Something to keep an eye on for Sarr

[LowCountryCat]

Actually the timing of this is still pretty consistent what I’ve described previously.

That aside, there’s a real simple solution for this. If you think I don’t know what I’m talking about, then I’d suggest you simply put me on ignore.

It’s never good to let other people’s comments get to you like this and simply ignoring my posts would take care of that right away. Something to think about.

"Waaaaaaaaah! You don't like my incompetent analysis so just block meeeeeeeeee! Stop saying mean thiiiiiiiiings!"

LOL

 

[UKrazycat2_rivals]

I'll just assume we get buggered by the SEC. No, I'm not British but I so seldom get to use that word.

 

[Lead Belly]

Lol, why are you all still giving @UKnCincy the time of day. He's already been caught in several lies. Hell, for 4 months he was arguing how difficult and unlikely it would be for Sarr to get approved by the NCAA. Come to find out, Sarr was already cleared in May by the NCAA.

I highly doubt this guy is a lawyer. If he is, I doubt he is a very good one considering the amount of time he has to spend on here. Sounds more like an Uber driver who just likes stirring the pot to me.

 

[Lead Belly]

Even assuming Vitale’s reported timing is accurate, the NCAA’s review of Sarr’s request took four times longer than the review time needed for the vast majority of approved waivers this summer.

That seems pretty consistent with what I’ve been discussing throughout the process.

Lol, no it didn't. It took about 5 weeks.

 

[LowCountryCat]

Lol, why are you all still giving @UKnCincy the time of day. He's already been caught in several lies. Hell, for 4 months he was arguing how difficult and unlikely it would be for Sarr to get approved by the NCAA. Come to find out, Sarr was already cleared in May by the NCAA.

I highly doubt this guy is a lawyer. If he is, I doubt he is a very good one considering the amount of time he has to spend on here. Sounds more like an Uber driver who just likes stirring the pot to me.

Yeah but he uses BULLET POINTS!!!!

 

[GonzoCat90]

As someone who feels like they've watched him try to patiently explain this to the same half dozen of you for six months, I'd love for one of you to show us his posts where he said Sarr wouldn't get a waiver. Or where he even made a prediction either way.

It's exactly that type of goofy oversimplification that ruins 80% of the threads here in the first place. If all that matters to you are your gut and the very end result, a place where people discuss things is probably not for you.

 

[Lead Belly]

As someone who feels like they've watched him try to patiently explain this to the same half dozen of you for six months, I'd love for one of you to show us his posts where he said Sarr wouldn't get a waiver. Or where he even made a prediction either way.

It's exactly that type of goofy oversimplification that ruins 80% of the threads here in the first place. If all that matters to you are your gut and the very end result, a place where people discuss things is probably not for you.

"As it stands today, there is zero information that has been made public that would support a waiver request for Sarr under the existing guidelines. Further, some of Sarr’s public comments and the comments of Steve Forbes are actually harmful to his case."

I don't know about you, but from this quote it sure sounds like he is saying a waiver would be unlikely for Sarr.

Lol, of course, little did he know at the time of this post the waiver had already been granted by the NCAA.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

"As it stands today, there is zero information that has been made public that would support a waiver request for Sarr under the existing guidelines. Further, some of Sarr’s public comments and the comments of Steve Forbes are actually harmful to his case."

I don't know about you, but from this quote it sure sounds like he is saying a waiver would be unlikely for Sarr.

Lol, of course, little did he know at the time of this post the waiver had already been granted by the NCAA.

It’s actually not saying that a waiver would be unlikely. It’s not saying that at all.

As I’ve explained on a couple of occasions, when you don’t fit the guidelines then you have to go the route of requesting a waiver based on the “totality of the circumstances.”

Those submissions are much more difficult to prepare, hence my viewpoint on this the entire time. I’ve been 100% consistent on this since Sarr first committed.

 

[Lead Belly]

It’s actually not saying that a waiver would be unlikely. It’s not saying that at all.

As I’ve explained on a couple of occasions, when you don’t fit the guidelines then you have to go the route of requesting a waiver based on the “totality of the circumstances.”

Those submissions are much more difficult to prepare, hence my viewpoint on this the entire time. I’ve been 100% consistent on this since Sarr first committed.

