Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, flyingcement said:

arguing in bad faith

Obviously you didn't listen to Kyle's podcast.  Left Wisconsin on good terms.  Said nothing bad about Bono.  Knows he's at the mercy of Wisconsin AD compliance now that NCAA rejected his transfer waiver exception.

Haven't seen any explanation how Wisconsin AD compliance is supposed to certify NPO truthfully.  But I remain open to listening.

Edited by 98lberEating2Lunches
Posted
On 12/23/2022 at 9:48 PM, Chestcrusher said:

“He said the NCAA responded that it is not the responsibility of its member institutions to inform the student athletes of the transfer rules.”
 

O. Ok. 

I would actually probably agree with that statement. I don’t think you should expect coaches to basically tell kids how to transfer.

I still think we don’t really have all the information here though.  I also understand the possible POV from Wisconsin that they would have had to certify that Burwick “didn’t have an opportunity to participate.”  But their statement they made still seems a little shady.

Posted

Agreed - if the situation is that they would have to lie on a signed form to the NCAA, well, I can see it being a no go.  
 

But damn, their handling of the public discussion is a major failure and a black eye.  Calls their truthfulness into question.  Makes them look like slimy.  Frankly, it kinda makes no sense if it all comes down to the issue mentioned above.  Such a disconnect that I can’t help to think that there is more to the situation.  But that is pure ignorant speculation.

  • Fire 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Dark Energy said:

Agreed - if the situation is that they would have to lie on a signed form to the NCAA, well, I can see it being a no go.  
 

But damn, their handling of the public discussion is a major failure and a black eye.  Calls their truthfulness into question.  Makes them look like slimy.  Frankly, it kinda makes no sense if it all comes down to the issue mentioned above.  Such a disconnect that I can’t help to think that there is more to the situation.  But that is pure ignorant speculation.

Must've missed this in the 16 pages and not planning to re-read all.   How did they handle the discussion, I only saw the one statement put out, or what page on this thread will one find the reference? 

.

Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, ionel said:

Must've missed this in the 16 pages and not planning to re-read all.   How did they handle the discussion, I only saw the one statement put out, or what page on this thread will one find the reference? 

I assume Bono is included as part of “they”

Edited by 1032004
Posted
1 minute ago, 1032004 said:

If he is included then “they” made more than one statement…

What was the statement?  All I ever saw reported here was a question on twitter.  

  • Fire 1

.

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, 98lberEating2Lunches said:

Are you arguing in bad faith?  (Asking for a friend) 😉 

you have "friend(s)?"  🤔 

🙂

Edited by ionel
  • Fire 1
  • Haha 1

.

Posted

Not that anyone cares, as I realize this has been beat to death already, but here's my handful of thoughts on the topic.  Its sort of a mixed verdict.

1.  Wisconsin/Bono's public statements on the topic are misleading -- at best.

Wisconsin is being disingenuous when its athletics department issues a statement saying they are actively working with the Nebraska to support his "immediate eligibility," and when Coach Bono sends out a tweet suggesting that the NPO option isn't available.  The original statement had a grain of truth insofar as they supported his appeal to the NCAA based on lack of awareness of the deadline, but implies support of his NPO efforts which is untrue.  And Bono's tweet was straight up untrue. 

2.  Wisconsin's hesitance to sign the NPO form is defensible.

My annoyance with Wisconsin's duplicity notwithstanding, I don't think its fair to criticize Wisconsin for not signing the NPO, since Wisconsin would have to certify Burwick "was no longer given an opportunity to participate."  Though I can see why a lay person might think that it "counts" that Burwick was recruited over and lost his starting spot, that's not what those terms actually mean, according to NCAA definitions.  Per NCAA by-law 14.02.9, "participate" means the "student-athlete either practices in a sport (see Bylaw 17.02.1) or competes in a sport, as defined in Bylaw 17.02.8," (https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/bylawView?id=8787), and those latter definitions make clear that they have nothing to do with whether you're a starter or on scholarship.  If I were Wisconsin's GC, I wouldn't let them sign the form as-is (without explanation).

3.  Manning isn't helping.

I get his passion to defend a student-athlete, but saying the "statement they put out was the biggest fraud I’ve ever seen,” as quoted in Hamilton's article on Flo, is definitely not the right approach. Yes, its misleading, but it has enough truth to not be called "fraud," and that sort of accusation is counterproductive.  (From the Flo interview, I think Manning realizes he sort of stepped in it.)

4.  Wisconsin should sign the form with explanation.

What I would advise Wisconsin to do if they asked me is to sign the form, and to check the box saying he didn't have an opportunity to participate, but to put an asterisk by the latter box -- and to add an explanatory sentence or two at the bottom.  Say Burwick wasn't forbidden from being on the team but did have his spot jeopardized by a transfer student brought at his weight without his knowledge, after the transfer deadline -- and that Wisconsin supports him not losing his eligibility.  That's honest, and if the NCAA still says no, that's on them, not Wisconsin. Anyone who still criticizes Wisconsin after that (e.g. saying that they shouldn't had given the explanation/asterisk) is basically saying Wisconsin is morally obliged to lie to the NCAA -- and I'm sorry, but F anyone who says that.

