Tare Martell's eligibility waiver could pave way for Tuttle

[IUCX9]

https://247sports.com/Article/Tate-...akdown-change-NCAA-transfer-system-128973860/

If Martell wins, you can basically make up any reason to transfer and get immediate eligibility.

Short term, IU benefits by getting Tuttle immediately eligibility.

Long term, it's bad for college football.

 

[welshman#]

https://247sports.com/Article/Tate-...akdown-change-NCAA-transfer-system-128973860/

If Martell wins, you can basically make up any reason to transfer and get immediate eligibility.

Short term, IU benefits by getting Tuttle immediately eligibility.

Long term, it's bad for college football.

another kid who's retained an attorney.....I sense a theme here

 

[fpeaugh]

These waivers are ridiculous imo. Either do away with the 1 year rule or quit giving out waivers to everyone who requests one.

It’s unfair and unbalanced.

 

[Bowlmania]

another kid who's retained an attorney.....I sense a theme here

He'd be a fool if he didn't retain counsel.

 

[Bowlmania]

https://247sports.com/Article/Tate-...akdown-change-NCAA-transfer-system-128973860/

If Martell wins, you can basically make up any reason to transfer and get immediate eligibility.

Short term, IU benefits by getting Tuttle immediately eligibility.

Long term, it's bad for college football.

The NCAA is a mess, but you're right - - we benefit here. I'd be shocked if Tuttle's waiver application isn't granted. We are looking really good at QB.

 

[IUCX9]

The NCAA is a mess, but you're right - - we benefit here. I'd be shocked if Tuttle's waiver application isn't granted. We are looking really good at QB.

Deboer working with Tuttle is beyond exciting for me. I really hope he gets his waiver approved. I know I'm setting myself up for disappointment, but I still remember my first home game attended. We lost. And I'm stiiiiiiil heeeeeere.

 

[IndyIUFan66]

Want Tuttle to be as good as advertised, but assuming he’s healthy, I’m pulling for Penix to start!

 

[82IU]

The NCAA will again bend good ole IU over unless we can get a slick lawyer who can nail them on some technicality. They have a h@rd0~ for us because of our past and because we are insignificant to the bigger picture.
Let's put it this way, someone once commented that the NCAA was so mad at Ohio State that they put Toledo on probation. LOL
Sorry for being so graphic and cynical, but I am not holding my breath and counting on the NCAA to help us out on anything. "Think Bryant Fitzgerald".

82

 

[Chriselli]

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't want him to have immediate eligibility. That greatly increases the odds of keeping all three of them for another year, IMO.

 

[E.Z.Rider]

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't want him to have immediate eligibility. That greatly increases the odds of keeping all three of them for another year, IMO.

I know what you mean. If Tuttle is the difference between 5 wins and 6, then play him. If not, I would like to see a little spacing between QBs.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

another kid who's retained an attorney.....I sense a theme here

how many attys you think the NCAA and the schools have?

i don't see the powers that be having any problem with a coach switching schools and being immediately eligible to coach at his new school without sitting out one day.

and coaches have 40-50 yrs to coach, kids have 4 yrs of eligibility.

just do away with the whole sit a yr totally unfair one sided rule, and let kids play where ever they want to play and are wanted.

it's all a zero sum gain for the schools anyway.

college fball will go on without a hitch.

gains and losses will all even out.

transfers won't eat a scholly for a whole yr they can't play, that could otherwise go to a walk on.

kids with a 4 yr clock running can maximize their situation for the short window they have, just as coaches, administrators, NCAA executives, and everyone else but the players, have always been allowed to do.

 

[welshman#]

how many attys you think the NCAA and the schools have?

i don't see the powers that be having any problem with a coach switching schools and being immediately eligible to coach at his new school without sitting out one day.

and coaches have 40-50 yrs to coach, kids have 4 yrs of eligibility.

just do away with the whole sit a yr totally unfair one sided rule, and let kids play where ever they want to play and are wanted.

it's all a zero sum gain for the schools anyway.

college fball will go on without a hitch.

gains and losses will all even out.

transfers won't eat a scholly for a whole yr they can't play, that could otherwise go to a walk on.

kids with a 4 yr clock running can maximize their situation for the short window they have, just as coaches, administrators, NCAA executives, and everyone else but the players, have always been allowed to do.

think you may have missed my point, which I originated in a different thread elsewhere, and which is that if Fields and Martell are retaining attorneys, Tuttle would be foolish not to as well--especially since his case is, at least on paper, weaker than Fields' case.

at the time I posed the original question, it was stated that Tuttle/IU had not retained an attorney. Which I felt was naive, especially when dealing with the NCAA.

 

[kmathum]

think you may have missed my point, which I originated in a different thread elsewhere, and which is that if Fields and Martell are retaining attorneys, Tuttle would be foolish not to as well--especially since his case is, at least on paper, weaker than Fields' case.

at the time I posed the original question, it was stated that Tuttle/IU had not retained an attorney. Which I felt was naive, especially when dealing with the NCAA.

you MUST have a good mouthpiece.

 

[crossfire74]

https://247sports.com/Article/Tate-...akdown-change-NCAA-transfer-system-128973860/

If Martell wins, you can basically make up any reason to transfer and get immediate eligibility.

Short term, IU benefits by getting Tuttle immediately eligibility.

Long term, it's bad for college football.

