Keith Carter Denied 5th Year

[valpo04]

[tweet]730473416638251010[/tweet]

[bbtds]

I'm starting to wonder more about Todd's sources. Not Todd but who he puts his faith in.

[NativeCheesehead]

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.

[covufan]

[tweet]730473416638251010[/tweet]

Sad news for Keith. 

[VU2014]

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

[DMvalpo18]

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.

[vu72]

[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.

[agibson]

Paul's twitter feed is tough, emotional, reading on the Carter issue.

[tweet]730504269732958209[/tweet]

and it gets worse from there.

[78crusader]

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

[covufan]

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. 

[valpotx]

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...

[VULB#62]

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.

[M]

#FreeKeith

[VU2014]

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. 

[agibson]

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. 

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.)

[VULB#62]

Is there an appeal to the appeal?  So much seems contrary to the facts. The math just doesn't add up.

[chef]

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.

[usc4valpo]

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?

[valpospartan]

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. 

[agibson]

However, 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.

[nkvu]

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.

[agibson]

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.

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.

[NativeCheesehead]

So far the theme of this offseason seems to be adults looking out for themselves at the expense of the kids....

[VULB#62]

Is there an appeal to the appeal?  So much seems contrary to the facts. The math just doesn't add up.

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]

[Commissioner]

View from Detroit fan: Robbed. As good a case for a waiver as you'll ever see.