[tweet]730473416638251010[/tweet]
I'm starting to wonder more about Todd's sources. Not Todd but who he puts his faith in.
Don't know that you can judge anyone sources based on this. I would doubt anyone who claimed they knew which way the NCAA is leaning on anything. This is the NCAA. I don't know enough of the details to know if this was justified or not, but the NCAA has no sense in anything it does. Look at the Miami situation, which was apparently overseen by our assistant commish. Completely shameful. And the situation at Penn State. (Don't get me wrong, JoePa and those that enabled that monster deserve everything they got coming) Beyond the victims, those that suffered the most were the players who were denied the postseason and denied scholarships. Go do a little research on Emmert. With his dirty hands it's amazing he's not a Chicago politician.
Quote from: valpo04 on May 11, 2016, 02:11:55 PM
[tweet]730473416638251010[/tweet]
Sad news for Keith.
Bummer. Let the Micah Bradford era begin I guess and hopefully Lexus gets that burst back pre-injury because those 2 are going to be big factors this season.
https://twitter.com/NWIOren/status/730473682758447105
https://twitter.com/NWIOren/status/730474285995855873
https://twitter.com/NWIOren/status/730476126208937988
https://twitter.com/MichaelOsipoff/status/730473561626955776
Not a fair shake for Keith. I'm bummed out by this. Let's hope Coach Lottich can fill out the roster with the right players. I'm trusting he can do it.
Quote from: covufan on May 11, 2016, 02:44:29 PM
Quote from: valpo04 on May 11, 2016, 02:11:55 PM
[tweet]730473416638251010[/tweet]
Sad news for Keith.
I presume this will need President Heckler's OK before it's final. ::) Keith has been screwed, as has the Valpo basketball program.
Paul's twitter feed is tough, emotional, reading on the Carter issue.
[tweet]730504269732958209[/tweet]
and it gets worse from there.
This has not been the offseason I hoped for. With the exception of Coach Lottich.
If Peters leaves, which at this point would not surprise me, then next year is going to be a pretty bumpy ride. With what looks to be, in Norman Dale's words, a short bench.
Paul
I will never understand the NCAA. Played one semester at SLU and 5 semesters at VU. He should have one more year. If he played the whole year at SLU, then transferred, he'd have one more year. :crazy: :crazy:
That is just ridiculous, given the decisions that the NCAA has made in favor of P5 guys with much less reason to keep a 4th full year...
This is Paul Oren's blog in the NWI Times.
http://www.nwitimes.com/blogs/sports/inside-vu-sports/vu-blog-denying-carter-just-wrong/article_70faf73a-17cc-11e6-aecb-7b9bf4ce19ed.html
Paul brings up some good points about the merits of Keith's appeal. And before going any further, I agree that the NCAA decision making is inscrutable, BUT, appeals are made and either granted or denied based on two things: Merit and precedent. Keith seemed to have an arguable case based on merit. What I am missing is all the appeals of other players that were granted that had less merit (precedents). A number of posters cited some really weird NCAA affirmative appeals for P5 players that normally would not have passed the sniff test. Is there a place in the appeal process to argue precedents -- i.e., compare the merits of Keith's case to the merits of other appeals cases? In a court of law, all cases are documented and open for review and use to argue subsequent cases. But then, that begs the question: are those same due process protections available to athletes in the NCAA appeals process? I'm thinking not.
#FreeKeith
I'm pretty surprised by the decision. I think if Michigan State was in our position, I be willing to bet NCAA would have had a different decision for their buddy Izzo.
Quote from: covufan on May 11, 2016, 06:12:53 PMPlayed one semester at SLU and 5 semesters at VU. He should have one more year. If he played the whole year at SLU, then transferred, he'd have one more year. :crazy: :crazy:
He'd have another year, 2016-17. But he would have missed playing spring 2014 at Valpo.
Do I have this right?
First year of eligibility:
He played part of one season (2012-2013) at Saint Louis, then transferred to Valpo before second semester of his freshman year.