It's actually saying exactly what it states and what you have posted multiple times. Which was that the Sarr waiver was "unlikely" and an "uphill battle" and "not like any others" and yada yada yada. Yet the whole time you were spewing your BS, the waiver was already approved. So no, it wasn't unlikely. No, it wasn't an uphill battle. No, Steve Forbes comments weren't harmful. You had no clue what was going on or about anything with which you were spewing your nonsense. You got exposed. Now you want to backtrack and pretend what you said wasn't really what you said, or that you didn't mean it in the manner in which you implied it. You're nothing more than a charlatan.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

It's actually saying exactly what it states and what you have posted multiple times. Which was that the Sarr waiver was "unlikely" and an "uphill battle" and "not like any others" and yada yada yada. Yet the whole time you were spewing your BS, the waiver was already approved. So no, it wasn't unlikely. No, it wasn't an uphill battle. No, Steve Forbes comments weren't harmful. You had no clue what was going on or about anything with which you were spewing your nonsense. You got exposed. Now you want to backtrack and pretend what you said wasn't really what you said, or that you didn't mean it in the manner in which you implied it. You're nothing more than a charlatan.

No, it’s really not. It’s saying he needed to submit a “totality of the circumstances” request. That’s exactly what you do when don’t fit one of the guidelines but think you have a situation that merits a waiver.

I’d also add that my original quote that you referenced was from mid-May and before Sarr’s waiver was submitted and well before it was approved in late July. Unfortunately for you, Zagoria confirmed the timing of his approval yesterday.

In short, your last two posts are riddled with inaccuracies and demonstrate you’ve completely misunderstood what I’ve said.

 

[Lead Belly]

No, it’s really not. It’s saying he needed to submit a “totality of the circumstances” request. That’s exactly what you do when don’t fit one of the guidelines but think you have a situation that merits a waiver.

I’d also add that my original quote that you referenced was from mid-May and before Sarr’s waiver was submitted and well before it was approved in late July. Unfortunately for you, Zagoria confirmed the timing of his approval yesterday.

In short, your last two posts are riddled with inaccuracies and demonstrate you’ve completely misunderstood what I’ve said.

Yes, it really is. It's written in black and white. As much as you would like to forget it or change it, it is what it is.

That was actually from end of May early June. The waiver was submitted and approved by then. You would have known that if you were actually connected like you claim. It wasn't a big secret at all.

Not at all. They are literally your words - verbatim. If they're inaccurate, they would be your inaccuracies.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

Yes, it really is. It's written in black and white. As much as you would like to forget it or change it, it is what it is.

That was actually from end of May early June. The waiver was submitted and approved by then. You would have known that if you were actually connected like you claim. It wasn't a big secret at all.

Not at all. They are literally your words - verbatim. If they're inaccurate, they would be your inaccuracies.

It was approved in late July. Zagoria confirmed that timing yesterday per the link below.

And no, my post that you quoted was from May 14th, not end of May / early June. I can link that one as well if you’d like me to further emphasize the inaccuracies I was referring to.

And lastly as a quick reminder, I revisited the “totality of the circumstances” piece just a couple of weeks ago. There’s a link below to that. Saying a situation doesn’t meet guidelines doesn’t mean I was saying it was unlikely. Not in the slightest. It simply defines the route you have to take to get a waiver. That’s a pretty straightforward concept that I’m not sure why you’re having such a hard time comprehending.

https://www.zagsblog.com/2020/09/24...sarr-two-months-ago-needs-sec-waiver-to-play/

https://kentucky.forums.rivals.com/threads/could-this-be-the-month.326970/post-9128272

 

[MdWIldcat55]

I think we can all agree on one thing: UKnCincy has certainly proved he's a lawyer.

Rule One on the first day of law school: "You are only wrong when you quit claiming you are right."

 

[Lead Belly]

It was approved in late July. Zagoria confirmed that timing yesterday per the link below.

And no, my post that you quoted was from May 14th, not end of May / early June. I can link that one as well if you’d like me to further emphasize the inaccuracies I was referring to.

And lastly as a quick reminder, I revisited the “totality of the circumstances” piece just a couple of weeks ago. There’s a link below to that. Saying a situation doesn’t meet guidelines doesn’t mean I was saying it was unlikely. Not in the slightest. It simply defines the route you have to take to get a waiver. That’s a pretty straightforward concept that I’m not sure why you’re having such a hard time comprehending.

https://www.zagsblog.com/2020/09/24...sarr-two-months-ago-needs-sec-waiver-to-play/

https://kentucky.forums.rivals.com/threads/could-this-be-the-month.326970/post-9128272

Lol, it was approved at the end of May. I don't see a date listed by Zagoria. He just restates Dickie V. However, the waiver was in fact approved in late May.

Yes, please do link it!

You've said a great deal of things in several posts. All were with the emphasis he was unlikely to get it and the challenges he faced. Of course, none of that was accurate, and he already had the waiver!

