PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Mallett to Petition NCAA to Allow Him to Play Next Year



MWM
02-05-2008, 11:08 PM
I hope he wins. While I agree that, in general, transfer athletes should have to sit out a year to avoid the "free agent" mess it would create without the rule, I do think exceptions such as this should be allowed. Mallett went to Michigan with a set of reasonable expectations only to have Carr retire and have them bring in a coach completely wrong for his development. He had no control over it. He shouldn't be penalized.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3232753

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. -- Arkansas will ask the NCAA to allow transfer quarterback Ryan Mallett to play immediately for the Razorbacks without sitting out a year.

Mallett transferred from Michigan after Rich Rodriguez replaced retiring coach Lloyd Carr.

"After visiting with Ryan and his parents, we feel that it is appropriate to file a waiver in this case based on extenuating circumstances," Arkansas athletic director Jeff Long said in a release. "While the outcome of the waiver request is uncertain, we feel strongly that as an institution we should offer our full support to Ryan and his family in this process."

When contacted by The Associated Press, a school spokesman would not elaborate on what Long meant by "extenuating circumstances."

Mallett's father, Jim Mallett, told ESPN's Joe Schad he believes his son's pending appeal to the NCAA for immediate eligibility could be landmark case.

"I know the NCAA has never really ruled on this one before," Jim Mallett said from his Arkansas home on Tuesday night. "But at some time I suppose they would have to."

The Malletts' claim to the NCAA is simple. He should not be punished because an incoming coach runs a system which does not fit his pocket-passing style.

The 6-foot-7 Mallett, who played in 11 games for the Wolverines last year, has three years of eligibility remaining. Mallett appears well suited to a pro-style offense, but Rodriguez's offense works well with a more mobile quarterback.

"We knew as soon as Rodriguez was hired it was obvious there would be a problem," Jim Mallett told Schad. "He would not fit into the coaches' spread offense. Now, is this something Ryan had control over? No. Now for him to sit out 18 months because of it would be tough. So we're asking the NCAA to examine the particulars of this case."

Jim Mallett said he understands that across-board provisions alllowing any athlete to transfer without cause and play immediately would be problematic.

"Then, of course, you do have a circumstance where a player would follow a coach," he told Schad. "But this is different. Lloyd Carr retired and we loved Lloyd Carr. Ryan left not because he wanted to, but because he needed to. He deserves a chance to play. And we're anxious to hear what the NCAA thinks."

Mallett was 61-of-141 for 892 yards with seven touchdown passes and five interceptions last season while filling in for Chad Henne when the senior was injured.

Mallett went to high school on the Texas side of Texarkana, but lived on the Arkansas side.

Information from ESPN college football reporter Joe Schad and The Associated Press was used in this report.

Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press

pedro
02-05-2008, 11:29 PM
I agree with you MWM.

cincinnati chili
02-05-2008, 11:45 PM
I give him odds of slim to none.

MWM
02-05-2008, 11:54 PM
I give him odds of slim to none.

Me too, although I think they should let him play. But this is the NCAA we're talking about.

Boston Red
02-05-2008, 11:58 PM
He figures playing next year is his only shot at getting to play for Bobby Petrino...

MWM
02-06-2008, 12:00 AM
He figures playing next year is his only shot at getting to play for Bobby Petrino...

:bowrofl:

paintmered
02-06-2008, 12:00 AM
He figures playing next year is his only shot at getting to play for Bobby Petrino...

What about the following year? :D

bucksfan2
02-06-2008, 12:04 PM
I completly disagree with allowing him to play next season. Sure he got screwed but it was his decision to leave. It still boiles down to the fact that he is a student athlete. Apparently academics was not a factor in his decision to leave and head down to Arkansas. He knew the transfer rules when he droped out of class and transfered to Arkansas, why should they change the rules because he feels that he has been short changed?

Chip R
02-06-2008, 12:44 PM
After seeing him play a few times last season, the whole SEC should join in on his petition and insist he not only be allowed to play next year but start.

bucksfan
02-06-2008, 01:54 PM
I completely support that any student-athlete who has a coach leave should be able to transfer without having to sit-out, providing he does not follow that coach to his new job, if that is the case.

I am sure there still may be some way to abuse so an allowance, but IMO it seems to hurt more kids who truly commit to a school (and are in part sold on the school by the coach) due to the coach's presence, personality, style, values, etc.

reds44
02-06-2008, 01:56 PM
He figures playing next year is his only shot at getting to play for Bobby Petrino...
lol

That was gold.

