Good comments here. What we have to understand is that NS is an amature and wrestles because he loves it. There is not a prifessional career at the end. CS is a college coach and while he has great success it's a sport unfortunately that few conferences support. This doesn't impact CS's legacy in a negative way. It doesn't impact the balance of power. It doesn't impact tv contracts. And if you really think it does so what. You may love college wrestling but it's just college wrestling. Let the kid, or any Olympic sport kid, go where they want to compete. Lets not make it bigger than it is.
Nick Suriano Status
- Thread starter wngarbarini
- Start date
PSU has given Nick a full release to wrestle at Rutgers. The B1G has a rule regarding transfers within the conference having to forfeit a year of eligibility. They have in a few cases granted waivers to that rule. Nick was aware of that rule when he signed his letter of intent to attend PSU and then enrolled at PSU. Most conferences have the same rule regarding transferring to another conference school.
We all agree that football and basketball are the kings of college sports compared to the Olympic sports, football and basketball do have more stringent NCAA transfer rules in that you will have to sit a year if you transfer. Problem for Nick is lawyers, under any legal challenge all sports are going to be treated equally regarding the intra conference transfer.
Unless Nick can get a waiver and he most likely will not know for several months, he has a choice, go to Rutgers and most likely only have 2 years of eligibility left, stay at PSU and have 3 years left or transfer to a non B1G school and have 3 years left.
Thanks for posting that for the 72nd time.
Who cares for the thousandth time. We know PSU granted NS a release to wrestle at RU. All that matters is if when asked by the Big Ten committee is if PSU supports NS receiving a waiver of the loss of 1 year eligibility. PSU has told us and for all intents and purposes has said NO. They said they support the current rule in place. NS will never return to PSU. He will go elsewhere if no waiver is granted.
He's just answering a question. And until we know, if ever, what the grounds for a waiver are, none of us can make an informed decision about whether or not Penn State should support a waiver. If, as some have pointed out, the grounds is some sort of malfeasance by Penn State, even Rutgers fans should understand that the waiver request would be not be supported by Penn State - if they even have such an opportunity.
Do you or does anyone know how the waiver process works? For example does Suriano have to be enrolled at Rutgers in order to request a waiver from the B1G? Has Suriano requested a waiver. Is Suriano even enrolled at Rutgers at this time? Last I checked he was not listed on the Rutgers wrestling roster.
No matter what happens, good luck to him. I do not expect Suriano to be back at PSU, I have a suspicion that that bridge has been nuked and some scholarship money may have been allocated somewhere else.
Most D1 Wrestling conferences do not have the same transfer restrictions that the Big Ten has for intraconference transfers.
So the chances he ends up at either PSU or Rutgers is pretty much Zero. Well that sucks...
An NCAA One-Time Transfer Exception is possible if Penn State supports a B1G waiver so that NS can attend Rutgers without losing eligibility.
One-Time Transfer Exception
The one-time transfer exception is the most commonly used exception for transfers from one four-year college to another, especially if the transfer involves two colleges in NCAA Division I or II.
- If transferring to a Division I school, the athlete must play a sport other than football, men’s or women’s basketball, or baseball. The exception is that an athlete can transfers to a Football Championship Subdivision (FCS or I-AA) school and use this exception provided he or she has at least two seasons of competition remaining. In Division II, any sport may use the one-time transfer exception.
- The athlete must not have previously transferred from another four-year school.
- At the time of the transfer, the athlete would have been academically eligible at the previous school; and
- If transferring from an NCAA or NAIA school, the athlete’s previous school states in writing that they have no objection to the athlete using the one-time transfer exception.
You have a right to feel upset for Cortez, but, would two wrongs make a right ?
Cortez transferred away from home to a wrestling program with a competitive advantage over Illinois.
NS just wants to transfer home to a wrestling program that will remain at a competitive disdvantage with Penn State after he transfers.
Why force NS to go outside of the B1G ?
Unless there is a grievance to be offered there is almost no likelihood a wavier would receive any consideration. Even if Cael called Delaney himself.
