personal loans and federally subsidized (deferred interest accrual) student loans then that issue goes away, I guess!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 7:33:48 GMT -5
Just some off the wall thoughts...if JO has a benefactor how does that effect things...... Was JO recruited to return to Siena...how does the semantics work here? If JO was not recruited and not getting "financial aid" with NCAA approval can he be a walk on? I would guess that a "benefactor" would have to be able to demonstrate no ties to Siena in any way shape or form, i.e., not a "supporter" as defined by the NCAA. I don't think there was any "recruitment" in his return - support yes, recruiting no, IMO.
|
|
IndianSaint
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 8,974
Dislikes:
|
Post by IndianSaint on Oct 14, 2015 8:50:18 GMT -5
I think there's so many nuances to JO's case that this is a tough one for anyone to call. We (Siena/JO) may be in uncharted waters (i.e., so many different rules/issues could apply to this instance).
I understand some may think this is a smoke screen, going thru motions, to eventually blame NCAA for not allowing; but I still believe Siena thinks they have a chance. Why waste time, energy and maybe money fighting if you know you'll lose anyway? I just don't buy that. I don't think they care about what the fans think "that much" to go thru this process. JMO
|
|
SaintMisbehavin
Team Captain
Legacy. Alum. Hoops Lover. Hyper-Niche Amateur Blog Runner
Posts: 2,433
Member is Online
Dislikes:
|
Post by SaintMisbehavin on Oct 14, 2015 9:09:33 GMT -5
Hopefully this helps everyone understand that Federal Aid is not a counter: There is something in the NCAA, it’s called Bylaw 15.02.4.3. This rule states that any financial aid except that which is specifically exempted (Bylaw 15.02.4.4) is going to count as athletic aid and make the student a “counter” in terms of scholarships. Federal aid based on need is exempted, and state aid is exempt for all sports save for Football and Basketball. web1.ncaa.org/LSDBi/exec/bylawSearch?bylawSearchSubmit=Get%20Selected%20Items&multiple=25624&division=1&adopted=0web1.ncaa.org/LSDBi/exec/bylawSearch?bylawSearchSubmit=viewHtml&division=1&textTerms=&titleTerms=&keyValue=25366&reportType=NotMain&adopted=0(c) Federal government grants awarded based on a student's demonstrated financial need [e.g., Supplemental Educational Opportunities Grant (SEOG)], regardless of whether the institution is responsible for selecting the recipient or determining the amount of aid, or providing matching or supplementary funds for a previously determined recipient; (d) State government grants awarded based on a student's demonstrated financial need, regardless of whether the institution is responsible for selecting the recipient or determining the amount of aid, or providing matching or supplementary funds for a previously determined recipient, provided the aid is administered in accordance with the federal methodology for determining a student's financial need and has no relationship to athletics ability. However, such aid is not exempt for purposes of determining a football or basketball student-athlete's counter status pursuant to Bylaw 15.5.1.1; This is the last I'm going to post about this, because I feel like the conversation is like a rocking chair. Giving us something to do, but not going anywhere. Personally, I don't think the aid would be the concern for eligibility, anyways - it's whether he "participated" in athletic endeavors at BU in the eyes of the NCAA. We'll find out next week, supposedly. Pulling for you, JO.
|
|
Sienafan
Team Captain
Posts: 2,498
Dislikes:
|
Post by Sienafan on Oct 14, 2015 9:45:08 GMT -5
Just some off the wall thoughts...if JO has a benefactor how does that effect things...... Was JO recruited to return to Siena...how does the semantics work here? If JO was not recruited and not getting "financial aid" with NCAA approval can he be a walk on? A "benefactor" is a no-no - as far as the NCAA is concerned, that's the same thing as athletic booster regardless of whether it can be shown they have ties to the school or not. Can you imagine the mass cheating that would go on if that was allowed? The only source of financial aid that likely won't count towards the scholarship limit is federally subsidized student loans. JO was not recruited to return to Siena. He approached the school about returning, so no worries there. So as long as his sources of funding are exempted financial aid and/or his family, he can be considered a walk-on who doesn't count against the scholarship limit just like Jimmy Merrill. Curiously, Gottfried was a recruited walk-on and yet he didn't count against the scholarship limit. I'm not sure how that was possible. I think the source of funding will not the issue here. Siena knows the rules very well, the rules are very clear, and Siena wouldn't have filed a waiver for him knowing his source of finances is clearly not in order. In my opinion, saintmisbehavin nails the sole defining issue that will determine the outcome - whether JO's activities at BU were enough to make him ineligible to return to Siena without sitting out as a transfer. I don't think he can get a waiver based on his family situation - those types of hardship waivers have been eliminated. I'd say the odds are against JO here, but the fact that he is returning to his original institution after just 6 weeks during the summer at the new one is the twist that gives him a chance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 9:52:47 GMT -5
The kid had it rough. He made a mistake. And it's costing him 40k. I think that's punishment enough.