Highlifeman21
02-07-2008, 02:04 PM
They've given some athletes a 6th year of eligibility b/c of injury handled in a case by case basis.

They should give transfering athletes a chance to play immediately in a case by case basis.

Unassisted
02-07-2008, 02:18 PM
Although I sympathize with the player, I'm sure athletic directors fear the slippery slope if this is allowed to happen. Making it easier for star players to abandon ship every time a coaching change happens will greatly complicate the decisions to hire and fire. ADs might even have to involve their stars in some of those decisions! Since there will be more athletic directors than former athletes on the committee making the decision, it's not hard to predict the outcome here.

Danny Serafini
02-07-2008, 02:22 PM
There's nothing at all about Mallett's case that's any different from the dozens and dozens of other players who transfer and have to sit out a year. Why he thinks he should be granted special treatment is beyond me.

Chip R
02-07-2008, 02:36 PM
There's nothing at all about Mallett's case that's any different from the dozens and dozens of other players who transfer and have to sit out a year. Why he thinks he should be granted special treatment is beyond me.


It could be that he's the guinea pig in a test case to get the NCAA to change their rules about this. Plus it can't hurt to ask. Before Spencer Haywood decided to go pro, athletes had to stay 4 years in college. Perhaps Mallett doesn't think it's going to happen for him but if he's successful, he can set a precedent for others.

flyer85
02-07-2008, 02:42 PM
I agree with Mallette's point but I don't think the NCAA will want to go there. They could open a can of worms with allowing a immediate play transfer if a player doesn't fit in a system.

Chip R
02-07-2008, 02:45 PM
I agree with Mallette's point but I don't think the NCAA will want to go there. They could open a can of worms with allowing a immediate play transfer if a player doesn't fit in a system.


That's true. But if Mallett really wants to pursue it, the NCAA may have no choice other than to change their rules. It may not benefit Mallett but it could help others in the future. That is if Mallett really wants to pursue it in court.

RedsManRick
02-07-2008, 02:54 PM
I still don't understand the problem with letting students who are on full athletic scholarship transfer without penalty in the case of a coaching change. This seems only fair to me.

Imagine this scenario. You go to a school because of their Political Science program, particularly it's focus on international relations. The next year, the dean quits and the new dean decides to change the focus of the program to western political theory. They drop 2 of the classes you wanted to sign up for, including one given by the professor who you consider your mentor. So, you decide to transfer to another school to match your educational career ambition. Only, your told that you can't go to any classes. You have to sit out a year., because they don't think it would be fair. Capice?

So long as a school is willing to give out a free education for playing sports, I don't think they should treat them differently in this manner. I can understand limiting "free" transfers to certain conditions, but to force the player to sit out a year strikes me as unnecessary and punishes the kids for the choices of the coaches.

flyer85
02-07-2008, 03:00 PM
That's true. But if Mallett really wants to pursue it, the NCAA may have no choice other than to change their rules. It may not benefit Mallett but it could help others in the future. That is if Mallett really wants to pursue it in court.
By the time he would be likely win in court it would be moot.

flyer85
02-07-2008, 03:01 PM
I still don't understand the problem with letting students who are on full athletic scholarship transfer without penalty in the case of a coaching change. This seems only fair to me. ... caveat being that you can't follow a coach. Otherwise a coach could leave and possibly destroy a program.

