Big Ten to discuss league-wide mandate against playing Texas Tech

[Richie O]

Report: Big Ten to discuss league-wide mandate against playing Texas Tech after Brendan Sorsby decision

The Big Ten is set to discuss a league-wide mandate against members facing Texas Tech in all sports after the Brendan Sorsby decision.

www.on3.com

 

[Anon1753410373]

Stupid. So now the BIG is basically threatening sanctions against TT. Don’t hate the player hate the game…

 

[Erial_Lion]

Stupid. So now the BIG is basically threatening sanctions against TT. Don’t hate the player hate the game…

With the Wild West that things have become, I'm waiting for a rival out-of-state school to go to court and get a ruling saying that Sorsby isn't eligible to play in the state of "x"...what happens, Texas Tech fights it and a homer judge from another state pushes the decision out until after their game against TT?

 

[Caliknight]

Whole country is run by suing people.

 

[cubuffsdoug_rivals]

The old Southwest Conference again. This ain't the wild, wild west. If you don't stand for something, then you'll fall for anything.

Stupid. So now the BIG is basically threatening sanctions against TT. Don’t hate the player hate the game…

 

[Caliknight]

What if a B1G team has to play them in a bowl game lol? Big Ten teams are lucky that Delany left an organization that nearly runs itself. The last two commissioners have been terrible.

 

[Knight Shift]

 

[Doctor Worm]

That is a very good point. We are where we are because Sorsby obtained an injunction against the NCAA. Neither Texas Tech nor the Big 12 were named in the injunction. Presumably, Texas Tech is free to drop Sorsby from the team. (Although they'd still have to pay him his contractually agreed NIL?) More realistically, the Big 12 could sanction Texas Tech for playing Sorsby, although that too would no doubt be litigated.

 

[Anon1754923206]

Seems petty…it won’t go anywhere

 

[RUTGERS95]

Stupid. So now the BIG is basically threatening sanctions against TT. Don’t hate the player hate the game…

not at all, it's smart and there is more behind the scenes here

 

[Anon1753410373]

If you wanna change my mind, you need to enlighten me then. Who are they punishing if a court allows him to retain eligibility. We didn’t complain when Elad was granted additional eligibility.

Unless this is used to push through strong reform…but then Kiffin and LSU would have to agree as well.

 

[Richie O]

If you wanna change my mind, you need to enlighten me then. Who are they punishing if a court allows him to retain eligibility. We didn’t complain when Elad was granted additional eligibility.

Unless this is used to push through strong reform…but then Kiffin and LSU would have to agree as well.

I mean Elad didn’t bet for and against his own team to be fair.

 

[Scarlet4ever]

We should just start recruiting NFL players in the twilight of their career and have a NJ judge give an injunction so they can play

 

[Knight Shift]

We should just start recruiting NFL players in the twilight of their career and have a NJ judge give an injunction so they can play

Kenny Britt and Ray Rice!!!

 

[NickRU714]

Is the Big Ten going to release a list of rules that are or are not allowed when scheduling games?

Since they are making up their own eligibility rules now.
Does the SEC have a list?
"NCAA eligibility doesnt matter to us. We aren't scheduling any school with a player in his 6th year of eligibility".
Maybe add that too?

It is funny that so many are on board for "conference should make their own rules and disregard the formal NCAA rules" while many of the same lament the B1G/SEC "breaking away" from the NCAA.

 

[Knight Shift]

Is the Big Ten going to release a list of rules that are or are not allowed when scheduling games?

Since they are making up their own rules now.
Does the SEC have a list?
"NCAA eligibility doesnt matter to us. We aren't scheduling any school with a player in his 6th year of eligibility".
Maybe add that too?

It is funny that so many are on board for "conference should make their own rules and disregard the formal NCAA rules" while many of the same lament the B1G/SEC "breaking away" from the NCAA.

I think this is fine as long as Michigan and Ohio State write the rules. Maybe they can enlist Conor Stalions to take this on.

 

[NickRU714]

I think this is fine as long as Michigan and Ohio State write the rules. Maybe they can enlist Conor Stalions to take this on.

I think Rutgers shouldn't schedule any team that signs a Top 10 NJ recruit in any sport.

 

[DJ Spanky]

Folks, keep the politics out of this thread please.

