Kylie Fitts is a Bobcat!

[Weltercat]

No decision has been made in Fitts' appeal. It sounds like no word will come until tomorrow. Stand down everyone.

I'm damn surprised that an appeal to the PAC12 can happen in a day. How long has it been pending?

[FTG06']

I'm probably wrong on this but I thought the Pac-12 had a clause that required an athlete that transferred to another school within their conference to sit out ie. lose 2 years of eligibility????? Did they change this recently???

PAC-12 can't override NCAA rules, so I would think that is bogus.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[allcat]

I'm probably wrong on this but I thought the Pac-12 had a clause that required an athlete that transferred to another school within their conference to sit out ie. lose 2 years of eligibility????? Did they change this recently???

PAC-12 can't override NCAA rules, so I would think that is bogus.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I would think the conference could have any extra rules they want as long as they equal or exceed the NCAA.

[PapaG]

No decision has been made in Fitts' appeal. It sounds like no word will come until tomorrow. Stand down everyone.

I'm damn surprised that an appeal to the PAC12 can happen in a day. How long has it been pending?

I'm still not clear on what the appeal would be about. If UCLA is able to put disclaimers into a player release, wouldn't that become a legal issue instead of an athletic issue? As I posted earlier, Johnny Ragin played for Cal in 2013, and is on the Oregon 2014 roster and in fall camp, although he's not eligible to play until next season because of the 1-year FBS transfer rule.

[PapaG]

I'm probably wrong on this but I thought the Pac-12 had a clause that required an athlete that transferred to another school within their conference to sit out ie. lose 2 years of eligibility????? Did they change this recently???

PAC-12 can't override NCAA rules, so I would think that is bogus.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I would think the conference could have any extra rules they want as long as they equal or exceed the NCAA.

The conference did use to have a 2-year rule. Then other coaches realized there were good players on other Pac-12 teams who may play a position of need for their school. Matt Moore is the first 1-year Pac 10/12 transfer I remember, although he did go JC for a year (and didn't player there), but there may have been others prior to him sitting out a year, then succeeding Derek Anderson as QB at Oregon State after leaving UCLA.

[SACCAT]

No decision has been made in Fitts' appeal. It sounds like no word will come until tomorrow. Stand down everyone.

I will NOT stand down just because some guy that has total access to the entire program, and knows more about everything than we do, tells me to. How dare you ask a fan base to not speculate wildly about every move a 19-20 year old kid desides to do with his football life. You sir need to stick to giving us compelling stories, and insight we would never have, instead of telling us to "stand down".

[WyomingGrizFan]

".., he (Fitts) will have to drop to the Division 2 level to play immediately, or seek the junior college route."

Damn, I hate that. Don't those so-called sports writers know what the hell NCAA level designation is
all about? There's Division I BCS and FBS. O.K. Then there's Division I FCS, which is not Division II; nor is FCS a junior college route. And transferring to FCS does not mean sitting out a year, duh.

[SonomaCat]

No decision has been made in Fitts' appeal. It sounds like no word will come until tomorrow. Stand down everyone.

I'm damn surprised that an appeal to the PAC12 can happen in a day. How long has it been pending?

I'm still not clear on what the appeal would be about. If UCLA is able to put disclaimers into a player release, wouldn't that become a legal issue instead of an athletic issue? As I posted earlier, Johnny Ragin played for Cal in 2013, and is on the Oregon 2014 roster and in fall camp, although he's not eligible to play until next season because of the 1-year FBS transfer rule.

It would appear that the enforcement body for matters of scholarships agreements is the NCAA and/or the conferences ... not the legal system.

[lutecat]

I may be wrong on this, but in other instances that I'm aware of, the Supreme Court has said that if an entity is under the umbrella of an organization and that organization has a body to rule on things of dispute then they are going to le the organization rule to its effectiveness. So in this case, Fitts would go to the NCAA about his dispute with UCLA, and the NCAA gets to rule as to what happens. If FItts tries to go to court over it, the Courts would likely declare that the NCAA had ruled and that was the end.

This happened in an instance that I know of when a church wanted to leave the national body it was affiliated with and a group wanted to stay and keep the actual church building as was allowed in their constitution. The governing body of the national church ruled one way and the Courts declared they had jurisdiction.

[mslacatfan]

[hardhatcat]

[Weltercat]

Brilliant! Made my day

[Bobcat80]

I keep checking back with this thread hoping to see some good news. I usually leave disappointed. This just about made me spit water all over my screen. Well done sir..well done....