I don't think anyone is having a difficult time comprehending. It seems you just want to change what you posted.

 

[Lead Belly]

I think we can all agree on one thing: UKnCincy has certainly proved he's a lawyer.

Rule One on the first day of law school: "You are only wrong when you quit claiming you are right."

Hey may be a law student, but he definitely isn't a lawyer yet.

Lawyers don't have this kind of free time to dedicate to a message board. At least not any good lawyers...

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

Lol, it was approved at the end of May. I don't see a date listed by Zagoria. He just restates Dickie V. However, the waiver was in fact approved in late May.

Yes, please do link it!

You've said a great deal of things in several posts. All were with the emphasis he was unlikely to get it and the challenges he faced. Of course, none of that was accurate, and he already had the waiver!

I don't think anyone is having a difficult time comprehending. It seems you just want to change what you posted.

I’ll help you out here with Zagoria by copying and pasting in.

“Kentucky’s Olivier Sarr was granted a waiver two months ago by the NCAA and he is awaiting a waiver from the SEC, ZAGSBLOG has independently confirmed.”​

Now, when he says two months ago, that means late July. If it were approved in late May, then he would have said four months ago. Make sense?

The next piece to take notice of is when he says that they’ve “independently confirmed” this. What that means is that Zagoria has personally spoken with someone with direct knowledge of the timing, and he’s not simply repeating what Vitale said.

Are you following or do we need to slow down more?

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

Hey may be a law student, but he definitely isn't a lawyer yet.

Lawyers don't have this kind of free time to dedicate to a message board. At least not any good lawyers...

Lucky for you I took the day off.

 

[Lead Belly]

I’ll help you out here with Zagoria by copying and pasting in.

​

“Kentucky’s Olivier Sarr was granted a waiver two months ago by the NCAA and he is awaiting a waiver from the SEC, ZAGSBLOG has independently confirmed.”​

Now, when he says two months ago, that means late July. If it were approved in late May, then he would have said four months ago. Make sense?

The next piece to take notice of is when he says that they’ve “independently confirmed” this. What that means is that Zagoria has personally spoken with someone with direct knowledge of the timing, and he’s not simply repeating what Vitale said.

Are you following or do we need to slow down more?

Lol, that doesn't confirm a date. Nor does it state if the confirmation is in regards to the SEC hold-up, the ncaa waiver approval or both. The waiver was approved in late May. That’s kind of how I was able to confirm it back then.

Lol, independently confirmed can be calling Vitale and asking him on your own.

 

[Lead Belly]

Lucky for you I took the day off.

Uber not busy on Fridays? So what about all the other days?

 

[caneintally]

I think you all are looking to much into a thing thats probably going to happen. He's going to be eligible.

Yep.

 

[UK-Chulo]

Uber not busy on Fridays? So what about all the other days?

Wouldn’t you have seen him when you were cleaning his windshield?

 

[Lead Belly]

Wouldn’t you have seen him when you were cleaning his windshield?

I doubt their drivers can afford a full service car wash.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

Lol, that doesn't confirm a date. Nor does it state if the confirmation is in regards to the SEC hold-up, the ncaa waiver approval or both. The waiver was approved in late May. That’s kind of how I was able to confirm it back then.

Lol, independently confirmed can be calling Vitale and asking him on your own.

Actually it does, but let’s set that aside for a moment because you’re asserting a pretty interesting timeline here.

First, you mentioned it took about 5 weeks for the NCAA to review and approve the waiver per your post above from 8:52am this morning. Second, you’ve stated it was approved in late May.

If we assume late May means final business day (5/29), then you’re asserting that UK submitted a finalized waiver request to the NCAA on April 27th. That’s about a week before Sarr entered the transfer portal and a couple of weeks before his final spring semester grades would be available.

That timeline would mean UK has committed a couple of NCAA infractions during the transfer process.

 

[Lead Belly]

Actually it does, but let’s set that aside for a moment because you’re asserting a pretty interesting timeline here.

First, you mentioned it took about 5 weeks for the NCAA to review and approve the waiver per your post above from 8:52am this morning. Second, you’ve stated it was approved in late May.

If we assume late May means final business day (5/29), then you’re asserting that UK submitted a finalized waiver request to the NCAA on April 27th. That’s about a week before Sarr entered the transfer portal and a couple of weeks before his final spring semester grades would be available.

That timeline would mean UK has committed a couple of NCAA infractions during the transfer process.

You seem to be formulating the timeline based on your own assumptions. I stated the NCAA approved his waiver at the end of May. I don't recall saying a date they submitted it. I honestly don't know the day they submitted it. Do you?

