The Official Olivier Sarr Thread (UPDATE: NCAA Rules Sarr Eligible, SEC Hasn't Yet)

[Matt Dillon]

There have been two or three others in the last day or two, baffling indeed.

[GOCAT15]

Good article about everything going on.

https://kentuckysportsradio.com/1/im...-olivier-sarr/

[Lighthouse]

I believe Sarr had his request in two months before the LSU guy. Things that make you scratch your head.

I've scratched my head so many times because of the NCAA I'm thinking about suing them because I'm bald. Nothing that organization does when it comes to Kentucky surprises me.

[Los Gatos]

I've scratched my head so many times because of the NCAA I'm thinking about suing them because I'm bald. Nothing that organization does when it comes to Kentucky surprises me.

You are certainly not alone in your feelings regarding the NCAA. I am curious however, what other, recent, things has the NCAA done with regard to UK that lead to your feeling? The seeming delay in the Gatewood decision is not the NCAA fault as UK only submitted the paper work about a month ago. Before that there was the Peter's (FB) waiver last year which was granted after FSU finally submitted paperwork. Not the NCAA's fault FSU didn't submit the paperwork.

[85 Fly]

I'm soooo over this enough already! Kid is in class, can we please get him officially on the roster NCAA!!!

[Lighthouse]

You are certainly not alone in your feelings regarding the NCAA. I am curious however, what other, recent, things has the NCAA done with regard to UK that lead to your feeling? The seeming delay in the Gatewood decision is not the NCAA fault as UK only submitted the paper work about a month ago. Before that there was the Peter's (FB) waiver last year which was granted after FSU finally submitted paperwork. Not the NCAA's fault FSU didn't submit the paperwork.

Nothing lately but, over the years with their selections in the BB tournament along with their favoritism toward NC and Duke, I will never get over.

[Los Gatos]

I thought the selection committee was made up on non NCAA employees?

[Catsrock]

Nothing lately but, over the years with their selections in the BB tournament along with their favoritism toward NC and Duke, I will never get over.

I'm with you Lighthouse. I don't have my blinders on. Don't know how recent the incidents have to be to count in the eyes of LGatos. Nor why it has to be done against the Cats. Zion Williamson is a current issue. If he came to UK then someone told the court system he had requested and been paid big $ before going to college would the NCAA Look into it even if the courts decided to not compel him to testify? I'm confident they would. But he went to Duke. Coach K asked Zion about it. He said he didn't receive benefits. End of story.

But honestly if anyone can ever explain to me why UNC didn't get the death penalty for 18 yrs of keeping players eligible by giving them A's in classes that did not exist--I promise you I'll shut up about the NCAA.

Every year the NCAA shows that it will make the rules up as it goes along depending on what program is involved. A KU player won't cooperate with their investigation--he's ineligible and all wins he participated in are vacated. No proof of anything--he just won't cooperate. NCAA declares in any situation if they're declare a player ineligible the team vacates all wins. VERY soon afterward Corey Maggette (I think--possibly a different Duke player-- been a long time & I'm getting old) won't cooperate--he's ineligible but no wins are vacated. The NCAA declares they will look at each situation on its own terms and how can they really vacate wins when Maggette wouldn't cooperate? That's actually what they determined.

[Catsrock]

You are certainly not alone in your feelings regarding the NCAA. I am curious however, what other, recent, things has the NCAA done with regard to UK that lead to your feeling? The seeming delay in the Gatewood decision is not the NCAA fault as UK only submitted the paper work about a month ago. Before that there was the Peter's (FB) waiver last year which was granted after FSU finally submitted paperwork. Not the NCAA's fault FSU didn't submit the paperwork.

Is Enes Kanter recent enough? Why was he permanently ineligible when countless others were allowed to repay what they received and sit out a few games? There was no specific dollar amount you could repay BEFORE his ruling. If you're paying it back then what does it matter how much it was? I wonder if after his ruling the NCAA wrote into their "bylaws" that if you receive as much as Enes Kanter then you are not eligible to repay and play--if it was less than that then you may do so.

What sort of evidence can you give us that the NCAA sets precedence in cases and sticks with it going forward?

Some players parents or "handlers" get money the player was ineligible whether the player even knew or not. Cam Newton's dad gets paid and it's OK because Cam didn't know. Why? because Cam had already win a championship.

[Los Gatos]

I'm with you Lighthouse. I don't have my blinders on. Don't know how recent the incidents have to be to count in the eyes of LGatos. Nor why it has to be done against the Cats. Zion Williamson is a current issue. If he came to UK then someone told the court system he had requested and been paid big $ before going to college would the NCAA Look into it even if the courts decided to not compel him to testify? I'm confident they would. But he went to Duke. Coach K asked Zion about it. He said he didn't receive benefits. End of story.

But honestly if anyone can ever explain to me why UNC didn't get the death penalty for 18 yrs of keeping players eligible by giving them A's in classes that did not exist--I promise you I'll shut up about the NCAA.

