Memphis compliance does not have final say if there is a judge who has ordered the school to consider Wiseman eligible until the legal questions are resolved. Ignoring the court’s order would result in contempt of court charges against the Memphis personnel responsible.
Memphis injunction...
- Thread starter Uncle Adolph_rivals58629
- Start date
Memphis compliance does not have final say if there is a judge who has ordered the school to consider Wiseman eligible until the legal questions are resolved. Ignoring the court’s order would result in contempt of court charges against the Memphis personnel responsible.
I have read nothing that says the NCAA was working to get the kid eligible. Where did you see this? At the end of the day, he took almost 12 grand from a booster of Memphis, who happens to be his head coach. The game is over.
We all l know how corrupt the NCAA is but if the know amount is 11,500 dollars , and Penny gave it to him family to directly get Wiseman to move to Memphis to play for him then I don’t see any rule they could bend to let this slide. If this were the Rat Faced Bastard and Dook I would say the rule would have already been rewritten to take care of this little over site by one of the Rats assistants
The school could have held him out regardless. The court has no jurisdiction over whether a school chooses to play a player in a game or not.
Right. Kinda my point. NCAA would assume UM would have held him out, instead of caving with Wiseman’s and the judge.
Just because he is temporarily eligible doesn’t mean the coach has to play him.
Last night something was said on the question of his eligibility on ESPN. Like ‘yes he was ineligible’ that the two sides were in talks of getting him eligible.
Wiseman will play. Even if the NCAA vacates the games, who cares? The games still happened for the players and fans. So what if 30 wins are erased from the books. It's not like Memphis is chasing us in total wins. They are an irrelevant program playing for a rogue, AAU coach. Penny will end up getting a show cause from the NCAA after he's fired.
You would think Penny and super recruiter Mike Miller would be smarter than this. If I was the NCAA I would start looking at how they got the rest of the number one class, it's on now.
If the injunction orders Memphis to treat Wiseman as eligible, then Memphis has to play him. There is absolutely zero reason why a healthy player of his caliber would simply ride the bench an entire game.
Sitting him would mean that the school is not considering him eligible and that the school is therefore ignoring a direct court order. It’s as simple as that. Memphis plays him until this is resolved or they face contempt of court.
I don’t think Memphis’s opponents will go so quietly into the night on it. It’s not fair to them. The NCAA would be forced to act and not only vacate the wins, but call them forfeits so that they are wins for the opponents. If Memphis cheated, other teams shouldn’t be held accountable for losses sustained to Memphis.
They don't have to play him, they chose to play him despite the NCAA ruling.
********. At the end of the day, the school administration has final say over whether a player plays or not. Eligible or not.
The "ticker tape" all night long scrolling from ESPN suggested/inferred that Memphis and the NCAA were working together to get Wiseman reinstated...
WTH does that mean?
NCAA: "Oh, we're sorry that we caught you. We know that we've let higher profile schools off the hook, so we'll see what we can do."
The final outcome will be very telling; i.e. NCAA. Am not holding my breath...
Personally, I think the NCAA is toooo big ($$) and selectively corrupt -- should be disbanded and restarted with something else.
Go CATS!
WTH does that mean?
NCAA: "Oh, we're sorry that we caught you. We know that we've let higher profile schools off the hook, so we'll see what we can do."
The final outcome will be very telling; i.e. NCAA. Am not holding my breath...
Personally, I think the NCAA is toooo big ($$) and selectively corrupt -- should be disbanded and restarted with something else.
Go CATS!
Not once a judge is involved. You can’t simply ignore a court order just because you don’t like it.
Lots of kids who are elligible dont get in the game. It was a coach's decision. Penny is the one who played him. Now he is trying to say it was Memphis not him..
A judge can not decide who a Coach puts in a game....
They do still have the final say. A judge doesn't have the power to order in game substitutions or starting lineups. He really can't even do what he did but forcing Memphis to play him is a power he has no ability to enforce. Memphis chose to break the rules last night. They can't hid behind this judge.
A judge cannot force a coach to play a basketball player in a game.
Contempt of court for not playing a basketball player in a game? Come on. That's pretty absurd. Any examples of this ever occurring? A school/coach being held in contempt over not playing an athlete in a game? Like, a single case of this occurring?
A judge can dictate that a school cannot use eligibility as the reason for sitting him if the player’s eligibility is at the heart of ongoing litigation.
So Memphis could only sit Wiseman if he were injured or if it made sense from a coaching / strategy perspective (i.e., sitting him would help win the game). He’s not hurt and there’s absolutely no way you can argue that sitting him helps win a game, so you have to play him.
I expect the NCAA to ban Memphis from post season play for knowingly playing an ineligible player.