[basincat]

I keep checking back with this thread hoping to see some good news. I usually leave disappointed. This just about made me spit water all over my screen. Well done sir..well done....

Danny's not Bushwood material anyway. He does drugs everyday.

[PapaG]

It would appear that the enforcement body for matters of scholarships agreements is the NCAA and/or the conferences ... not the legal system.

I'm still wondering how UCLA can put caveats in their releases, while Cal doesn't. One would think that each team in a conference should have the same transfer rules. I don't understand how Mora should have any control on where Fitts ends up playing in the future. If Fitts goes on to play at a conference rival, does that mean the terms of his release are violated? What's the penalty? Does Fitts have to go back to UCLA?

ETA - I can only find two internet sources that say he can't transfer to a Pac 12 school. One is on a UCLA fan site, and the other is this thread.

[PapaG]

I may be wrong on this, but in other instances that I'm aware of, the Supreme Court has said that if an entity is under the umbrella of an organization and that organization has a body to rule on things of dispute then they are going to le the organization rule to its effectiveness. So in this case, Fitts would go to the NCAA about his dispute with UCLA, and the NCAA gets to rule as to what happens. If FItts tries to go to court over it, the Courts would likely declare that the NCAA had ruled and that was the end.

This happened in an instance that I know of when a church wanted to leave the national body it was affiliated with and a group wanted to stay and keep the actual church building as was allowed in their constitution. The governing body of the national church ruled one way and the Courts declared they had jurisdiction.

The entire Northwestern football unionization case went outside of NCAA jurisdiction.

[lutecat]

I would say that's different in that we're talking unionization. That's outside of an NCAA issue. I mean it effects the NCAA but different. I'm not really sure how to verbalize that.

[wbtfg]

It would appear that the enforcement body for matters of scholarships agreements is the NCAA and/or the conferences ... not the legal system.

I'm still wondering how UCLA can put caveats in their releases, while Cal doesn't. One would think that each team in a conference should have the same transfer rules. I don't understand how Mora should have any control on where Fitts ends up playing in the future. If Fitts goes on to play at a conference rival, does that mean the terms of his release are violated? What's the penalty? Does Fitts have to go back to UCLA?

ETA - I can only find two internet sources that say he can't transfer to a Pac 12 school. One is on a UCLA fan site, and the other is this thread.

After a quick 5 minute google search I've learned just enough to be dangerous and likely completely wrong. That said, here are my thoughts....

I'm guessing Fitts is still bound under his NLI. In order to get out of that he needs to be granted a release by his current school. UCLA/Mora may decide not to do that. Also, I think one thing I saw somewhere which was somewhat unique to the Pac-12 is that intra-conference transfers may not receive athletic aid during their transfer year residency period. I'm guessing this is what Fitts is appealing. If UCLA/Mora are willing to grant a release then (from what I interpret in a bit of a vague document) he would likely be on the hook to finance a year of schooling while he sit out. He may or may not be in a position to do that.

[SonomaCat]

It would appear that the enforcement body for matters of scholarships agreements is the NCAA and/or the conferences ... not the legal system.

I'm still wondering how UCLA can put caveats in their releases, while Cal doesn't. One would think that each team in a conference should have the same transfer rules. I don't understand how Mora should have any control on where Fitts ends up playing in the future. If Fitts goes on to play at a conference rival, does that mean the terms of his release are violated? What's the penalty? Does Fitts have to go back to UCLA?

ETA - I can only find two internet sources that say he can't transfer to a Pac 12 school. One is on a UCLA fan site, and the other is this thread.

I'm not sure if you saw this the first time -- it seems to address the concerns you share with the author:

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sp ... tting.html

[SonomaCat]

I would say that's different in that we're talking unionization. That's outside of an NCAA issue. I mean it effects the NCAA but different. I'm not really sure how to verbalize that.

One is a legal issue regarding federal labor laws and the other is a scholarship issue relating to the by-laws of the NCAA and its member conferences?

An athlete could probably challenge the anti-trust exemption of the NCAA if they wanted to (to try to invalidate all NCAA authority), but they probably can't appeal specific by-laws of the NCAA in our legal system unless that by-laws conflicts with some existing law. That's not an expert legal analysis, of course, but is just my interpretation of why things are the way they are.