Rogers dilemma

[phillyfan]

The only time I remember major blowback against a school was when Phil Martelli of St Joes would not sign the release for graduate transfer Todd O’Brien to UAB. But the circumstances and rules were very different from the Siena situation.
O’Brien was a 6-9 center at Bucknell and had an outstanding freshman year at the Patriot League school. He ended up transferring to A-10 SJU and sat out the obligatory one year. He was initially a starter and there were high expectations for him. But he proved to be a mediocre A-10 player , lost his starting and then played even less the following year. He was a favorite whipping boy on the SJU board. So after this second year with Joes he still had one year of eligibility but had his undergraduate diploma.
At this point he wanted to go to UAB , play basketball for one year and begin a graduate program that was not offered at Joes.
For reasons I don,t understand, Phil Martelli did not want the school to sign the release. This was the waning days of Martelli at Joes and he was just being stubborn and vindictive. O’Brien left Joes but as far as I know never played D-1 basketball again.
The response from the media to Joes decision was immediate and very negative. I know The NY Times did a major story on it as did a number of other national newspapers.
I hope you you’ll agree this is a vey different situation from the Rogers situation with Siena. I think for reasons others have given Siena acted honorably and ethically, while SJU did not and they were deservedly vilified for it.
Can anyone else remember a situation where a school received negative publicity because they would not sign a release especially since the new transfer rules were established?

[greengold4ever]

Dec 4, 2022 10:22:56 GMT -5 saints15 said:

Dec 4, 2022 0:55:00 GMT -5 hoopjunkie said:

Things have obviously changed in the transfer world over the last few years. Years ago if a kid transferred from a D-1 to another D-1 he'd have to sit out a year....but that was with a signed release from the previous school. IF a school didnt sign the players release, they had to sit out TWO years. Now that was extremely rare because everyone signed a kids release. If a school did that the player would appeal to the NCAA. I dont have the stats, but Im guessing most kids won against the school that wanted him to sit out 2 years.

Rogers probably didnt get much sympathy from the NCAA's since he only stayed at Siena for one year after getting instant eligibility coming from Cal Poly. I mean the kid isnt trying to play in our league, or even for a team we usually play in OOC, then I might get why Siena would be reluctant to sign a waiver. He wants to go halfway across the country and find happiness there. So let him! Who cares why he didnt want to be at Siena.

Look at Don Carey. He was ARGUABLY G'Towns best player last season, and he left to go down the street to play at Maryland. Hoyas let him go. Im sure they didnt want to see him leave, but why fight it. Kid wanted out for some reason.

Does anyone know of any other transfer in the country going thru this? Being forced to sit out?

I believe Carey was a graduate (or at least I would hope after 5 years he had his degree) transfer, so Georgetown wouldn’t need to sign the release saying they had no spot for him.

correct, and sorry HJ but Carey was a grad transfer GTown did no such thing............Siena was totally in the right here, and not wanting to lie was the right path to take.................besides so much BS is always said to recruits that other coaches/programs do anyway to lure away kids, they fabricate crap all the time, IF the recruit is truly being "responsible" then they should be doing the "due diligence" when exploring any school/coach recruiting them, meaning get the full story before they make the decision............this will not hurt Carm/Siena in the least.............

[OneIndian]

Rogers was released per his request in April. Second time transfers are now looked at differently and need to adhere to new guidelines/requirements. This is a “Non Participant Opportunity Document” issue which is now required by the NCAA as part of the transfer process. Siena would need to sign to verify the Colby was in good standing but was no longer given an opportunity to participate - practice or play on Siena’s team for reasons outside of Colby’s control.

On April 4th per a published TU article - a direct quote from Colby is as follows:

"First and foremost, I want to say I'm glad at what I could do at Siena," Rogers said in a phone interview. "I'm glad to accomplish what we accomplished. I wish them the best. There's no love lost. There's no hard feelings. I just decided to part ways and kind of find a new opportunity."

Rogers said he wants to play at a higher level.

"That's always been a goal of mine, but I want to play at the next level, the NBA, stuff like that," he said. "Just try to get somewhere where I can become a better player, expand my game, transform my body. Just an overall improvement. That's really what it is."

Again I don’t see how Siena can falsify a document when the above was clearly documented per a direct quote and is public knowledge. If WS sold him a bill of goods about immediate eligibility that’s not Siena’s problem.

Colby will get his shot to play up, just not this year. Hope it works out for him.