5.  The NCAA rule needs to change.

If an athlete wants to transfer to a new school after a given deadline, and the original school has zero objection to their doing so, they ought not lose a year of eligibility.  Period.  I'm fine with the NCAA requiring the original school's consent if the transfer is after a certain deadline, but who is the NCAA to forbid the original school from granting consent?  The idea that the NCAA should be telling athletes they lose a year of eligibility even when both schools consent is preposterous.  

  • Fire 3
Posted
3 hours ago, BAC said:

when its athletics department issues a statement saying they are actively working with the Nebraska to support his "immediate eligibility," and when Coach Bono sends out a tweet suggesting that the NPO option isn't available

I agree with you.

Manning said in his Bader interview that Wisconsin AD was still working with Nebraska.  I continue to find the context, timing, and motivation of Bono's tweet odd.

3 hours ago, BAC said:

Wisconsin should sign the form with explanation.

If only this would work.  Wisconsin AD compliance would have to creative with the NPO in a way that they were not falsifying information provided to the NCAA.  The NPO has both AD's acknowledge recognizition of the NCAA rule to provide accurate information to the NCAA.

I agree that 

3 hours ago, BAC said:

If an athlete wants to transfer to a new school after a given deadline and the original school has zero objection to their doing so, they ought not lose a year of eligibility.

I see the NPO no longer being required is a positive first step.

Posted

As much as I appreciate the hour-by-hour updates on the Burwikk situation, could we edit the thread to spell his name correctly, or has this reached the significance of a Stevenson/Carl type of purposeful misspelling?

 

  • Fire 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, MNRodent said:

As much as I appreciate the hour-by-hour updates on the Burwikk situation, could we edit the thread to spell his name correctly, or has this reached the significance of a Stevenson/Carl type of purposeful misspelling?

 

 Bob only gives us 15 minutes to correct our mistakes.  A grumpy old codger that Bob is.  🥴

.

Posted
On 12/17/2022 at 8:24 AM, Antitroll2828 said:

A righteous sort of guy? He told Damian Hahn he was staying at SDSU so Hahn kept him on a full ride and didn’t recruit his weight , then gross wrestles one dual leaves the team after and transfers to be with bono at Wisconsin, also gross got the boot from Iowa for going on a car/ house robbing spree …I know people change and grow and what not but there about 2000 college wrestlers I’d call righteous before adding Seth gross to the list 

Just looking at Soldier Salute brackets…is Caleb Gross at SDSU Gross’s brother?

Also weren’t there rumors that Bono essentially pushed out McDonough to make room for Gross on the coaching staff?

Posted
3 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Just looking at Soldier Salute brackets…is Caleb Gross at SDSU Gross’s brother?

Also weren’t there rumors that Bono essentially pushed out McDonough to make room for Gross on the coaching staff?

No not his brother , don’t think they are related , Seth went to apple valley in Minnesota, Caleb is from Wisconsin I think  

Posted
6 hours ago, Antitroll2828 said:

No not his brother , don’t think they are related , Seth went to apple valley in Minnesota, Caleb is from Wisconsin I think  

Correct.  Seth does have a younger brother, Brady, who wrestles for Augsburg.

 

Posted
On 12/30/2022 at 8:04 AM, 1032004 said:

Just looking at Soldier Salute brackets…is Caleb Gross at SDSU Gross’s brother?

Also weren’t there rumors that Bono essentially pushed out McDonough to make room for Gross on the coaching staff?

This is what Askren will rant about if asked...endlessly...for hours. 

Posted
57 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

This is what Askren will rant about if asked...endlessly...for hours. 

Honest question here....Askren liked McDonough? Or is there more to this story that I am missing?

Posted
4 hours ago, TexRef said:

Honest question here....Askren liked McDonough? Or is there more to this story that I am missing?

There is SOOO much to this story that you're missing, but...lets just say this. 

Askren doesn't like UW. He didn't like Davis because he didn't aggressively pursue him. 
He got into some of the pettiest feuds with Bono and others and...some of the nonsense going on is insane.

He's done a great job with AWA(Really, John Mesinbrink has done a great job, he's one of the best HS Coaches I've ever seen)...but he openly trashes UW...and he did it before Bono when Barry Davis was there. He got along with Bono for a split second but...some nonsense about a scholarship(that was very well articulated to the student athlete that it'd be backloaded, meaning if he was still there at the end of 4 years, he'd get a very substantial scholarship). 

Then the believe that Gross was promised the job and they lied to McDonough and that's why Gross wrestled at UW. It falls apart when you realize Gross was on staff for the RTC and he filled in only after McD left and he would have been there either way making the same money. 

 

So it's really down to a visit that Askren didn't believe he was afforded appropriate respect and it really hasn't died down since. 

  • Fire 1
Posted
On 12/23/2022 at 7:31 PM, jajensen09 said:

Ehh not really.  All Mark manning is saying is for Wisconsin to do the right thing. Which they haven't yet. Just a signature is all 

And the right thing is to lie and say that there was something preventing him from competing(other than actual competition at the weight class)?

Is that the "right thing?" 

  • Fire 1
  • Haha 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...