From what I am hearing, it sounds like it was a 2 - 3 week process with the NCAA. That would be seem pretty on par with his commitment. UK knew a bit before the announcement that he was coming here and what his academic standing was at WF. The waiver request was likely drafted and ready to be submitted as soon as he announced.

You're trying so hard. You just keep coming up a little short.

 

[gossie21_rivals69805]

Actually it does, but let’s set that aside for a moment because you’re asserting a pretty interesting timeline here.

First, you mentioned it took about 5 weeks for the NCAA to review and approve the waiver per your post above from 8:52am this morning. Second, you’ve stated it was approved in late May.

If we assume late May means final business day (5/29), then you’re asserting that UK submitted a finalized waiver request to the NCAA on April 27th. That’s about a week before Sarr entered the transfer portal and a couple of weeks before his final spring semester grades would be available.

That timeline would mean UK has committed a couple of NCAA infractions during the transfer process.

Kudos to you for trying to explain things, I don't know how you have the patience. I don't think the contrary crowd here has any interest in understanding the process.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

Lol, no it didn't. It took about 5 weeks.

I’ll help you out again. Earlier this morning, you said it took 5 weeks for the waiver to be approved.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

Kudos to you for trying to explain things, I don't know how you have the patience. I don't think the contrary crowd here has any interest in understanding the process.

To be fair, I’m not sure it’s patience so much as it is that fact that I simply enjoy arguing for its own sake. Sometimes it’s good for me to get that out of my system here so that I don’t drive people like my wife insane. Hopefully that doesn’t get too annoying for folks such as yourself.

I’m also not trying to change Lead Belly’s mind on anything. It’s clear he’s not aware of the implications of his claims when he makes them, so just having some fun pointing out the flaws. I think it’s pretty clear which of us knows what we’re talking about to anyone who’s not being obtuse.

 

[Lead Belly]

I’ll help you out again. Earlier this morning, you said it took 5 weeks for the waiver to be approved.

Let me help you out. That is from the time UK staff knew with certainty he was coming here.

 

[HerrosHeroes]

I think you all are looking to much into a thing thats probably going to happen. He's going to be eligible.

And UK is probably going to win it all...

 

[Whatsup]

Wow! What a pissing show. Can’t we all just get along? Sarr will be cleared argument over. I got ESP extra sensitive penis. Hee Haw.

 

[GonzoCat90]

"As it stands today, there is zero information that has been made public that would support a waiver request for Sarr under the existing guidelines. Further, some of Sarr’s public comments and the comments of Steve Forbes are actually harmful to his case."

I don't know about you, but from this quote it sure sounds like he is saying a waiver would be unlikely for Sarr.

Lol, of course, little did he know at the time of this post the waiver had already been granted by the NCAA.

If that's the best one you have, a lot of you all owe him an apology.

I keep seeing people joke about his use of lawyer talk, but that's just pejorative for nuance and accuracy. When you're dealing with these processes and guidelines, those are literally the only things that matter.

If you want to discard or ignore those for a focus on the end result, you might as well just visit this board on the first Tuesday in April to see if we won the title.

 

[Lead Belly]

If that's the best one you have, a lot of you all owe him an apology.

I keep seeing people joke about his use of lawyer talk, but that's just pejorative for nuance and accuracy. When you're dealing with these processes and guidelines, those are literally the only things that matter.

If you want to discard or ignore those for a focus on the end result, you might as well just visit this board on the first Tuesday in April to see if we won the title.

Lol, that was just the first one that came up from the search. Plenty of others to choose from.

I haven't really seen any lawyer talk demonstrated to even joke about. He has stated mostly inaccuracies or conflicting statements about the process. Little did he know Sarr was already cleared most of that time. It was a very easy process.

People are disregarding his statements because they were false and have been proven as such. If you want to slob on his knob because you haven't properly understood his motives, that's your business. The rest of us aren't obligated.

 

[GonzoCat90]

Lol, that was just the first one that came up from the search. Plenty of others to choose from.

I haven't really seen any lawyer talk demonstrated to even joke about. He has stated mostly inaccuracies or conflicting statements about the process. Little did he know Sarr was already cleared most of that time. It was a very easy process.

People are disregarding his statements because they were false and have been proven as such. If you want to slob on his knob because you haven't properly understood his motives, that's your business. The rest of us aren't obligated.

His motives appear to have been to provide some insight into how the process usually goes, the things that are considered, etc and to correct inaccuracies in how others have attempted to represent his positions.

Like right now, for example. I asked for proof of him claiming Sarr wouldn't get a waiver. You quoted a post that didn't do that but claim that it does and followed it up by attacking him for inaccuracy.