As far as I’m concerned this is a non-issue.

[saints15]

Are we under some type of probation with the NCAA because of the Patsos crap? Imagine if we signed it and the NCAA hammered us for blatantly lying on an NCAA affidavit while those other sanctions and warnings were in place?? This board would be screaming for Carm and D’Arg’s heads.

Now I realize the NCAA probably wouldn’t because they know everyone lies, but why risk it? I do think it might hurt us with a Frosh or Soph transfer that could be thinking about transferring up again if he blew up here, but for guys with 1-2 years I don’t see it being an issue. Plus the NCAA will probably go to the unlimited transfer rule so this will be a non issue.

[Sienafan]

Dec 4, 2022 15:17:38 GMT -5 saints15 said:

Are we under some type of probation with the NCAA because of the Patsos crap? Imagine if we signed it and the NCAA hammered us for blatantly lying on an NCAA affidavit while those other sanctions and warnings were in place?? This board would be screaming for Carm and D’Arg’s heads.

Now I realize the NCAA probably wouldn’t because they know everyone lies, but why risk it? I do think it might hurt us with a Frosh or Soph transfer that could be thinking about transferring up again if he blew up here, but for guys with 1-2 years I don’t see it being an issue. Plus the NCAA will probably go to the unlimited transfer rule so this will be a non issue.

Siena is still on probation through spring of '23. I've been saying that's probably a contributing factor to them playing it straight.

[indian82]

Dec 3, 2022 16:42:58 GMT -5 OneIndian said:

No win situation.

Not sure how Siena could respond to an inquiry made by the NCAA relative to the “non-participation” document requested by WS & CR. Which clearly states the following:

1. Was no longer given an opportunity to participate (practice or compete per NCAA Bylaw 14.02.12) on the institution’s team for reasons outside of the student-athlete’s control.
2. Was not dismissed from the team or the institution for any reason within the student- athlete’s control (e.g., violation of team or institutional rules).
3. Was athletically eligible and in good standing with the team at the time of transfer.
4. Was in good academic standing and academically eligible at the time of transfer.

The above would have to be falsified to allow the NCAA to provide a waiver.

We couldn’t possibly get away with this without directly misrepresenting the truth to the NCAA. That would have put Siena in an extremely uncomfortable & vulnerable situation.

I think we did the right thing. If we can’t sign someone who already has one transfer under their belt because they have issues with this, they’re probably a high risk get & threat to leave anyway. We’re just avoiding another potential headache. Too many players out there to worry about the ones that might take offense to Siena following NCAA regulations.

This doesn’t impact players who haven’t transferred only players coming out of the portal.

Great points about other kids coming in via transfer. It does scream headache if that holds them back. Let them go.

At some point integrity should play a role. Let the NCAA change the rule if that's what they want.

[hoopjunkie]

I admit not knowing every transfer was required to get TWO release forms from the school he was leaving. Obviously any kid that starts has every opportunity to play again the next season. Basically something so obvious it doesn’t need discussing. So Cal Poly signed two releases saying Rogers would not get the opportunity to play on their team his junior year?? So they must have lied and let him play at Siena??…..I did think the NCAA would be tough on his waiver request because he already transferred without sitting out a year.

[indian82]

Dec 4, 2022 16:57:51 GMT -5 hoopjunkie said:

I admit not knowing every transfer was required to get TWO release forms from the school he was leaving. Obviously any kid that starts has every opportunity to play again the next season. Basically something so obvious it doesn’t need discussing. So Cal Poly signed two releases saying Rogers would not get the opportunity to play on their team his junior year?? So they must have lied and let him play at Siena??…..I did think the NCAA would be tough on his waiver request because he already transferred without sitting out a year.

Believe that second 'release' you refer to is really a true waiver required only on second time transfers. Don't think that was necessary for Colby to play right away here (his first transfer). EVERYBODY gets the first one free.

[hoopjunkie]

These are all new rules. There shouldn’t be a 2nd waiver required. NCAA should make the rule that every player gets ONE free pass to transfer and not sit. Transfer again, as an undergrad, and you have to sit. No grey area. Simple rule. Putting the burden on us isn’t fair and regardless of what most of you think, it will hurt us in d ruining circles, and no, you won’t be able to physically see/hear it. How much? No one can gauge it. It should be a non-issue in a year anyway.