 

[RUShea]

We should just start recruiting NFL players in the twilight of their career and have a NJ judge give an injunction so they can play

Or some practice squad players that would rather see the field. At this point, how could they even stop it? I believe there's already a few instances of G League players coming back to college. Such a joke.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

That is a very good point. We are where we are because Sorsby obtained an injunction against the NCAA. Neither Texas Tech nor the Big 12 were named in the injunction. Presumably, Texas Tech is free to drop Sorsby from the team. (Although they'd still have to pay him his contractually agreed NIL?) More realistically, the Big 12 could sanction Texas Tech for playing Sorsby, although that too would no doubt be litigated.

Can you explain where the basis for that litigation would come from? Theoretically the constitution calls for freedom of speech - yes? but B12 conference rules (and pretty much every conference) permit a ref give multiple techs leading to ejections for foul language on the court. I imagine if a kid did that over and over again - a season suspension could be in the picture. The courts can’t over ride that and say it impedes a kids ability to make a living - right? Or can it? Are we saying neither conferences nor the NCAA are allowed to institute any discipline rules that impede a players ability to earn a living?

Also - please help me understand then why our guy Duarte is about to be declared ineligible because Overtime Elite paid him some money 5 plus years ago at a time when the “rules” said no pay for play athletes could ever play for a college? How does that make sense? Rules don’t matter - right - only illegal acts are upheld except when a RU athlete is involved?

 

[RUChet]

I think Rutgers shouldn't schedule any team that signs a Top 10 NJ recruit in any sport.

lol

 

[NickRU714]

Can you explain where the basis for that litigation would come from? Theoretically the constitution calls for freedom of speech - yes? but B12 conference rules (and pretty much every conference) permit a ref give multiple techs leading to ejections for foul language on the court. I imagine if a kid did that over and over again - a season suspension could be in the picture. The courts can’t over ride that and say it impedes a kids ability to make a living - right? Or can it? Are we saying neither conferences nor the NCAA are allowed to institute any discipline rules that impede a players ability to earn a living?

Also - please help me understand then why our guy Duarte is about to be declared ineligible because Overtime Elite paid him some money 5 plus years ago at a time when the “rules” said no pay for play athletes could ever play for a college? How does that make sense? Rules don’t matter - right - only illegal acts are upheld except when a RU athlete is involved?

What would be the basis for B12 to sanction TT?
For using an eligible player?
Do conferences routinely impose harsher penalties than the NCAA?
For example, NCAA says Rutgers must give up 5 scholarships for violating a rule. B10 then says "that's not enough. Make it 25."

 

[RUTGERS95]

If you wanna change my mind, you need to enlighten me then. Who are they punishing if a court allows him to retain eligibility. We didn’t complain when Elad was granted additional eligibility.

Unless this is used to push through strong reform…but then Kiffin and LSU would have to agree as well.

and people chastise me for calling half our board members morons

 

[NickRU714]

Also, Duarte is academically ineligible.
Didn't think it had anything to do with him playing in OTE or the DR.

 

[Richie O]

Also, Duarte is academically ineligible.
Didn't think it had anything to do with him playing in OTE or the DR.

It has nothing to do with academics, it has to do with him getting paid while at OTE.

 

[Doctor Worm]

What would be the basis for B12 to sanction TT?
For using an eligible player?
Do conferences routinely impose harsher penalties than the NCAA?
For example, NCAA says Rutgers must give up 5 scholarships for violating a rule. B10 then says "that's not enough. Make it 25."

I suspect that B12 bylaws enable the conference to discipline a member "for conduct detrimental to the conference", or some such generality. If the B12 took such action, Texas Tech would no doubt contest it in court.

 

[Erial_Lion]

Can you explain where the basis for that litigation would come from? Theoretically the constitution calls for freedom of speech - yes? but B12 conference rules (and pretty much every conference) permit a ref give multiple techs leading to ejections for foul language on the court. I imagine if a kid did that over and over again - a season suspension could be in the picture. The courts can’t over ride that and say it impedes a kids ability to make a living - right? Or can it? Are we saying neither conferences nor the NCAA are allowed to institute any discipline rules that impede a players ability to earn a living?

Last year down here in South Jersey, a 12 year old kid from Haddonfield hit a home run in a little league Sectional game to send his team to the state tournament. In doing so, he threw his bat in the air, and the umpire ejected him for the bat flip (a guy I work with some that's a very good umpire and is very "by the book"...the kid launched his bat and the ejection was probably the right call). As with any Little League ejection, the kid was also suspended for the following game, which happened to be the first game of the state tournament.

