Online Now 496

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

On this Board 289
Record: 4947 (7/23/2012)

Online now 464
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

Question about the Danny O'Brien transfer

  • Danny O'Brien recently announced his intent to transfer from the Terps. Supposedly, Edsall gave him a list of schools he cannot transfer to, including Vandy and other ACC schools. My question: the fact that your prior school can control who you can transfer to seems reasonable in the context of an undergrad leaving the program to play for another school. But in this case, O'Brien will be a graduate. Can a school still control your destiny in a transfer once you have graduated from that school? If so, under what authority? This seems counterintuitive to me. I wonder if it is legally defensible.

    strez

  • strez said...

    Danny O'Brien recently announced his intent to transfer from the Terps. Supposedly, Edsall gave him a list of schools he cannot transfer to, including Vandy and other ACC schools. My question: the fact that your prior school can control who you can transfer to seems reasonable in the context of an undergrad leaving the program to play for another school. But in this case, O'Brien will be a graduate. Can a school still control your destiny in a transfer once you have graduated from that school? If so, under what authority? This seems counterintuitive to me. I wonder if it is legally defensible.

    Yeah, that's always been an interesting bit that I have wondered about. But it seems the LOI befomes binding when you enroll in that school and begin classes. Since he has he is still bound to attend that school until they release him

    MTayl72

  • MTayl72 said...

    Yeah, that's always been an interesting bit that I have wondered about. But it seems the LOI befomes binding when you enroll in that school and begin classes. Since he has he is still bound to attend that school until they release him

    I have never understood that. If said kid already has undergraduate degree and intends to go to grad school and wants to do so at another school, I can't see how UMD could control where he goes in this instance. That said, O'Brien is a different bird. He has graduated in three years, not four, so ...

    Hamilton Lion

  • I'm wondering if he really wants to go to Vandy (or...um...PSU) he can fight it in court. It seems like this is a highly unusual situation (the three-year graduation) and perhaps not one the rule contemplated.

    strez

  • strez said...

    I'm wondering if he really wants to go to Vandy (or...um...PSU) he can fight it in court. It seems like this is a highly unusual situation (the three-year graduation) and perhaps not one the rule contemplated.

    It probably isn't worth his time if he has nice offers to go elsewhere. shrug

    getmyjive11

  • getmyjive11 said...

    It probably isn't worth his time if he has nice offers to go elsewhere. shrug

    Right, and courts are slow and it most likely wouldn't be through by enrollment time. The only point he would make is that Edsall is a d-bag and he could do that without the lawsuit.

    helpdesk

  • It's by NCAA rule.

    It's also legally binding because the NCAA is a group of universities who have joined together and have created rules that they have chosen to abide by.

    Playing college football is not a god given right. Schools are allowed to determine among themselves who is eligible to play and who is not - and the NCAA is the vehicle by which they make those choices.

    UncleLar

  • MTayl72 said...

    Yeah, that's always been an interesting bit that I have wondered about. But it seems the LOI befomes binding when you enroll in that school and begin classes. Since he has he is still bound to attend that school until they release him

    You mixing up a couple of things.

    One, the LOI becomes binding when you sign it, not when you enroll.

    Two, the NCAA rules regarding transfers are applicable whether you have signed an LOI or not.

    Three, O'Brien's transfer is governed by NCAA rule, not the LOI agreement.

    This post was edited by UncleLar on 2/16/2012 at 3:16 PM

    UncleLar

  • UncleLar said...

    You mixing up a couple of things.

    One, the LOI becomes binding when you sign it, not when you enroll.

    Two, the NCAA rules regarding transfers are applicable whether you have signed an LOI or not.

    Three, O'Brien's transfer is governed by NCAA rule, not the LOI agreement.

    Yes I know that the NCAA rule governs transfers. Sorry, I'll clarify more. It was poorly written as I was walking to a lunch meeting, my mistake. And yes I know whether or not you signed a LOI the NCAA looks at transfers, I have helped athletes with that in the past.

    LOI thing is weird. As we were talking about it last week. Once a player signs it they are committed to that school. to go somewhere else you must be released from it. However, if you sign a LOI and have not enrolled there is no transfer penalty

    MTayl72

  • But thanks for clearing it all up. Sorry again for wording things poorly. At least we have you here to fix it.

    MTayl72

  • MTayl72 said...

    Yes I know that the NCAA rule governs transfers. Sorry, I'll clarify more. It was poorly written as I was walking to a lunch meeting, my mistake. And yes I know whether or not you signed a LOI the NCAA looks at transfers, I have helped athletes with that in the past.

    LOI thing is weird. As we were talking about it last week. Once a player signs it they are committed to that school. to go somewhere else you must be released from it. However, if you sign a LOI and have not enrolled there is no transfer penalty

    " if you sign a LOI and have not enrolled there is no transfer penalty"

    That's only true if you get released from your LOI. If you don't get released, there's a really big penalty in that you not only have to sit out a year but you also lose a year of eligibility. That's even worse than transferring because transfers can at least use a redshirt year to sit out.