Just saying. NS will be the 2018 Big10 125 pound champion
Really? Pac12? ACC? Big 12? They all have similar rules from what I read. And the rules cut across all sports, so add some more conferences.
Yes really. There are seven other D1 Wrestling conferences besides the Big Ten. They are the ACC, Big 12, EIWA, EWL, MAC, PAC 12 and SoCon and they all do not have the same transfer restrictions that the Big Ten has for intraconference transfers.
All D1 Wrestling conferences do have the same NCAA transfer restrictions though. Big Ten transfer restrictions for intraconference transfers are in addition to standard NCAA transfer restrictions.
Last edited:
In the Sports Illustrated College Football preview issue, big article about grad transfers. The article stated that most conferences have restrictions against intra conference transfers, all sports. I have not taken the time to research each conference individually. But for the topic at hand, the only conference that matters is the B1G. It looks like there Nick will forfeit a year of eligibility if he transfers to Rutgers. Micic is the lone exception that anyone has found to the rule who was not a post grad transfer, he transferred to Michigan and was willing to lose the year of eligibility, waiver was not approved until November.
Regardless of the waiver process, nothing is stopping CS from public ally stating he has no issue with NS and hopes he doesn't lose a year of wrestling. But he hasn't done so. Tells you a lot about the man.
Any of you RU posters going to call him out for repeating the same, wrong info over and over again? Just asking. Goose, gander, and all that. Difference is, my info wasn't wrong.
Because the ones that are not a major conference and/or not a sports-wide conference (i.e. EIWA, EWL, MAC, SoCon) don't have a similar rule. The conferences that are actually similar to B1G (i.e. ACC, Big 12, and Pac12) do have similar rules. So, c'mon.
This borders on silly. Seriously. He's supposed to say this to, what, make you like him more?
You PSU guys continually fall short in doing what is right vs. what you think is required.
I'm pretty sure if you went across the college wrestling world, people would laugh at the suggestion that it's "right" for Cael to say something like what was suggested at this point. Maybe when the process is completed he could say something "nice" to appease the Rutgers fans (like he did after the PSU/Rutgers dual meet last year), but now certainly is not the "right" time.
Has Suriano enrolled at Rutgers yet? Has Suriano applied for a waiver from the B1G? Until those happen there is nothing for Cael to support or not support other than giving Suriano his release to talk to/transfer to Rutgers.
If Suriano does enroll at Rutgers and request a waiver, he will need to provide a reason why it should be approved. Depending upon that reason, you cannot state that PSU/Cael should unconditionally support the waiver application. If Suriano trashes PSU in the hardship, why would Cael support it?
Rumor is that Suriano will attempt to use the treatment for his ankle as his hardship. Support it and you are throwing the PSU medical staff under the bus. Let alone the fact that Suriano broke his ankle, which is typically a 6 to 8 weeks injury to heal, simple breaks in non-load bearing bones are 4 to 6 weeks. What could PSU have done differently to treat his ankle?
1. Kindly show me a citation or source for the idea that he has to be enrolled to request a waiver from the Big Ten. You are making that up. You have no idea if Cael can or cannot tell the Big Ten he supports/consents to the waiver. There are no written procedures for the appeal process, and you dont know what weight, if any, is given to the opinion of the school the athlete is leaving. Approval from Cael/PSU may be critical, or it may be immaterial. You don't know.
2. Talking about anything concerning the claim for hardship is wild speculation. The only reasons anyone has discussed were "rumors" only to the extent that people on a message board with zero connection to the situation made them up. No one know what grounds are being claimed to justify a waiver of the Big Ten rule.
1. I don't know. Google "Steve Micic". That's how it went for him. He transferred and then months after his transfer, he was granted a waiver. I think if you put one and one together on the timeline, you can figure out he transferred before the waiver was granted, not after.
2. I think you just proved the point. No one knows. But, I know I'm repeating myself but you (and others) don't seem to get it, if the grounds for Suriano's request for a waiver allege malfeasance on the part of PSU and/or its agents/employees, you must understand that Penn State cannot endorse or support the waiver. For now, impartial silence is the correct course of action.
1. I know how it went from Steven Micic. Neither of us knows if he had to enroll before going to the Big Ten though. That is just how he did it.