The kid's parents and Haddonfield went to court to get an injunction overturning the suspension and allowing him to play along these same lines..."irreputable harm" if he's forced to miss a State tournament game. So the opponent was forced to play against a kid that should have been suspended. I was shocked that the courts got involved, but you find a favorable judge and suddenly the court can overrule the umpire's decision.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

What would be the basis for B12 to sanction TT?
For using an eligible player?
Do conferences routinely impose harsher penalties than the NCAA?
For example, NCAA says Rutgers must give up 5 scholarships for violating a rule. B10 then says "that's not enough. Make it 25."

It’s not the same thing at all - the situation your pointing to has nothing to do with disciplining unethical behavior. When a child acts out, his or her parent sets the punishment. Why shouldn’t a conference be able to establish whatever consequence they deem appropriate for unethical, unsportsmanlike conduct? I get it - the NCAA has a “monopoly” on the college basketball industry but the B12 is far from the only available option to earn a living as a basketball player. No one conference is. Why can’t a conference set its own standard for acceptable behavior??? This seems crazy.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

It has nothing to do with academics, it has to do with him getting paid while at OTE.

After listening to your podcast explaining why he’s not eligible - Duarte’s impending denial ought to have a discussion string all its own.

I know Duarte didn’t project to be a superstar but I doubt we’re getting 2 players better than him at this point. His denial, in light of this injunction, is simply nuts. I know they are different issues entirely but the underlying message from the injunction is that rules set forth by the NCAA do not matter unless the law itself forbids the behavior. So in Duarte’s case - the rule he would’ve broke by playing not only isn’t a rule anymore but it was never illegal just against NCAA rules. And today, it’s not even preferred that players avoid engaging in this behavior (earning money).

 

[Richie O]

After listening to your podcast explaining why he’s not eligible - Duarte’s impending denial ought to have a discussion string all its own.

I know Duarte didn’t project to be a superstar but I doubt we’re getting 2 players better than him at this point. His denial, in light of this injunction, is simply nuts. I know they are different issues entirely but the underlying message from the injunction is that rules set forth by the NCAA do not matter unless the law itself forbids the behavior. So in Duarte’s case - the rule he would’ve broke by playing not only isn’t a rule anymore but it was never illegal just against NCAA rules. And today, it’s not even preferred that players avoid engaging in this behavior (earning money).

Rutgers would have to get a judge to rule in their favor and places with money and alum in high places like Tech have that capability.

 

[NickRU714]

It’s not the same thing at all - the situation your pointing to has nothing to do with disciplining unethical behavior. When a child acts out, his or her parent sets the punishment. Why shouldn’t a conference be able to establish whatever consequence they deem appropriate for unethical, unsportsmanlike conduct? I get it - the NCAA has a “monopoly” on the college basketball industry but the B12 is far from the only available option to earn a living as a basketball player. No one conference is. Why can’t a conference set its own standard for acceptable behavior??? This seems crazy.

Umm your are completing wrong. Its the same identical situation.

If Rutgers has "unethical behavior" the NCAA imposes a punishment.
For example, loss of 5 scholarships.

Then the question you avoided:
Does the B1G then come in and impose a harsher punishment. For example, make it 20 scholarships instead.

Duff gets suspended by the NCAA for 1 game for fighting.
B1G says "actually make it 2 games".

That is what you/B12 is proposing.
NCAA has suspended Sorsby for 2 games (you can debate the merits of the process including legal intervention).

B12 is then potentially saying "make it a year".

You are asking a conference to set harsher standards.
Which is completely fine.

Back to my original question (that was avoided):
When has a conference imposed a harsher punishment than the NCAA? Maybe it happens often?

 

[LETSGORU91]

Don’t hate the player hate the game…

The players are driving the reason to hate the game. Therefore both can be hated.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Umm your are completing wrong. Its the same identical situation.

If Rutgers has "unethical behavior" the NCAA imposes a punishment.
For example, loss of 5 scholarships.

Then the question you avoided:
Does the B1G then come in and impose a harsher punishment. For example, make it 20 scholarships instead.

Duff gets suspended by the NCAA for 1 game for fighting.
B1G says "actually make it 2 games".

That is what you/B12 is proposing.
NCAA has suspended Sorsby for 2 games (you can debate the merits of the process including legal intervention).

B12 is then potentially saying "make it a year".

You are asking a conference to set harsher standards.
Which is completely fine.

Back to my original question (that was avoided):
When has a conference imposed a harsher punishment than the NCAA? Maybe it happens often?