Second year of eligibility:
He was at Valpo, not playing, for that spring semester and the fall semester of his sophomore year (spring 2013, fall 2013).
He played at Valpo Spring 2014.
Third and fourth years of eligibility:
He played at Valpo 2014-15 and 2015-16.
He could have played at Valpo 2016-17 if he hadn't played at Valpo spring 2014.
What seems crazy to me is that Crewes' decision, at Saint Louis, not to seek a medical redshirt for Keith is allowed to stand. What incentive did Crewes have to do that? Just to try to get rid of Keith, and free up a scholarship, faster? Is there anything to that decision that benefits Keith?
Or, maybe I'm misunderstanding the redshirt? My understanding is about the total number of games. That playing, then being out injured, and then coming back to play for a game, should still keep the redshirt in play. And that somehow Crewes just elected not to pursue it for him.
Maybe this is all explained in Paul's blog, which I've not yet read. (Edit: Nope, doesn't seem to be covered in the article. At least not head-on.)
Is there an appeal to the appeal? So much seems contrary to the facts. The math just doesn't add up.
The reason why everyone close to the situation thought Keith would get another year is because the facts were in his favor. Keith was injured at St. Louis and that's the reason he only played 39 minutes. Thus he should have been eligible to turn his time at St. Louis into a medical redshirt. If that had happened, his time there basically would have been aborted and he'd still have another year. However, for some reason, the St. Louis medical staff refused to sign off on Keith's injury. The fact is Keith was so injured that he didn't even practice his first few months at Valpo.
If you want an example of a university whose punishment was far worse than the crime, look at USC. What is worse - JoePa's assistant coach molesting kids with JoePa knowing it, or a player's family renting out a condo for a year?
Quote from: VU2014 on May 12, 2016, 11:28:50 AM
I'm pretty surprised by the decision. I think if Michigan State was in our position, I be willing to bet NCAA would have had a different decision for their buddy Izzo.
:crazy:
Quote from: chef on May 12, 2016, 09:09:41 PMHowever, for some reason, the St. Louis medical staff refused to sign off on Keith's injury.
Interesting. So the doc/trainers just wouldn't size? [sic; odd auto-correct; I meant "just wouldn't _sign_?"]
Someone standing on principle, somehow, or some kind of oddity... Unfortunate, to say the least.
According to the blog it was the coaches who didn't want Carter to redshirt. So they screwed him out of a year of eligibility over 39 minutes of backup availability. Doesn't seem like much concern for the player at all. And the kid pays the price. Sucks.
I may have to go back to following the NBA for my basketball fix rather than college basketball. Yes the game is only vaguely what I remember basketball to be but at least there is less hypacracy.
Quote from: nkvu on May 13, 2016, 12:38:51 AMAccording to the blog it was the coaches who didn't want Carter to redshirt. So they screwed him out of a year of eligibility over 39 minutes of backup availability. Doesn't seem like much concern for the player at all.
But, he can be _available_ for backup play. And, as long as he doesn't play, he can still redshirt. Right? You can "pull" the redshirt at any time.
He _didn't_ play. He's presumably eligible for the redshirt.
It seems like someone (maybe the medical folks, maybe the coach) just doesn't want to do it. And I'm struggling to find any kind of reason.
So far the theme of this offseason seems to be adults looking out for themselves at the expense of the kids....
Quote from: VULB#62 on May 12, 2016, 08:11:34 PM
Is there an appeal to the appeal? So much seems contrary to the facts. The math just doesn't add up.