2. Why do you think I don't get that. Of course I get that. Its obvious.
Nothing in your post disputes my post. I am simply highlighting where the disagreement is. It is REALLY simple.
I do not know the exact process for transferring with the B1G and how the waiver process works. I can admit that, can you? Please provide the link to the documentation regarding applying for a waiver for an intra-conference transfer within the B1G.
If you think about it, it would make sense that you have to be enrolled at your new school to apply for a waiver. PSU has granted a full release to Rutgers, Suriano can transfer there. Why would the B1G rule on a wavier request for a transfer that has not yet happened? The Micic transfer took 3 to 4 months to get an answer, he actually enrolled at Michigan.
Um. Did you read the post you are responding to? Of course I don't know how the waiver process works. Thats exactly what I said in my post. I said no one knows, and that the rules are unpubished. Then you respond to me by asking me for a link to documentation?
As to your second point, I agree that it seems like Micic enrolled first. You dont know if it has to be that way or not. I could see why a preemptive wavier process would make sense, if the student doesn't want to lose a year of eligibility, it would make sense for the Big Ten to grant an advance ruling so the athlete could make an informed decision. Its unfair to expect the kid to transfer, without knowing his situation. We can argue all day about that...its not worth it though, because we dont even know if its a relevant argument. I do think, in my mind, that an advance ruling is way more fair to the student athlete.
1. Using Micic's situation is a lot more instructive than relying upon wishful thinking.
2. Yes, but one position is grounded upon clear thinking and the other upon fuzzy/wishful thinking. So they are not equivalent.
You understand that making intraconference transfers easier is directly opposed to the B1G policy of discouraging them, don't you? The conference's focus is on fairness to member institutions and the conferences, not to individual student athletes seeking to do something the conference discourages.
Allowing advance rulings (akin to advisory opinions) would lead to many more applications for intraconference transfer requests, which, again, is not an encouraged activity.
Maybe Micic is informative, maybe it isn't. When you only have one example though, it is impossible to draw any conclusions because you cannot find any patterns. You simply know how it went once. You cannot "ground an opinion" on a one-time occurence. What if I told you I was going to eat a salad for lunch today. Can you form an opinion on what I am going to eat tomorrow? Am I likely to be a healthy eater? Or was today the anomaly, and I normally eat pizza?
You make a fair argument for not allowing an advance ruling, and give some good reasons why they shouldn't be granted. There are also arguments to be made for granting them. Its a silly argument for us to have, because all the back and forth in the world won't settle anything. I am not going to continue on that point. It would be nice if the Big Ten simply told us what the deal was.
But I can conclude, with a lot of certainty, that you do eat salad. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
I actually agree with all you are saying. Could you clue in your fellow Rutgers fans that they have no right to disparage Cael or anyone else since none of them know anything about what's going on.
It isn't my info. It is from the NCAA. You are wrong.
Please read it.
http://www.athleticscholarships.net/ncaa-transfer-exceptions.htm
Well, the disparagement comes from the fact that many here believe PSU and or Cael could have consented/acquiesced to a waiver, and that such consent/acquiescence would have been extremely important to the Big Ten committee. Since we don't know the truth, it could be fair, or it could be totally undeserved.
On our side, we have had insiders saying that PSU's consent/acquiescence was extremely important, and the local media seems to have gone with that version. I don't know why they would mislead us, but of course there is a chance this information is flat out wrong. On your side (correct me if I am wrong) I believe its just message board posters and that no one claiming to have inside info has said anything about PSU's consent.
Either way, I really see the Big Ten as the one to blame. Rutgers fans definitely may be jumping the gun and the criticism may be totally undeserved. I think the bottom line is, if the Big Ten was more transparent about this totally undocumented process, we would all have a clearer understanding of what was going on, and likely all of this drama could have been avoided.
I totally understand why PSU fans are annoyed to see Cael being criticized when we don't even know if he could have done anything differently, let alone if he did anything wrong. As a point to you guys, I think RU fans feel the same way when your fans suggest that there was tampering or wrongdoing by our staff.
Similar threads