If Wiseman is ineligible, the NCAA could out pressure on other member institutions to not play Memphis and also not invite Memphis to the NCAA tournament. Not to mention, they will make Memphis pay royally for this. Penny may be done if he doesn't step in and sit him until this is figured out.
The only school that the NCAA “works to get a kid eligible” for is Duke. I hope Memphis points out the NCAA’s selective enforcement to the media and whoever else will listen. They should just ignore or deny or lawyer up.
Can you point to a single, prior instance where a player has sought a restraining order regarding an eligibility ruling?
You could say that this issue is distracting the team and therefore it's a detriment to the program. We are shutting him down until it's figured out.
No one can prove it's not.
From everything I’ve read, that court order was temporary relief to say he was eligible to play. It did not order the school to play him. Two different things. The school had absolute final authority over whether to play Wiseman or not.
I'm sorry, but Memphis and the coaching staff 110% have the right to not play an athlete if they deem the risks greater than the reward long-term.
Coaches play favorites and choose to not play kids over petty issues all the time. Coach doesn't like a kid's attitude, for example, and chooses not to play him despite said player being 100% eligible to play, and is perhaps better than everyone playing in front him. Coach doesn't like the kid, however, and chooses not to play him. Tool move, yes, but well within the coach's right to play who he or she wants to play.
Parents may get pissed. Player may get pissed. Tough luck. They can't sue the coach for lack of playing time, and a judge has no authority over who a coach chooses to play in a sporting event.
Can you provide a single case where this occurred? A single case as precedent here? I'm not a lawyer, but I am a dentist, and we use peer-reviewed journals and studies to help dictate how we practice evidence-based dentistry. If the literature supports our decision-making, it helps ensure that we cannot be held liable regarding standard of care.
So are there any prior court cases where a judge was given the authority to force a coach to play an athlete in an athletic event?
Until there is a final resolution, it remains a distraction whether he plays or he sits.
But if you choose to sit him for that reason, then you are admitting it is eligibility driven. If I am Wiseman’s attorney, then I’m going back to the judge to say you’re ignoring a court order and you’re going to have an even bigger distraction to deal with.
The more prudent course of action for the school is to play him until this is resolved. If the NCAA’s decision is upheld, then the games will be vacated.
Can you point to a single, prior instance where a player has sought a restraining order regarding an eligibility ruling?
Please explain how we'd get from Penny simply saying that it was his decision not to play him in the game, to Penny having charges brought against him.
Obviously the eligibility is the distraction but you're not saying he's ineligible so you are adhering to the court order. You are saying that due to the fact that games could be vacated at a later date and all the commotion it is causing in the media for him to play that is a detriment to your team.
Sure he could take you back to court but that the time when you explain to him and his family what this will do to the University and you then try to work out that decision between the two of you. If he and his family are good people, like some folks are painting them, then they would understand.
I think all of this is moot because the university is behind this. I bet they concocted this plan to make it look like they have no choice.
Again, as others have pointed out, the judge ruled Wiseman can remain eligible for a temporary period, which won't hold up, but that's not the point.
The judge CANNOT FORCE the school or coach to play the kid in a game.
There are plenty of case examples of boosters providing payment to players resulting in punishment, so it is 100% within the school and coaching staff's authority and right to choose to not play a kid if they deem the risks too great in doing so.
Wiseman can transfer. Well within his right. He can still attend Memphis as a student. Well within his right.
However, people can't seek legal action over playing time in an athletic event. To suggest otherwise is absurd unless a specific case example can be presented as precedent.
You're not providing evidence to support your claim that the judge can force Memphis to play James Wiseman in a basketball game.
Again, given prior cases of boosters providing impermissible benefits resulting in severe punishment for a school's program, if Memphis feels that playing Wiseman places them in jeopardy, they can choose to sit him, and there's not a single thing a judge can do to make them play him.
No, my question is highlighting the flawed assumption underlying your question about precedent.
Prolly not since there are extra penalties for running to a local court to get a temporary restraining order if it doesn't stand.
He's showing precedent by saying previous cases of boosters paying players lead to vacated games. That would show that Memphis has a case to sit the guy regardless of the court says he is eligible.
The Memphis compliance department is probably so dumb they didn't even realize this.
Which is precisely why Wiseman filed the lawsuit and not Memphis. Wiseman is suing both the NCAA and the University of Memphis over his eligibility.
The reason for doing that is that it enables Memphis to say to the NCAA, “look, we didn’t take this course of action and our hands are now tied because of a court order.”
This whole thing is a Hail Mary for Memphis to try to keep Wiseman eligible. The thing about Hail Mary’s is that they rarely actually work.