Quote from: VULB#62 on May 12, 2016, 09:10:05 AM
This is Paul Oren's blog in the NWI Times.
http://www.nwitimes.com/blogs/sports/inside-vu-sports/vu-blog-denying-carter-just-wrong/article_70faf73a-17cc-11e6-aecb-7b9bf4ce19ed.html
Paul brings up some good points about the merits of Keith's appeal. And before going any further, I agree that the NCAA decision making is inscrutable, BUT, appeals are made and either granted or denied based on two things: Merit and precedent. Keith seemed to have an arguable case based on merit. What I am missing is all the appeals of other players that were granted that had less merit (precedents). A number of posters cited some really weird NCAA affirmative appeals for P5 players that normally would not have passed the sniff test. Is there a place in the appeal process to argue precedents -- i.e., compare the merits of Keith's case to the merits of other appeals cases? In a court of law, all cases are documented and open for review and use to argue subsequent cases. But then, that begs the question: are those same due process protections available to athletes in the NCAA appeals process? I'm thinking not.
AHA!![tweet]731160536012996608[/tweet]
[tweet]731160253589540864[/tweet]
View from Detroit fan: Robbed. As good a case for a waiver as you'll ever see.
I don't think that SLU should be able to have the say in this circumstance. It is an absolute joke if he is not given a chance for another year. Even if he took the year elsewhere because he is graduating, this guy deserves another season.
Quote from: valpotx on May 13, 2016, 09:57:20 PMI don't think that SLU should be able to have the say in this circumstance.
I'm baldly guessing on the formalities here. I have very little idea how this actually works.
But, it's seems like Keith's probably only entitled to additional playing time in some kind of medical redshirt situation. His limited time at SLU has to have been because of injury, and not just because he was the last guy on the bench.
It's not crazy to me that SLU, or some doctor or trainer involved at the time, gets a say on that issue. But, it'd probably also be reasonable if Keith (and/or Valpo) got to bring in some kind of other expert, if there was a disagreement on the facts. Alas, I wouldn't be shocked if the NCAA didn't allow for that dissenting opinion from the outside expert.
But, I'm still at a loss - why did/does/would SLU have any reason to deny the redshirt?
TX, you are spot on in this case. The facts are 39 minutes of playing time as a freshman, injury, and then a transfer at semester. What does SLU's opinions/prejudices/agendas have to do with this?
And I hope VU cites the many "questionable" previously granted appeals as comparisons/precedents to support Keith's appeal for the waiver.
I was thinking this was a done deal for Keith. What exactly happened at Saint Louis that they hated Carter so much?
Quote from: historyman on May 24, 2016, 11:33:08 PM
I was thinking this was a done deal for Keith. What exactly happened at Saint Louis that they hated Carter so much?
Carter committed to play for Majerus. Once Majerus got sick and it was evident that he would not be returning (and likely passing away), Carter wanted to leave. The problem was that SLU's starting PG, Kwamain Mitchell, broke his foot and SLU needed backcourt depth so Crews played Carter despite the fact that Carter was both banged up and he wanted to leave.
Crews was right in wanting to play Carter, but SLU did fine even when Carter wasn't playing. I think Crews should have respected Carter's wishes and let him redshirt the entire season. It seems surprising to me that the NCAA would deny Carter a 5th year considering all the circumstances at play.
There is a rumor on the Minnesota board that they will not be at the Vegas Tournament this season.
http://www.forums.gopherhole.com/boards/showthread.php?67744-Early-Look-At-2016-17-B1G-Non-Conference-Schedules/page5
There is also a rumor on the SLU message board that they will be in the Vegas Tournament this season.
http://www.billikens.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=27136
I dislike SLU for beating us on the buzzer at the ARC. I think they were nationally ranked at the time. Also, they screwed Carter out of a year of college hoops.
But I would love to be in a conference with them....
Quote from: SLU83 on May 26, 2016, 06:51:37 AM
Quote from: historyman on May 24, 2016, 11:33:08 PM
I was thinking this was a done deal for Keith. What exactly happened at Saint Louis that they hated Carter so much?
Carter committed to play for Majerus. Once Majerus got sick and it was evident that he would not be returning (and likely passing away), Carter wanted to leave. The problem was that SLU's starting PG, Kwamain Mitchell, broke his foot and SLU needed backcourt depth so Crews played Carter despite the fact that Carter was both banged up and he wanted to leave.
