|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Mar 16, 2020 7:18:42 GMT -8
Daneesha Provo of Utah WBB was granted an extra season of eligibility by the NCAA apparently due to missing the same number of games that Tudor did in '18-'19 and having another complication that impacted her first year at Clemson. I wouldn't dismiss the same possibility for Tudor through the NCAA if Tudor still wants one season back.
As for Tudor being "healthy" at the end of the sesson, I saw her limping during games. It was apparent to many people I spoke with that she was playing through pain and discomfort.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 16, 2020 8:55:48 GMT -8
Daneesha Provo of Utah WBB was granted an extra season of eligibility by the NCAA apparently due to missing the same number of games that Tudor did in '18-'19 and having another complication that impacted her first year at Clemson. I wouldn't dismiss the same possibility for Tudor through the NCAA if Tudor still wants one season back. As for Tudor being "healthy" at the end of the sesson, I saw her limping during games. It was apparent to many people I spoke with that she was playing through pain and discomfort. You're talking medical concerns for an individual unable to physically play. Missing postseason games while able to play isn't close to the same. Being not 100% isn't an qualifier. Kat played. Could you imagine the appeals if playing, but not at 100%? |
|
|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Mar 16, 2020 10:03:03 GMT -8
Tudor's health at the end of the season wasn't the point of my post. I was responding to baseba1111's statement that Tudor was "healthy." There are more issues involved with Tudor's situation than any of us really know.
The primary point of my post was to bring up the issue of the Provo hardship appeal that the NCAA approved and the fact that Tudor now has another consideration to add to a different appeal if she wants another season back.
Provo played in 12 games during her freshman season and did not leave Clemson or end her season due to an injury. She played in 13 games as a redshirt senior and then tore her ACL. She was granted a 6th season to compete by the NCAA, ostensibly because she had missed a significant part of two seasons although in both seasons she played more than the customary 30% threshhold.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 16, 2020 10:40:14 GMT -8
Tudor's health at the end of the season wasn't the point of my post. I was responding to baseba1111's statement that Tudor was "healthy." There are more issues involved with Tudor's situation than any of us really know. The primary point of my post was to bring up the issue of the Provo hardship appeal that the NCAA approved and the fact that Tudor now has another consideration to add to a different appeal if she wants another season back. Provo played in 12 games during her freshman season and did not leave Clemson or end her season due to an injury. She played in 13 games as a redshirt senior and then tore her ACL. She was granted a 6th season to compete by the NCAA, ostensibly because she had missed a significant part of two seasons although in both seasons she played more than the customary 30% threshhold. And, there is FAR more issues specific to Provo's case than you know and make it significantly different to Kat's yet you keep tossing it out as if they are equivalent. Kat was indeed healthy... no player is 100% after 30+ games. But, she played in games up and including the last game. That's healthy by any standard... if you play you are healthy enough to NOT appeal. Kat's situation is no way mirrors that which you mention. Provo's injury and transfer situation is nothing close to what the NCAA consider for Kat. Kat was denied on medical appeal. Done. The issue going on now is a completely separate issue and isn't going to follow along any current NCAA guideline hence not be coupled with any previous ruling. I have no idea what the NCAA will do, but I can't believe anyone thinks missing out on postseason play due to a world health crisis is remotely similar to a player missing 20+ games due to a season ENDING injury. |
|
|
|
Post by believeinthebeavs on Mar 16, 2020 13:17:10 GMT -8
Provo and Kat were both injured with acl's the same number of games into the season, or close to it. So they have that in common. According to ncaa rules they both should have been denied a medical redshirt. However the ncaa make rules and then continuously makes exceptions to them. One thing they don't have in common is number of eligible years, Provo has had six now.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 16, 2020 13:34:29 GMT -8
Provo and Kat were both injured with acl's the same number of games into the season, or close to it. So they have that in common. According to ncaa rules they both should have been denied a medical redshirt. However the ncaa make rules and then continuously makes exceptions to them. One thing they don't have in common is number of eligible years, Provo has had six now. Provo had TWO shortened seasons plus "other" issues that precipitated her transfer. Their situations, at this moment, aren't similar. |
|
|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Mar 17, 2020 15:14:15 GMT -8
Provo and Kat were both injured with acl's the same number of games into the season, or close to it. So they have that in common. According to ncaa rules they both should have been denied a medical redshirt. However the ncaa make rules and then continuously makes exceptions to them. One thing they don't have in common is number of eligible years, Provo has had six now. Provo had TWO shortened seasons plus "other" issues that precipitated her transfer. Their situations, at this moment, aren't similar. True. And, as has been pointed out by other posters on this site, every situation is different. If an athlete is not satisfied with the response to his/her appeal for an additional season, he/she can provide additional information for NCAA consideration and/or attempt to litigate to regain a season. The NCAA decided that Provo's unique situation merited an additional season. I hope that they may do the same for Tudor or even Stanford's Fingall (if Stanford had an available scholarship, which it apparently does not currently have) given their circumstances if they should appeal for reconsideration. |
|