But that’s not what happened. The NCAA had a rule. They are being legally bound by a court not to enforce that rule. To be clear, the NCAA is not being forced to insist that Sorbsy gets welcomed with open arms to the B12. The injunction only says their rule can’t be applied. Meaning they can’t jump in and say he can’t play. They are not being authorized to force conferences to lift their own rules and consequences for unethical behavior. Sorbsy would have to follow suit by taking the B12 to court next. It would have nothing to do with the NCAA.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Rutgers would have to get a judge to rule in their favor and places with money and alum in high places like Tech have that capability.

Yeah I get that’s how it works.

What I don’t get is why it should even come to that. Duarte didn’t do anything wrong. He didn’t accept money while being a college athlete. He was an oversees kid who accepted money to play for a club team and probably didn’t even know the consequence of what that mean for his prospects of later playing college ball in the US. He probably had no idea. Ok fine - NCAA denied him back then fine, but the point is it’s not like he broke any rules that require a punishment until now.

Weed was once illegal - if you got caught with it when it was against the law, that offense is still on your record because you broke the law at the time. But Duarte didn’t break any rules. He just didn’t get to play because the rules said he couldn’t since he accepted money. But now the rules don’t say that anymore. So the NCAA is saying what exactly? your still ineligible if you got paid prior to the day NIL was approved. But everyone paid after that is fine?

 

[Anon1753410373]

and people chastise me for calling half our board members morons

Pot meet kettle. You alluded to there being more to the story…so share because otherwise your all knowing oz routine is tiresome.

 

[NickRU714]

But that’s not what happened. The NCAA had a rule. They are being legally bound by a court not to enforce that rule. To be clear, the NCAA is not being forced to insist that Sorbsy gets welcomed with open arms to the B12. The injunction only says their rule can’t be applied. Meaning they can’t jump in and say he can’t play. They are not being authorized to force conferences to lift their own rules and consequences for unethical behavior. Sorbsy would have to follow suit by taking the B12 to court next. It would have nothing to do with the NCAA.

What is the basis for that decision by the B12?
Again - the same question that has yet to be answers....

Do conferences have their own rules and consequences?
For anything.
When has a conference ever gone above and beyond the NCAA rules and consequences?

HC Flood: NCAA put Rutgers on probation and didn't reduce scholarships.

Imagine the B1G came out and said "That's great. We are imposing additonal penalties and consequences for unethical behavior. We are stripping Rutgers of 10 football scholarships."


Yes the NCAA has rules. But for whatever dumb reason, they are being limited to 2 game suspension.
That's the official penalty (for now).
Any additonal action by the B12 would be going above and beyond.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

What is the basis for that decision by the B12?
Again - the same question that has yet to be answers....

Do conferences have their own rules and consequences?
For anything.
When has a conference ever gone above and beyond the NCAA rules and consequences?

HC Flood: NCAA put Rutgers on probation and didn't reduce scholarships.

Imagine the B1G came out and said "That's great. We are imposing additonal penalties and consequences for unethical behavior. We are stripping Rutgers of 10 football scholarships."


Yes the NCAA has rules. But for whatever dumb reason, they are being limited to 2 game suspension.
That's the official penalty (for now).
Any additonal action by the B12 would be going above and beyond.

Of course they do. Remember Covid? Different conferences had completely different Covid policies.

 

[RUTGERS95]

What is the basis for that decision by the B12?
Again - the same question that has yet to be answers....

Do conferences have their own rules and consequences?
For anything.
When has a conference ever gone above and beyond the NCAA rules and consequences?

HC Flood: NCAA put Rutgers on probation and didn't reduce scholarships.

Imagine the B1G came out and said "That's great. We are imposing additonal penalties and consequences for unethical behavior. We are stripping Rutgers of 10 football scholarships."


Yes the NCAA has rules. But for whatever dumb reason, they are being limited to 2 game suspension.
That's the official penalty (for now).
Any additonal action by the B12 would be going above and beyond.

yes, a conference can impose other sanctions and penalties on teams but believe in the BIG, requires a vote on some things.

i'll check and come back

 

[NickRU714]

yes, a conference can impose other sanctions and penalties on teams but believe in the BIG, requires a vote on some things.

i'll check and come back

Penn State Sandusky?
Michigan Sign Stealing?

Conferences, as far as I can remember, have never imposed additonal punishments beyond what occurs with the NCAA.

 

[RUTGERS95]

Penn State Sandusky?
Michigan Sign Stealing?

Conferences, as far as I can remember, have never imposed additonal punishments beyond what occurs with the NCAA.

can and do are entirely different.

PSU shouldn't even have a football program but often, the conferences relied on the NCAA to be bad guy but that doesn't mean they can't