Crews was right in wanting to play Carter, but SLU did fine even when Carter wasn't playing. I think Crews should have respected Carter's wishes and let him redshirt the entire season. It seems surprising to me that the NCAA would deny Carter a 5th year considering all the circumstances at play.
Your leaving out a very important fact. SLU and Crews went out of their way to make sure Carter didn't get a another year of eligibility.
Quote from: bbtds on May 26, 2016, 09:13:08 AM
Quote from: SLU83 on May 26, 2016, 06:51:37 AM
Quote from: historyman on May 24, 2016, 11:33:08 PM
I was thinking this was a done deal for Keith. What exactly happened at Saint Louis that they hated Carter so much?
Carter committed to play for Majerus. Once Majerus got sick and it was evident that he would not be returning (and likely passing away), Carter wanted to leave. The problem was that SLU's starting PG, Kwamain Mitchell, broke his foot and SLU needed backcourt depth so Crews played Carter despite the fact that Carter was both banged up and he wanted to leave.
Crews was right in wanting to play Carter, but SLU did fine even when Carter wasn't playing. I think Crews should have respected Carter's wishes and let him redshirt the entire season. It seems surprising to me that the NCAA would deny Carter a 5th year considering all the circumstances at play.
Your leaving out a very important fact. SLU and Crews went out of their way to make sure Carter didn't get a another year of eligibility.
That could be true. I don't know the whole story behind the appeal. I can certainly see Crews doing that.
Quote from: SLU83 on May 26, 2016, 10:20:25 AM
Quote from: bbtds on May 26, 2016, 09:13:08 AM
Your leaving out a very important fact. SLU and Crews went out of their way to make sure Carter didn't get a another year of eligibility.
That could be true. I don't know the whole story behind the appeal. I can certainly see Crews doing that.
I'm still trying to figure out why. And it seems like noone's really laid out the whole story. But, it does seem like this is so...
In other news, I've heard that we might hear about Carter reasonably soon - maybe next week? But, Valpo's been surprised previously in this process, so, we'll see.
At the meet and greet, Luke said that the timeline is three weeks max for the decision on the appeal.
Mark LaBarbera said VU had contact with the NCAA today, and Valpo was informed the decision on Carter more likely would be a month away. Lottich then amended his expectation for hearing about Keith from June 23 to July 9. He will hold a scholarship open until the July decision.
[tweet]751496104831774720[/tweet]
bummer
The worst part about this is that Kieth was the only point guard who played significant minutes last season.
[tweet]751518176593281024[/tweet]
I hope the athletic department (1) receives a formal appeals determination document that describes in logical detail the grounds for denial -- not a simple postcard stamped "DENIED." And (2) if that document exists, I hope Mark and Matt share the exact words of the NCAA with the Valpo community and fans.
I've still never understood why he doesn't/didn't just get a conventional medical redshirt. Even when he was pressed back into service at SLU, he played so little, it should have been (should be?) a slam dunk case for a medical redshirt for that season. But, SLU wouldn't agree to it for some reason?
http://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2016/06/30/oregon-guard-dylan-ennis-gets-sixth-year-of-eligibility/
Apparently the key figure is between 21 minutes and 39. These two decisions were like 2 weeks apart. Consistency that is the NCAA. Perhaps it matters what size school or conference the player in question is from.
This is just pure bs. If you substitute Vandy for Valpo I bet the decision would have been different. Power 5 rules.
Really unfortunate for Keith. Petty move by the NCAA.
To me this is really disturbing. We always hear how the NCAA is suppose to be working for real student athletes and this seems to go directly to the contrary. A student and a school with no prior infractions asks that an athlete be allowed to continue playing, not even a complete fourth season, when this student athlete has played significantly less than 3 seasons worth of games because of extenuating circumstances. The NCAA in some shape or form believes that this will somehow hurt the integrity of the game or set a precedent for others to in some way gain an unfair advantage. I see no way that Keith or VU is asking for exceptional treatment, only for what is best for this student athlete in light of his significant extenuating circumstances. Fairness and concern for true student athletes and the schools that foster an honest student athlete experience has been replaced by legalistic mumbo-jumbo.