I would suggest that you're just misunderstanding what he says, but he's explained it a hundred times pretty clearly. So my theory is that you didn't like how you initially perceived his posts on the subject and refuse to admit you were wrong.

That, or you're trying to convince everyone that you called this ten years ago and his insight has made that attempt difficult.

No one is trying to "slob his knob." Some of us are just sick of every thread turning into idiotic ******** and would appreciate if the gut feeling, anonymous source, slob on the knob insult crowd wouldn't run off someone with a brain that's trying to share what they know.

 

[Lead Belly]

His motives appear to have been to provide some insight into how the process usually goes, the things that are considered, etc and to correct inaccuracies in how others have attempted to represent his positions.

Like right now, for example. I asked for proof of him claiming Sarr wouldn't get a waiver. You quoted a post that didn't do that but claim that it does and followed it up by attacking him for inaccuracy.

I would suggest that you're just misunderstanding what he says, but he's explained it a hundred times pretty clearly. So my theory is that you didn't like how you initially perceived his posts on the subject and refuse to admit you were wrong.

That, or you're trying to convince everyone that you called this ten years ago and his insight has made that attempt difficult.

No one is trying to "slob his knob." Some of us are just sick of every thread turning into idiotic ******** and would appreciate if the gut feeling, anonymous source, slob on the knob insult crowd wouldn't run off someone with a brain that's trying to share what they know.

That would be a misunderstanding by you. If you read the referenced post and others, you should easily be able to see he was implying that given the known information the waiver was unlikely. He called it an uphill battle, challenging, complicated and so on. Yet, the waiver was already cleared during this point. Literally all of what he was claiming was ********.

I posted 1 of many of his claims that it was unlikely. In fact, it was very likely.

It definitely appears like knob slobbing. You seem to be very defensive over this person who many posters agree has been insinuating a negative result in the Sarr waiver. If this many people are not comprehending his post or aren't understanding him, it's probably not them that is the issue.

 

[cdbearde_rivals384606]

To be fair, I’m not sure it’s patience so much as it is that fact that I simply enjoy arguing for its own sake. Sometimes it’s good for me to get that out of my system here so that I don’t drive people like my wife insane. Hopefully that doesn’t get too annoying for folks such as yourself.

I’m also not trying to change Lead Belly’s mind on anything. It’s clear he’s not aware of the implications of his claims when he makes them, so just having some fun pointing out the flaws. I think it’s pretty clear which of us knows what we’re talking about to anyone who’s not being obtuse.

Keep on arguing your point if you know the way this process goes, don't worry about our inexperienced opinions. Plus this gives you a small amount of practice for the courtroom. [winking] [roll][roll]
You go bud.

 

[bucsrule8872]

I can’t believe you guys are still arguing over this.

It’s time for Johnny and Danny to bury the hatchet.

Was it an illegal kick or not? Who cares, get over it and move on.

(Sorry been watching way too much Cohra Kai, forgive me.)

 

[Blue Decade]

I really want Sarr to be eligible to play but the Sec has a rule that he is not allowed to play. If he gets a Covid year he would be good to go. Not sure all the members of the Sec want us to have a great year. Slime hog Pearl has already said he didn’t think Sarr should be able to play. Just hope the Covid ruling gives him a extra year whether he uses it not he would be good to go!

The SEC has the discretionary latitude to grant a waiver to the rule you mentioned. That's what this has always been about from the get-go, ever since Sarr applied for a waiver. In these times, with all the recent precedents, he should receive his waiver as long as the NCAA concurs. The basketball season doesn't begin until November. Not to worry.

 

[Fatboyfat]

Is it possible that Sarr could major in a program or class that isn't offered at Wake forest that is offered at UK and be eligible that way? Just was thinking about that scenario

 

[Whatsup]

Is it possible that Sarr could major in a program or class that isn't offered at Wake forest that is offered at UK and be eligible that way? Just was thinking about that scenario

Well Da.

 

[kyjeff1]

I really want Sarr to be eligible to play but the Sec has a rule that he is not allowed to play. If he gets a Covid year he would be good to go. Not sure all the members of the Sec want us to have a great year. Slime hog Pearl has already said he didn’t think Sarr should be able to play. Just hope the Covid ruling gives him a extra year whether he uses it not he would be good to go!

Well, Bruce Pearl doesn’t get to decide and quite honestly, it’s something he better get used to, because starting next year, the transfer-and-play-immediately era is going to begin. If he's struggling with this one guy, he's going to totally lose it when 50 kids transfer each year and get to play right away.