I've been told the NCAA tends to look more at what happened at the school the player transferred from, not necessarily any hardship case. In other words if the school releases the player and writes a letter of recommendation for said player, the NCAA usually grants it. This is what has been happening recently. It happened with Mack's transfer to Pittsburgh. It happened with Fields and OSU/GA, And Utah's staff has done the same for Tuttle. While it's certainly the NCAA, I will be pretty surprised if Tuttle isn't ruled eligible immediately.

As for whether it's "bad for college football" I really don't agree with that premise. If a coach can be courted and leave for what is perceived as a better opportunity with no penalty, then I see no reason why players can't do the same thing. I'm sure you could argue that players are getting recruited every off season, but so are coaches, so again what is fair for one, is fair for all.

Now what could end up being a deterrent for a free for all would be the APR score. But in the world of college football, where every off season there are transfers, medical hardships, etc, I just don't think this is all that horrible. And for a school like IU, it could be beneficial to gain a good transfer from a top power 5 school that sat the bench there, but could come in and play quickly without the sit out year.

 

[IUCX9]

I've been told the NCAA tends to look more at what happened at the school the player transferred from, not necessarily any hardship case. In other words if the school releases the player and writes a letter of recommendation for said player, the NCAA usually grants it. This is what has been happening recently. It happened with Mack's transfer to Pittsburgh. It happened with Fields and OSU/GA, And Utah's staff has done the same for Tuttle. While it's certainly the NCAA, I will be pretty surprised if Tuttle isn't ruled eligible immediately.

As for whether it's "bad for college football" I really don't agree with that premise. If a coach can be courted and leave for what is perceived as a better opportunity with no penalty, then I see no reason why players can't do the same thing. I'm sure you could argue that players are getting recruited every off season, but so are coaches, so again what is fair for one, is fair for all.

Now what could end up being a deterrent for a free for all would be the APR score. But in the world of college football, where every off season there are transfers, medical hardships, etc, I just don't think this is all that horrible. And for a school like IU, it could be beneficial to gain a good transfer from a top power 5 school that sat the bench there, but could come in and play quickly without the sit out year.

I see what you are saying, but what keeps bluebloods from cherry picking our class. Let's say Notre Dame's starting QB tears his ACL in the Spring. Invites Tuttle to play QB for the Irish the following summer because he'd be immediately eligible. Or let's say OSU's incoming RBs get busted for armed robbery (very possible) and they come calling to Sampson or Stevie?

Not good.

 

[crossfire74]

I see what you are saying, but what keeps bluebloods from cherry picking our class. Let's say Notre Dame's starting QB tears his ACL in the Spring. Invites Tuttle to play QB for the Irish the following summer because he'd be immediately eligible. Or let's say OSU's incoming RBs get busted for armed robbery (very possible) and they come calling to Sampson or Stevie?

Not good.

While that "could" happen, ND should have 4 Tuttes sitting on the bench waiting their turn to play.

And remember, I said the NCAA looks at what the situation is at the school and the coaches say about the transfer. If that scenario were to play out, I highly doubt a coach would release the player in good standing. Also a coach can limit a player greatly. The coach could very well say no to any regional school or in conference school transfer. That was the condition given to Tommy Stevens who thought about transferring to IU, then decided to stay when Franklin laid it out like he did.

So again, while your scenario is a possibility, I put it at about .000001% that it would ever occur. I think you are fearing something that won't ever be an issue.

However, an IU coach can go to OSU or ND no problem. Heck we almost lost Hart to ND. Didn't see you posting about how unfair that could be.

 

[IUCX9]

While that "could" happen, ND should have 4 Tuttes sitting on the bench waiting their turn to play.

And remember, I said the NCAA looks at what the situation is at the school and the coaches say about the transfer. If that scenario were to play out, I highly doubt a coach would release the player in good standing. Also a coach can limit a player greatly. The coach could very well say no to any regional school or in conference school transfer. That was the condition given to Tommy Stevens who thought about transferring to IU, then decided to stay when Franklin laid it out like he did.

So again, while your scenario is a possibility, I put it at about .000001% that it would ever occur. I think you are fearing something that won't ever be an issue.

However, an IU coach can go to OSU or ND no problem. Heck we almost lost Hart to ND. Didn't see you posting about how unfair that could be.

You're forgetting that the rules have already changed and coaches can no longer limit a player from transferring. That's why there is a portal now.

What I'm saying is if the NCAA continues down this slippery slope, scenarios like the one I presented are going to be much more likely. Maybe not today, but the precedent will definitely affect the future, especially when lawyers are involved.

Edit: once a player is on the portal. They can be contacted by ANY program.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

I see what you are saying, but what keeps bluebloods from cherry picking our class. Let's say Notre Dame's starting QB tears his ACL in the Spring. Invites Tuttle to play QB for the Irish the following summer because he'd be immediately eligible. Or let's say OSU's incoming RBs get busted for armed robbery (very possible) and they come calling to Sampson or Stevie?

Not good.

not good for who, (whom)?

you? IU?, OSU?

for the schools, it will all turn out a zero sum game anyway.

it's their life, the NCAA window is short, kids should be able to go where they want to be and are wanted.

i never understand the obsession some have with dictating other's lives, be it important stuff like making the most of their college experience, or minor stuff like pass outs.

 

[IUCX9]

not good for who, (whom)?

you? IU?, OSU?

for the schools, it will all turn out a zero sum game anyway.

it's their life, the NCAA window is short, kids should be able to go where they want to be and are wanted.

i never understand the obsession some have with dictating other's lives, be it important stuff like making the most of their college experience, or minor stuff like pass outs.

LOL. Might as well delete your account because this board is all about "obsessions" people have about the sports they watch.