    UncleLar

  • UncleLar said...

    " if you sign a LOI and have not enrolled there is no transfer penalty"

    That's only true if you get released from your LOI. If you don't get released, there's a really big penalty in that you not only have to sit out a year but you also lose a year of eligibility. That's even worse than transferring because transfers can at least use a redshirt year to sit out.

    I'm pretty sure that's what happened when lane kiffin went to USC, and there was nothing that tenn could do because they hadn't attended classes yet

    signature image

    'Just to make it clear, I'm not transferring, I like it here too damn much to leave.' Jordan Kerner

    ejb5212

  • ejb5212 said...

    I'm pretty sure that's what happened when lane kiffin went to USC, and there was nothing that tenn could do because they hadn't attended classes yet

    I'm not clear what you are referring to by "that" in "that's what happened when".

    It sounds like you are saying that Tennessee had kids who signed a LOI but went somewhere else even though they had signed an LOI.

    I can assure you that if that happened and the kids played without sitting out a year, then Tennessee released the kids from their LOI. If you can name some kids, I'd be glad to look them up and prove it to you.

    EDIT: Here. I'll prove it without any names. Lane Kiffin took the job with USC on January 13th. National Letter of Intent signing day is in February so Tennessee couldn't have had ANY kids who had signed LOIs before he left.

    This post has been edited 4 times, most recently by UncleLar on 2/18/2012 at 4:41 PM

    Lane Kiffin to leave Tennessee Volunteers for USC Trojans job - ESPN Los Angeles

    Tennessee's Lane Kiffin has agreed to become USC's next coach.

    sports.espn.go.com

    UncleLar

  • ejb5212 said...

    I'm pretty sure that's what happened when lane kiffin went to USC, and there was nothing that tenn could do because they hadn't attended classes yet

    To beat Uncle Lar to the punch, the way Kiffin got all of those stud recruits to switch their commitments was that he took the job at USC January 13th.

    He then had time before signing day to call up some recruits and tell them to come with him to LA, and a lot of them did.

    EDIT: Damn, nevermind.

    This post was edited by Texas Lion on 2/18/2012 at 4:47 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    ‏@Cordale10 Why should we have to go to class if we came here to play FOOTBALL, we ain't come to play SCHOOL, classes are POINTLESS

    Texas Lion

  • UncleLar said...

    I'm not clear what you are referring to by "that" in "that's what happened when".

    It sounds like you are saying that Tennessee had kids who signed a LOI but went somewhere else even though they had signed an LOI.

    I can assure you that if that happened and the kids played without sitting out a year, then Tennessee released the kids from their LOI. If you can name some kids, I'd be glad to look them up and prove it to you.

    EDIT: Here. I'll prove it without any names. Lane Kiffin took the job with USC on January 13th. National Letter of Intent signing day is in February so Tennessee couldn't have had ANY kids who had signed LOIs before he left.

    Tennessee had two pretty decent names scheduled to start early, Brandon Willis was one and the other name escapes me. Those two were on campus and already move in once Kiffin bolted. Willis packed up and left for UNC.

    Hamilton Lion

  • Hamilton Lion said...

    Tennessee had two pretty decent names scheduled to start early, Brandon Willis was one and the other name escapes me. Those two were on campus and already move in once Kiffin bolted. Willis packed up and left for UNC.

    Thanks for that info. Early enrollees don't sign LOIs so they obviously aren't bound by them. Without an LOI, Willis would have been locked into Tennessee once he had attended a class. I suspect that classes hadn't started yet so he was thus free to go to North Carolina without the transfer rules coming into play..

    This post was edited by UncleLar on 2/18/2012 at 5:20 PM

    UncleLar

  • UncleLar said...

    Early enrollees don't sign LOIs so they obviously aren't bound by them.

    So we're both right?

    signature image

    'Just to make it clear, I'm not transferring, I like it here too damn much to leave.' Jordan Kerner

    ejb5212

  • UncleLar said...

    Thanks for that info. Early enrollees don't sign LOIs so they obviously aren't bound by them. Without an LOI, Willis would have been locked into Tennessee once he had attended a class. I suspect that classes hadn't started yet so he was thus free to go to North Carolina without the transfer rules coming into play..

    Exactly right ... he left the day before classes started. He went home and enrolled at UNC in the Fall.

    Hamilton Lion

  • UncleLar said...

    You mixing up a couple of things.

    One, the LOI becomes binding when you sign it, not when you enroll.

    Two, the NCAA rules regarding transfers are applicable whether you have signed an LOI or not.

    Three, O'Brien's transfer is governed by NCAA rule, not the LOI agreement.

