98lberEating2Lunches

Not quite, while I agree the focus of the rules isn't giving total control to the student athletes. Student athletes just have to enter the portal in the defined window for their sport or have an appropriate waiver exception. Then the coach cannot do anything. Again, the portal window and rules were an attempt to reign in a wild west portal transfers arguably (by coaches and athletic administrators) because a wide-open portal created an administrative burden and a negative affect on the competition. The fielded competition is the product that is the cash cow of NCAA membership through TV revenues. So that is what the NCAA sought to protect in a way its member institutions wanted. Lastly, one can always transfer and compete below the D1 level.

Team pays for attached. Team doesn't pay anything for unattached. Can't have too many attached at a tournament when the team doesn't want that tournament to count as a competition date. So participation at tournaments (who goes to which) must be coordinated including who may be attached in consideration of competition date criteria and budget.

This year and all future years? Even if Lamont got injured? Are you a psychic?

I would think most entering the portal this late likely graduated this semester. Then I don't bekieve a sign off would be required. But they could alternatively have a hardship situation to get a waiver. Only if neither of the preceding apply, they are as student athlete in good standing, and they were not allowed to compete or practice, then their current school would have to certify they are being given "No Participation Opportunity."

There are risks of getting one's scholarship pulled after they enter the portal. So maybe it's just better to enter in the defined window that allows one not to lose eligibility when one is serious about transferring to the point they don't care whether theIr current scholarship is pulled.

The coach doesn't want the athlete on the team any more for whatever reason (e.g. perceives the athlete as being a bad influence or distraction and attempts to correct didn't work), so he bans them from practice and doesn't allow them to suit up.

It's a "No Participation Opportunity" meaning the athlete's current school is certifying they did not allow an athlete in good standing to participate or practice (beyond the athlete's control). But I agree with much of your sentiment towards the NCAA as an administrative bureaucracy.

Nice piece of fiction. Actually responsible are 1) NCAA rules-makers governing portal transfer and 2) Kyle Burwick, with an admitted assist from Wisconsin Athletics for not informing its athletes. Some seem to conveniently forget Kyle was considering leaving Wisconsin before anyone signed off on Taylor Lamont and choose to assume Wisconsin Athletics hadn't been made aware of that after May 1st and before Lamont became a Badger May 24th. And to be clear, I neither hate Nebraska nor Wisconsin while also not being a fanatic of either.

Who me? I am not celebrating. I'm just being a realist. Blame the NCAA not the Wisconsin AD or Bono. Facts include the rule, May 1 deadline exists, and NPO NCAA process guidance exists at least until next year, because those are the rules the coaches and NCAA collectively agreed upon. Also, Kyle admits he was thinking of leaving after last year's competition well before the May 1st. That's before the Taylor Lamont recruitment. Nobody on this board knows the nature of any communications between Bono and Kyle, including before Kyle talked face-to-face with Wisconsin coaches well after entering the portal late. It's pretty evident that all of Kyle's public statements made it less likely that the Wisconsin AD could squint with one eye to certify the NPO. Doing so now would seem risk the NCAA coming down on him. To me, it has never been about picking sides or becoming morally outraged. I just wanted to try and better understand what went on. I think I have a much better understanding now than immediately after Kyle's Tweet. Even @Husker_Du seems to understand both sides. And he has declared he's not getting in the middle of it. So I don't expect him to reply to this thread.

Now that True Freshman can wrestle attached first semester, is it possible that a Coach, who had always been planning to RS them, has them compete attached intending to document an injury that they can then assert prevents them from wrestling in accordance with Medical RS criteria? This way, at least theoretically, they might put a Medical RS in the bank and subsequently use the resulting lineup flexibility in the current and future years. Enjoy your morning pastries everyone.

A legitimate concern appears to have turned into a farce, once all the information could be pieced together. I believe the continued calls for Bono to sign is simply trolling. I also believe this thread has served its purpose and should be allowed to die in peace. Apparently that's the strategy. That would be showing real support for Kyle. Alas, Wisconsin won't do it, so we'll see Kyle in a Nebraska singlet in 2023-24, assuming he doesn't enter the portal again.

Yes. Per that Collegiate Dual update press release you posted.

I looked at the tOSU update. It looks like Bouzakis has wrestled 3. What might I be misunderstanding?

How many competition dates have tOSU's potential RS true freshman used? Collegiate Duals would count as one more, right?

I thought one has to compete in their conference tournament to receive a wild card bid. Didn't Suriano step on the mat and injury defaulting with subsequent MFFs for that reason?