Every year the NCAA shows that it will make the rules up as it goes along depending on what program is involved. D Rose won't cooperate with their investigation--he's ineligible and all wins he participated in are vacated. No proof of anything--he just won't cooperate. NCAA declares in any situation if they're declare a player ineligible the team vacates all wins. VERY soon afterward Corey Maggette (I think--possibly a different Duke player-- been a long time & I'm getting old) won't cooperate--he's ineligible but no wins are vacated. The NCAA declares they will look at each situation on its own terms and how can they really vacate wins when Maggette wouldn't cooperate? That's actually what they determined.

How about five years? Seems a reasonable period.

I've ask this question of a number of people, most don't respond. I appreciate your response. One thing I do see, most all of the responses are similar to the Zion situation. IE they involve a player at a different school who, apparently, has gotten away with some violation. And then an assumption that if it was a UK player the school would have been punished. This kind of situation is impossible to prove one way of the other. What I'm really looking for is a situation where a UK player was handled unfairly. Even then it's impossible to know for sure due to privacy rules. Take a waiver request, we are not allow to read the basis for a waiver so how can we know if one request is the same as another.

As for the UNC situation, does anyone know if I'm allowed to do a cut'n paste from another site? Or can I post a link to another site? While I'm not an attorney there is a post on the Rivals site that explains why the NCAA had to allow UNC to get off free. In a single sentence, the NCAA realized they would be sued and that they would lose.

[Catsrock]

OTE=Los Gatos;n238682]

How about five years? Seems a reasonable period.

I've ask this question of a number of people, most don't respond. I appreciate your response. One thing I do see, most all of the responses are similar to the Zion situation. IE they involve a player at a different school who, apparently, has gotten away with some violation. And then an assumption that if it was a UK player the school would have been punished. This kind of situation is impossible to prove one way of the other. What I'm really looking for is a situation where a UK player was handled unfairly. Even then it's impossible to know for sure due to privacy rules. Take a waiver request, we are not allow to read the basis for a waiver so how can we know if one request is the same as another.

As for the UNC situation, does anyone know if I'm allowed to do a cut'n paste from another site? Or can I post a link to another site? While I'm not an attorney there is a post on the Rivals site that explains why the NCAA had to allow UNC to get off free. In a single sentence, the NCAA realized they would be sued and that they would lose. [/QUOTE]


Why 5 years? Is that when the NCAA became the NCAA?

Eric Manuel.

Then the NCAA should have governed their member, gone to court and argued their case that all members agree to play by the same rules or pay the price. If they lose they lose and all members know the rules have changed. Instead they declined to be the governing body of UNC while others endure punishments.

I don't know what you're allowed to cut & paste but I'd love for someone to convince me the UNC was a just ruling. I'd sleep better.

OK scratch the "if Zion came to UK." If he went to Arizona (Ayton) or Kansas (DeSousa)) would the NCAA have followed up on evidence they got from outside sources or just take their coach's word for his innocence? As in many many other cases precedence is there but not followed.

​​​​​​Other member institutions have taken notice. Notre Dame included the UNC ruling in their response to an NCAA inquiry a year or so ago. You may not agree but crazy irrational UK fans are not the only ones who see partiality.

I apologize. UNC thing eats at me so I keep coming back to this post. Hopefully my final edit: if I never had any plan of punishing someone under my rule the easiest way to let them.off would likely be to say I realized I was going to be sued and lose. Every member school has slick-tongued lawyers. Going forward every school under investigation should threaten to take the NCAA to court. Bill Self has learned to take that route.

[J.Jennings]

Ncaa is a joke....

[Lighthouse]

How about five years? Seems a reasonable period.

I've ask this question of a number of people, most don't respond. I appreciate your response. One thing I do see, most all of the responses are similar to the Zion situation. IE they involve a player at a different school who, apparently, has gotten away with some violation. And then an assumption that if it was a UK player the school would have been punished. This kind of situation is impossible to prove one way of the other. What I'm really looking for is a situation where a UK player was handled unfairly. Even then it's impossible to know for sure due to privacy rules. Take a waiver request, we are not allow to read the basis for a waiver so how can we know if one request is the same as another.

As for the UNC situation, does anyone know if I'm allowed to do a cut'n paste from another site? Or can I post a link to another site? While I'm not an attorney there is a post on the Rivals site that explains why the NCAA had to allow UNC to get off free. In a single sentence, the NCAA realized they would be sued and that they would lose.

LG, I understand you thinking and for the life of me, I can't answer the question honestly. What I do know for sure is how I feel about the NCAA and how inconsistent they govern. Your point about the selection committee being non-NCAA employees. I'm not sure how they are selected but I do know the head of the NCAA comes on TV every year and explains how the teams were selected, so it seems to me he has a hand in the selection and placement of teams. And they have favorites because Duke and UNC both play their first games very close to home, not just once in awhile but every year.

[Joneslab]

Calipari talking to the media today says he feels good about Sarr's situation and that it's just going through the proper channels.

[J.Jennings]

I hope K. Brooks has hit the weights, don't want to hold my breathe on Sarr