Hopefully, the NCAA takes it easy on him and we reap the benefits of 100 blocked shots from the center position.
If they don't, well, I get that too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5
I know half of you think historical prorated stats as a predictive tool is crap but here's what a JO/Silas even platoon could do for us without improving over their prior year stats:
11.4 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 3.14 bpg, 0.7 spg, 1.4 apg, 2.5 tpg
A 20/20 split equates to an even 100 blocks.
Last year, 5 MAAC teams had less than 100 blocks as an entire team.
Approaching 200 blocks as a team is an elite MAAC defensive accomplishment. And there is usually a large correlation between that and 2pt% defense.
JO's eligibility ensures that there is always a top MAAC shot blocker roaming our interior.
Hopefully, we get lucky.
|
|
|
Post by greenblood on Oct 14, 2015 12:14:57 GMT -5
I think there's so many nuances to JO's case that this is a tough one for anyone to call. We (Siena/JO) may be in uncharted waters (i.e., so many different rules/issues could apply to this instance). I understand some may think this is a smoke screen, going thru motions, to eventually blame NCAA for not allowing; but I still believe Siena thinks they have a chance. Why waste time, energy and maybe money fighting if you know you'll lose anyway? I just don't buy that. I don't think they care about what the fans think "that much" to go thru this process. JMO Not to be a pain in the ass but discountung tickets and slow ticket sales may be making them listen....
|
|
IndianSaint
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 8,974
Dislikes:
|
Post by IndianSaint on Oct 14, 2015 13:02:14 GMT -5
I think there's so many nuances to JO's case that this is a tough one for anyone to call. We (Siena/JO) may be in uncharted waters (i.e., so many different rules/issues could apply to this instance). I understand some may think this is a smoke screen, going thru motions, to eventually blame NCAA for not allowing; but I still believe Siena thinks they have a chance. Why waste time, energy and maybe money fighting if you know you'll lose anyway? I just don't buy that. I don't think they care about what the fans think "that much" to go thru this process. JMO Not to be a pain in the ass but discountung tickets and slow ticket sales may be making them listen.... You're not being a pain, if anything I am. I just don't think there's a connection(hope there's not a connection). I truly believe they think they have a chance.
|
|
$cott
Assistant Coach
Posts: 5,102
Dislikes:
|
Post by $cott on Oct 14, 2015 13:16:26 GMT -5
If they didn't have a chance then the NCAA would have shot it down already. The fact that the NCAA asked for more paperwork means that at least there is a chance. How good of a chance is anyone's guess.
|
|
|
Post by psycholojets on Oct 14, 2015 15:25:14 GMT -5
No news is often good news in things like this. If it were an easy straight forward "No" it would have been quick.
Sent from my SM-G900P using proboards
|
|
gorvy
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 10,022
Dislikes:
|
Post by gorvy on Oct 14, 2015 17:59:41 GMT -5
Or they are just burying Siena in paperwork hoping they will go away.
|
|
IndianSaint
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 8,974
Dislikes:
|
Post by IndianSaint on Oct 14, 2015 20:45:19 GMT -5
Or they are just burying Siena in paperwork hoping they will go away. If that's the case the NCAA isn't very smart (stupid if you ask me as they don't learn from history). Siena doesn't back down when NCAA wants extra docs. How quickly NCAA forgets how we didn't back down with Imoh & Gomis. They'd be better off denying it from the start rather than try and bury us in paperwork. We're to happy to provide it and make them decide. It won't be on Siena to back down.
|
|