[goldsaint17]

Dec 4, 2022 16:57:51 GMT -5 hoopjunkie said:

I admit not knowing every transfer was required to get TWO release forms from the school he was leaving. Obviously any kid that starts has every opportunity to play again the next season. Basically something so obvious it doesn’t need discussing. So Cal Poly signed two releases saying Rogers would not get the opportunity to play on their team his junior year?? So they must have lied and let him play at Siena??…..I did think the NCAA would be tough on his waiver request because he already transferred without sitting out a year.

Colby’s first transfer was based on the NCAA’s one-time transfer waiver, which only requires you to be in good academic standing and to be a first time transfer to be eligible. Cal Poly didn’t have to lie and didn’t. Once he’s transferring for a second time without having graduated, he needs a diffeeenr waiver. Path of least resistance would have just been Siena signing that he had “no participation opportunity”, so that’s how much schools start the process. But not everyone says yes and the number of second-time non-grad transfers without a coaching change who weren’t run off is fairly low.

[hoopjunkie]

Dec 4, 2022 17:34:22 GMT -5 goldsaint17 said:

Dec 4, 2022 16:57:51 GMT -5 hoopjunkie said:

I admit not knowing every transfer was required to get TWO release forms from the school he was leaving. Obviously any kid that starts has every opportunity to play again the next season. Basically something so obvious it doesn’t need discussing. So Cal Poly signed two releases saying Rogers would not get the opportunity to play on their team his junior year?? So they must have lied and let him play at Siena??…..I did think the NCAA would be tough on his waiver request because he already transferred without sitting out a year.

Colby’s first transfer was based on the NCAA’s one-time transfer waiver, which only requires you to be in good academic standing and to be a first time transfer to be eligible. Cal Poly didn’t have to lie and didn’t. Once he’s transferring for a second time without having graduated, he needs a diffeeenr waiver. Path of least resistance would have just been Siena signing that he had “no participation opportunity”, so that’s how much schools start the process. But not everyone says yes and the number of second-time non-grad transfers without a coaching change who weren’t run off is fairly low.

So if Carm left last year, Rogers would get to play right away for the Shockers? I doubt thats a written rule, but I get it. There's too many grey areas when it comes to this. Needs to be ironclad rules written for each situation.

Id be curious to know how many kids in Rogers situation were denied the 2nd waiver. How many say "yes" and how many say "no."

[goldsaint17]

Dec 4, 2022 21:30:30 GMT -5 hoopjunkie said:

Dec 4, 2022 17:34:22 GMT -5 goldsaint17 said:

Colby’s first transfer was based on the NCAA’s one-time transfer waiver, which only requires you to be in good academic standing and to be a first time transfer to be eligible. Cal Poly didn’t have to lie and didn’t. Once he’s transferring for a second time without having graduated, he needs a diffeeenr waiver. Path of least resistance would have just been Siena signing that he had “no participation opportunity”, so that’s how much schools start the process. But not everyone says yes and the number of second-time non-grad transfers without a coaching change who weren’t run off is fairly low.

So if Carm left last year, Rogers would get to play right away for the Shockers? I doubt thats a written rule, but I get it. There's too many grey areas when it comes to this. Needs to be ironclad rules written for each situation.

Id be curious to know how many kids in Rogers situation were denied the 2nd waiver. How many say "yes" and how many say "no."

Not a written rule, but any school that doesn’t sign anything to let a kid walk after their coach leaves DOES deserve hate.

[brian]

Dec 2, 2022 12:56:05 GMT -5 goldsaint17 said:

Would have been happy for Colby to get a waiver but there was never any responsibility for Siena to lie. Unfortunately, good chance Wichita coach Isaac Brown gets fired after this year and at that point we might see Colby in the portal yet again…

[OneIndian]

Mar 11, 2023 17:25:12 GMT -5 brian said:

Dec 2, 2022 12:56:05 GMT -5 goldsaint17 said:

Would have been happy for Colby to get a waiver but there was never any responsibility for Siena to lie. Unfortunately, good chance Wichita coach Isaac Brown gets fired after this year and at that point we might see Colby in the portal yet again…

Can you say portal.

[Sienafan]

Dec 2, 2022 12:56:05 GMT -5 goldsaint17 said:

Would have been happy for Colby to get a waiver but there was never any responsibility for Siena to lie. Unfortunately, good chance Wichita coach Isaac Brown gets fired after this year and at that point we might see Colby in the portal yet again…

Your words were prophetic. Let's see what Colby's next move is. At least he'll get the waiver given his school's publicly stated position that everyone should get them under any circumstances.