Chip R
02-07-2008, 03:54 PM
I still don't understand the problem with letting students who are on full athletic scholarship transfer without penalty in the case of a coaching change. This seems only fair to me. Imagine this scenario. You go to a school because of their Political Science program, particularly it's focus on international relations. The next year, the dean quits and the new dean decides to change the focus of the program to western political theory. They drop 2 of the classes you wanted to sign up for, including one given by the professor who you consider your mentor. So, you decide to transfer to another school to match your educational career ambition. Only, your told that you can't go to any classes. You have to sit out a year., because they don't think it would be fair. Capice?So long as a school is willing to give out a free education for playing sports, I don't think they should treat them differently in this manner. I can understand limiting "free" transfers to certain conditions, but to force the player to sit out a year strikes me as unnecessary and punishes the kids for the choices of the coaches.I think the logic behind the rule is to not give kids incentive to transfer willy-nilly. I'm sure when the rule was written, they didn't have coaches jumping to other jobs like they do now. Even at the mediocre programs, coaches stayed there a lot longer than they would at a similar situation now. Plus the money wasn't as great either so there was less incentive to jump. So the thought of kids transferring because their coach went to a different school was a remote possibility. As for fairness, lots of things about being a college athlete aren't fair. You can't have a job for extra spending money while on scholarship while regular students can earn all the outside money they can. Plus if you are a gifted student and some company comes to you before you graduate and wants you to come work for them, you can quit school right then and there and start that job. But if you are a college football or baseball player you have to wait 3 years (one year for basketball). That's no more fair than the transfer rule but it is the rule.I don't think the NCAA wants to look like that these kids are mercenaries and they want to give the appearance that these kids are there for an education and not just athletics. Of course that isn't the reality but the NCAA is more than just the BCS schools. It's Division II and Division III schools who are not as likely to care as much about the plight of someone wanting to transfer from Michigan to Arkansas. All the Division I schools could vote to change a rule but if the Division II and II schools don't agree, the rule is not going to pass.
By the time he would be likely win in court it would be moot.Exactly.

bucksfan
02-07-2008, 03:56 PM
There's nothing at all about Mallett's case that's any different from the dozens and dozens of other players who transfer and have to sit out a year. Why he thinks he should be granted special treatment is beyond me.

It doesn't seem to be a case of "requesting special treatment" in my eyes, just simply asking for something that seems to make sense given the situation. I have thought it an unfair situation for a student-athlete ever since I was aware of the transfer rule.

If a policy or rule seems unfair or short-sighted, I see nothing wrong with trying to get the policy changed, either for yourself or for those in the future. Just because possibly hundreds of others have let it go would be no cause for inaction on my part.

Roy Tucker
02-07-2008, 04:41 PM
... caveat being that you can't follow a coach. Otherwise a coach could leave and possibly destroy a program.

This is an excellent point.

Coaches may leave a program and take all the program's players with him.

They could make that caveat saying if a coach leaves, you can go to any school but his new one. Which I'm sure that one day would be challenged.

Just make collegians pros and be done with it. They are anyhow. High schoolers aren't too far behind judging from the ever-increasing attention on recruiting.

15fan
02-07-2008, 04:49 PM
Imagine this scenario. You go to a school because of their Political Science program, particularly it's focus on international relations. The next year, the dean quits and the new dean decides to change the focus of the program to western political theory. They drop 2 of the classes you wanted to sign up for, including one given by the professor who you consider your mentor. So, you decide to transfer to another school to match your educational career ambition. Only, your told that you can't go to any classes. You have to sit out a year., because they don't think it would be fair. Capice?

I get the analogy that you're trying to make. But as someone who has spent a fair amount of time in & around higher education, I can assure you that those kinds of changes don't happen over the course of 12 months. Making that change is a glacial pace, and once that kind of decision is finally made, it is phased in / out verrrrrrrrrry slowly.

Granting Mallett's request is a slippery slope all the way around.

As I mentioned in another thread a couple of weeks ago, I don't see why anyone would be opposed to getting to spend a 5th year in college as a QB on the football team.

:cool: :beerme: :drink: :rockband: :dancingco :party: :pimp:

paintmered
02-07-2008, 04:51 PM
I think players can request the previous school release them without penalty to the new school. Usually this is done in extenuating circumstances when a player needs to relocate to tend to a sick family member or the like. But the scholarship transfers rather than voids. I don't know if the player still has to sit out for the year in this case.

A UC defensive lineman tried to do this when Dantonio left to Michigan State. He was from Michigan and told UC he wanted to transfer to a Michigan school to be closer to his family, and that it had nothing to do with Dantonio. So UC released him to every Michigan school with a football program except MSU. The player went to MSU anyways, his scholarship didn't transfer and he ended up paying a semester's tuition this past fall because of it.

Kelly has since released him to Michigan State because the kid learned his lesson about lying and Kelly didn't find it necessary to punish him further.

dabvu2498
02-07-2008, 05:45 PM
I think players can request the previous school release them without penalty to the new school. Usually this is done in extenuating circumstances when a player needs to relocate to tend to a sick family member or the like. But the scholarship transfers rather than voids. I don't know if the player still has to sit out for the year in this case.

Tyler Smith, basketball player at Tennessee, did not have to sit a year under this scenario.
http://deathrattlesports.com/ncaa-basketball/college-news/tyler-smith-leaves-iowa-for-tennessee.html