The major difference between the Dylan Ennis (Oregon) situation and Keith is that Oregon is funded by Phil Knight who is the Founder and majority shareholder of Nike that lines the NCAA's pockets with $$$$$$$$$$ and more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, went to Oregon and one of the single handed biggest athletics boosters in college athletics. If Keith were on Duke, Michigan State or some other power 5 conference school with major pull because of revenue being generated then he'd probably get an extra year of eligibility. The up hill battle for mid-majors continues...
http://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2016/07/08/ncaa-denies-keith-carter-extra-year-of-eligibility-at-valparaiso/
This is complete BS, and the NCAA should be ashamed of itself, as if we were P5, he would have been approved. I wish him much luck in his professional career, wherever he may end up.
One kid gets denied and another is rewarded. Interesting that they mention some of the same items that we thought would work in Keith's favor, but didn't, yet they seemed to work for this kid. Jalan West gets a 6th year (http://www.todaysu.com/southland-conference-today/jalan-west-gets-chance-finish-started/)
A load of crap, indeed. The NCAA should be ashamed.
https://twitter.com/MichaelOsipoff/status/847997232402112515
NCAA grants Carter a sixth year of eligibility...Oh, not Valpo's Keith Carter, Michigan State's Ben Carter:
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/michigan-state-university/2017/05/08/msus-ben-carter-granted-sixth-year-eligibility/101444192/ (http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/michigan-state-university/2017/05/08/msus-ben-carter-granted-sixth-year-eligibility/101444192/)
Funny how the NCAA bends over backwards for a Big Ten school, but screwed Keith out of his eligibility for no reason whatsoever. It's all a corrupt cartel.
Quote from: bigmosmithfan1 on May 08, 2017, 09:33:16 PM
Funny how the NCAA bends over backwards for a Big Ten school, but screwed Keith out of his eligibility for no reason whatsoever. It's all a corrupt cartel.
Did BEN Carter play a single minute last year? Read like he screwed his knee up on his first practice with the team?
Quote from: FieldGoodie05 on May 08, 2017, 09:47:33 PM
Quote from: bigmosmithfan1 on May 08, 2017, 09:33:16 PM
Funny how the NCAA bends over backwards for a Big Ten school, but screwed Keith out of his eligibility for no reason whatsoever. It's all a corrupt cartel.
Did BEN Carter play a single minute last year? Read like he screwed his knee up on his first practice with the team?
You are correct 0 minutes played this year. Different situation than Carter's. I think the NCAA screwed up in not giving KC another year, but I don't think they "bent over backward" in the BC/MSU case.
The NCAA just gave a kid a 7th year... I'm not begrudging them giving a kid a 7th year but just the fact they are inconsistent bothers me.
https://twitter.com/theScoreNCAAB/status/860870436900360192
https://twitter.com/franfraschilla/status/860674924779773953
https://twitter.com/Efawcett7/status/860688456875483136
What we are forgetting is the input from Saint Louis that influenced the decision. The NCAA obviously felt more comfortable with SLU's coaching staff/training staff/AD's explanation of what happened in Keith's freshman year than KC's explanation. No matter what type of individual KC turned out to be the NCAA had to feel that during his freshman year Carter did not reveal the whole truth and that the SLU staff had the better story. In the end most coaching staffs don't try to hurt any kid's chances at playing but in Carter's case they must have felt they needed to teach KC a life lesson. As the Rolling Stones song says "You Can't Always Get What You Want."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S94ohyErSw
Did Keith play professionally this past season?
I think Keith is one of the most underrated players in VU history. Possibly because we only got 2 years.
I miss the lobs to vashil
Quote from: valpotx on May 08, 2017, 11:56:50 PM
Did Keith play professionally this past season?
According to Keith's twitter he is not playing or has not played in any professional leagues so far.
That is very surprising. I would have figured he would be pro, by now.