Realistic USC "Steals"

Moderators: greenyellow, UOducksTK1

duck55
Senior
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:37 am
Location: Keizer OR

Re: Realistic USC "Steals"

Post by duck55 »

maxduck wrote:In news maybe more relevant to UW fans, it's been learned today that the Pac-10 recently ruled that it will not waive its transfer rules to allow USC players to transfer within the conference.

Due to the sanctions placed on USC Thursday, the team's juniors and seniors are free to transfer without having to sit out a year as a penalty under NCAA rules.

But that only applies to going outside the conference. The Pac-10 has an interconference transfer rule that requires football transfers to sit out one year, and that will apparently not be waived in this case (technically, all petitions to transfer have to go through the conference and be approved).

The NCAA rules would allow for players to transfer without sitting out the one year. But the Pac-10 has apparently decided not to waive its rules in this case, effectively meaning USC's players won't transfer within the conference (there might be a guy with a redshirt year to could consider it, though any junior with a redshirt year could also just stay at USC until the time the team is again eligible for a bowl game).

A Pac-10 official today confirmed that's how the rules will work.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/h ... cation=rss
Will that prevent transfers to the other Pac-16 teams or can they all go to OU & Texas?
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 40707
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Realistic USC "Steals"

Post by UOducksTK1 »

duck55 wrote:
maxduck wrote:In news maybe more relevant to UW fans, it's been learned today that the Pac-10 recently ruled that it will not waive its transfer rules to allow USC players to transfer within the conference.

Due to the sanctions placed on USC Thursday, the team's juniors and seniors are free to transfer without having to sit out a year as a penalty under NCAA rules.

But that only applies to going outside the conference. The Pac-10 has an interconference transfer rule that requires football transfers to sit out one year, and that will apparently not be waived in this case (technically, all petitions to transfer have to go through the conference and be approved).

The NCAA rules would allow for players to transfer without sitting out the one year. But the Pac-10 has apparently decided not to waive its rules in this case, effectively meaning USC's players won't transfer within the conference (there might be a guy with a redshirt year to could consider it, though any junior with a redshirt year could also just stay at USC until the time the team is again eligible for a bowl game).

A Pac-10 official today confirmed that's how the rules will work.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/h ... cation=rss
Will that prevent transfers to the other Pac-16 teams or can they all go to OU & Texas?
Well if they are Juniors and Seniors and transfer to OU or Texas, then by the time those teams join the Pac-16, any players that transfered from USC will have graduated by then.

So I doubt that will effect them at all.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
OreDucks01284
Senior
Posts: 3635
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon

Re: Realistic USC "Steals"

Post by OreDucks01284 »

also USC and baxter said that 5 schools illegally contact Baxter on june 10th
Image
User avatar
Elduderino
Senior
Posts: 2242
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:19 pm
Location: CA

Re: Realistic USC "Steals"

Post by Elduderino »

chump01284 wrote:also USC and baxter said that 5 schools illegally contact Baxter on june 10th
One of which is UO. Athletic Dept has since denied the allegation.
AKA: CAgrown
DarronThomas5
Four Star Recruit
Posts: 889
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Realistic USC "Steals"

Post by DarronThomas5 »

Elduderino wrote:
chump01284 wrote:also USC and baxter said that 5 schools illegally contact Baxter on june 10th
One of which is UO. Athletic Dept has since denied the allegation.
It's just posturing by USC to try to deflect attention and be like "see everyone else breaks the rules." Nothing will come of this unless Baxter transfers to one of those schools which he won't and even if he did nothing would happen to the school that takes him.
Image
User avatar
Elduderino
Senior
Posts: 2242
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:19 pm
Location: CA

Re: Realistic USC "Steals"

Post by Elduderino »

DarronThomas1 wrote:
Elduderino wrote:
chump01284 wrote:also USC and baxter said that 5 schools illegally contact Baxter on june 10th
One of which is UO. Athletic Dept has since denied the allegation.
It's just posturing by USC to try to deflect attention and be like "see everyone else breaks the rules." Nothing will come of this unless Baxter transfers to one of those schools which he won't and even if he did nothing would happen to the school that takes him.

I tend to agree.
AKA: CAgrown
User avatar
briarduck
Senior
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:55 am
Location: Milwaukie OR

Re: Realistic USC "Steals"

Post by briarduck »

Elduderino wrote:
chump01284 wrote:also USC and baxter said that 5 schools illegally contact Baxter on june 10th
One of which is UO. Athletic Dept has since denied the allegation.
Really...that's funny!

Baxter and the rest of the new recruits can't be too happy right now but they all new something would happen. :lol: Dude should have been a Duck!
GO DUCKS!! WTD!
Post Reply