Kyle put it out there that he was thinking about transferring of his own volition prior learning of Taylor's transfer into Wisconsin. The May 1 portal entry deadline is about coaches and institutions having time to establish their teams. It was a step to reigning in an undesirable side-effect of the portal transfer process. Kyle could've been less than fully truthful on his waiver exemption request, asserting some circumstance for which waiver exemptions are granted. It doesn't appear that he was. Good for him. Just doesn't seem right for Nebraska, Manning, or Kyle to expect Wisconsin or Bono would certify the No Participation Opportunity untruthful. Good for them. And if rumors of Kyle's likely departure circulated Wisconsin led to Taylor's recruitment, well then, that would appear to fly in the face of the spirit of the May 1 deadline.

This excerpt appears to make it a black and white issue: "If applicant institution is unable to document that the student-athlete was no longer given an opportunity to participate by his or her previous institution for reasons outside the student-athlete’s control or if the student-athlete was dismissed from the previous institution’s team, which led to the student-athlete’s decision to transfer, the case should be denied." This is guidance the NCAA wrote for itself to govern transfer and one-year sitouts. If anyone is to blame, it's the NCAA.

Consider reading the attached starting on page 12, "Assertions of No Participation Opportunity at Previous Institution." https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/committees/d1/clr/D1CLR_Guidelines.pdf This is from February 2022. Note the highlighted section. It takes time to update forms. The one provided earlier is current, dated 12/07/2022 My guess is the prior one is identical except that it didn't include the yellow highlight indicating the form was about to become obsolete.

Perhaps your emotions are getting the best of you. It's understandable. Maybe think of it this way... When an employee enjoys and wants to keep their job, they don't normally revisit items with their boss after the boss has reached a conclusion based on the best available information without any new information coming to light--especially after they issue a statement that they consider the matter closed and won't be further discussing the topic in public. Cast aspersions on Bono all you want, but his actions seem reasonable and defensible to me.

@jajensen09 it can be used this year but isn't needed in later. This excerpt from it looks similar to what Bryan Snyder quoted in his recent Tweet exchange with Bono: "A signed NPO form will no longer be a basis for waiver relief from the transfer year in residence requirement for an undergraduate transfer student-athlete whose first championship season at their new institution will be conducted during the 2023-24 academic year." Why include these statements unless the form is in use this year? Didn't @Husker_Du write it was a single sheet of paper that an ambiguious 'they' could sign? He didn't say sign truthfully and in good conscience, did he? I agree with @jchapman that the Wisconsin AD likely has decided it can't in good faith certify item #1. Wisconsin supported the waiver exception request. It appears that request focused on not being informed about the May 1 portal deadline rather than any other exception that the NCAA typically finds acceptable. It doesn't appear that the NCAA found that sufficient grounds for a waiver exception. It is likely Nebraska pressed for the NPO, and Wisconsin informed them it couldn't sign it truthfully and in good conscience, and did this earlier between October 7 when the NCAA declined the waiver exception and when Kyle and Manning went off to court public opinion. It's unfortunate, but it is what it is.

Which part(s) of the law and what do you understand are their spirit? The May 1 deadline? The waiver exception for the May 1 deadline? The certification of a "No Participation Opportunity" waiver? It seems one can expect bureaucratic administrators to administrate in accordance with defined processes. Expecting them to innovate based on inspiration from some spirit of a rule seems futile. At best there might be some 'statements of consideration' that they might reference when applying a rule.

P.S. It reads that the Directors of Athletics (not coaches) are the responsible signators. That would seem to take Coach Bono off the hook.

Now that we know the name of the form "No Participation Opportunity" we can look at it. Here it is: https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/committees/d1/clr/D1CLR_NoParticipationOpportunityForm.pdf Probably the Wisconsin AD believes he can't sign it in good faith, because they understand they would be falsely certifying one of the four items required by the form. I assume this is the piece of paper @Husker_Du said was sitting on a desk. So it's back on the NCAA for what they required on the form for the winter of this academic year. Wisconsin worked through October 7 waiver exception, which the NCAA denied. The need for this form followed that denial.

I believe Masoumi's English would progress enough to learn the difference between digress and regress.

Is Bono dumb, playing dumb, or being malicious? I don't know. After reading the rules, I thought one thing. But after reading that purported NCAA email screenshot, it seems there's some transition period going on that Kyle may've got caught up in (and future rules will be how I thought they already were). Let's hope Bono is feigning dumb now as a face saving tactic. Maybe he'll "only now come to understand" that he can sign an NPO to allow Kyle to compete. And then he'll do so.