    I think you might be wrong. The LOI becomes binding when the player enrolls, not when he signs it. Ejuan Price SIGNED his LOI to play for Ohio State in Febuary of last year, but got released and played for Pitt this past year. He didn't have to sit out a year like a transfer normally has to because he never enrolled at Ohio State. Maybe the NCAA changed the rules from last year, but Price transferred without sitting a year and had no hardship waiver (like a lot of transfers do when they get to play right away).

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.sites.post-gazette.com%2Findex.php%2Fsports%2Fvarsity-blog%2F28012-woodland-hills-lb-ejuan-price-will-attend-pitt-stepoli-no-longer-at-monessen&ei=-aZAT4noOquw0QHr4bi4Bw&usg=AFQjCNF1oA-J0X9gGwdqjovveNwBTG7MJQ

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Buckeye Warrior on 2/19/2012 at 1:47 AM

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior

  • ejb5212 said...

    So we're both right?

    Uh. I don't think so.

    Although I suppose you could claim that since, as I said, "I'm not clear what you are referring to by "that" in "that's what happened when".

    Willis wasn't bound by an LOI because he never signed one. And the NCAA rules didn't apply to him because he never showed up in a class at Tennessee.

    If the above is what you meant by "that" then you were right but the reality is that the previous situations that we had discussed didn't fit Willis's case, so I'm hard pressed to figure out how you were right.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by UncleLar on 2/19/2012 at 2:45 AM

    UncleLar

  • ejb5212 said...

    So we're both right?

    Foolish question, nobody is ever as correct as UncleLar. Otherwise, he wouldn't have corrected you in the first place, right UncleLar?

    signature image signature image signature image

    ‏@Cordale10 Why should we have to go to class if we came here to play FOOTBALL, we ain't come to play SCHOOL, classes are POINTLESS

    Texas Lion

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    I think you might be wrong. The LOI becomes binding when the player enrolls, not when he signs it. Ejuan Price SIGNED his LOI to play for Ohio State in Febuary of last year, but got released and played for Pitt this past year. He didn't have to sit out a year like a transfer normally has to because he never enrolled at Ohio State. Maybe the NCAA changed the rules from last year, but Price transferred without sitting a year and had no hardship waiver (like a lot of transfers do when they get to play right away).

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.sites.post-gazette.com%2Findex.php%2Fsports%2Fvarsity-blog%2F28012-woodland-hills-lb-ejuan-price-will-attend-pitt-stepoli-no-longer-at-monessen&ei=-aZAT4noOquw0QHr4bi4Bw&usg=AFQjCNF1oA-J0X9gGwdqjovveNwBTG7MJQ

    But you just said the word "released" as in let out of a binding contract that he signed...

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • Buckeye Warrior said...

    I think you might be wrong. The LOI becomes binding when the player enrolls, not when he signs it. Ejuan Price SIGNED his LOI to play for Ohio State in Febuary of last year, but got released and played for Pitt this past year. He didn't have to sit out a year like a transfer normally has to because he never enrolled at Ohio State. Maybe the NCAA changed the rules from last year, but Price transferred without sitting a year and had no hardship waiver (like a lot of transfers do when they get to play right away).

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.sites.post-gazette.com%2Findex.php%2Fsports%2Fvarsity-blog%2F28012-woodland-hills-lb-ejuan-price-will-attend-pitt-stepoli-no-longer-at-monessen&ei=-aZAT4noOquw0QHr4bi4Bw&usg=AFQjCNF1oA-J0X9gGwdqjovveNwBTG7MJQ

    I assure you that I'm not wrong.

    You are confusing two things.

    1. The LOI is binding when you sign it.
    2. The NCAA transfer rules become applicable when you enroll in school and attend your first class.

    Those are two different animals.

    Price was able to play for Pitt because Ohio State gave him a release from his LOI. Had he not gotten a release, then not only would he have had to sit out a year but he also would have lost an entire year of eligibility. The NCAA transfer rules never applied to Price because he didn't take any classes at Ohio State.

    UncleLar

  • Texas Lion said...

    Foolish question, nobody is ever as correct as UncleLar. Otherwise, he wouldn't have corrected you in the first place, right UncleLar?

    I'm not always right - but I usually am. biggrin

    And this is one of those cases when I know I am.

    UncleLar

  • UncleLar said...

    I assure you that I'm not wrong.

    You are confusing two things.

    1. The LOI is binding when you sign it. 2. The NCAA transfer rules become applicable when you enroll in school and attend your first class.

    Those are two different animals.

    Price was able to play for Pitt because Ohio State gave him a release from his LOI. Had he not gotten a release, then not only would he have had to sit out a year but he also would have lost an entire year of eligibility. The NCAA transfer rules never applied to Price because he didn't take any classes at Ohio State.

    NCAA rules make my head spin. They seem to go in circles and make no sense sometimes.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

    Buckeye Warrior