Ballin wins.

I haven’t read all the thread. But here is why I think wiseman wins.

THe NCAA hounds are holding Penny accountable for three separate events while he was in three separate roles.
He gave a significant donation to his university that was eventually named after him.
He helped a family and dealt with the TSSAA which ended up declaring Wiseman eligible.
He several years latter was hired in a job that was not on the horizon when he helped the family. The new job requires as a condition and core purpose for A coach to be engaged with recruiting top athletes to their program.
Three separate events that the ncaa uses to restrict Penny’s ability to pursue conditions of his job, consequences that expect penny to know that he would one day be the coach at Memphis and he would one day help a family in need before he knew he would one day be coach.

And in standard illogical fashion the the NCAA punishes the student.

This case is much bigger than Memphis simply losing a player. And that’s why a talented young man with a bright future will continue to play at the univ of Memphis

Even if he did know he'd be coach one day it's a loophole just like hiring a player's relative to ensure they sign with a program or postponing a hiring of an assistant coach such as Sam Smith so that he can recruit outside the recruiting period given he's not yet an official member of the staff.

Coaches and teams do things like this all the time and are allowed to do so. This is the NCAA'S way of tarnishing Memphis yet again to stunt the ascension to greatness and to appease the other whining coaches. Politics. Meanwhile, true Strong-Ass Offers are being made by the Will Wade's and nothing is fine about it....

NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

two questions to be answered:
1 Did NCAA have the details of the moving expenses when the first declared him eligible?
2 If Penny is a "booster", how is he allowed to recruit kids to play at Memphis? So the NCAA is going to prevent Penny from doing his job?

Interesting thoughts in this thread.

The outcome of this situation will likely depend on how far down the rabbit hole the respective attorneys for Wiseman, Penny and the University want to go as all three factions fight the NCAA thugs.

I know that Wiseman will be fine financially effective next year regardless of his eligibility for the remainder of the season...it just takes the wind out of what could've a magical year for the program if he is indeed ruled ineligible.

Penny will be just fine as well, even if he is placed on some sort of probationary status by the NCAA, but I really think he's good in regards to remaining as head coach of the Tigers.

The University itself is the big question. Do they want to fight this thing to the bitter end and really test the NCAA to it's limits and finally get some redemption on overturning the organization's routine overturning of players' eligibility at the drop of a hat when they have ruled the same player eligible just a few months prior? Taking this type of thing to court could take years to battle it out, and I wonder if the U wants to spend the resources and possible damage to it's reputation should they lose such a potentially high profile case?

I hope Penny doesn’t give out candy at his house at Halloween. Just think of all the future generations of “recruits” that the NCAA will deem ineligible (after they play one game).

Penny helped Wiseman, A Lo, thousands of other players. Thre NCAA also claims it is acceptable so long as the help/benefit was available to others which it was.

A Lo moved in with penny for a time when his family wad unable to provide for A Lo. Penny helped other players as well just like any teacher in America does with their students. Teachers buy school supplies, allow kids to live with them etc. just like Penny and it's no big deal.

This is about politics. The same with the Strict Liability ruling which has icky been used against Memphis. UNC players were found to have taken fake courses and thre ncaa forgot about strict liability. Roy "didn't know" so no harm no foul.....

(11-09-2019 09:46 AM)GermantownTiger Wrote:  Interesting thoughts in this thread.

The outcome of this situation will likely depend on how far down the rabbit hole the respective attorneys for Wiseman, Penny and the University want to go as all three factions fight the NCAA thugs.

I know that Wiseman will be fine financially effective next year regardless of his eligibility for the remainder of the season...it just takes the wind out of what could've a magical year for the program if he is indeed ruled ineligible.

Penny will be just fine as well, even if he is placed on some sort of probationary status by the NCAA, but I really think he's good in regards to remaining as head coach of the Tigers.

The University itself is the big question. Do they want to fight this thing to the bitter end and really test the NCAA to it's limits and finally get some redemption on overturning the organization's routine overturning of players' eligibility at the drop of a hat when they have ruled the same player eligible just a few months prior? Taking this type of thing to court could take years to battle it out, and I wonder if the U wants to spend the resources and possible damage to it's reputation should they lose such a potentially high profile case?

NCAA will fold, they really have no jurisdiction to go after Wiseman....

(11-09-2019 09:46 AM)GermantownTiger Wrote:  Interesting thoughts in this thread.

The outcome of this situation will likely depend on how far down the rabbit hole the respective attorneys for Wiseman, Penny and the University want to go as all three factions fight the NCAA thugs.

I know that Wiseman will be fine financially effective next year regardless of his eligibility for the remainder of the season...it just takes the wind out of what could've a magical year for the program if he is indeed ruled ineligible.

Penny will be just fine as well, even if he is placed on some sort of probationary status by the NCAA, but I really think he's good in regards to remaining as head coach of the Tigers.

The University itself is the big question. Do they want to fight this thing to the bitter end and really test the NCAA to it's limits and finally get some redemption on overturning the organization's routine overturning of players' eligibility at the drop of a hat when they have ruled the same player eligible just a few months prior? Taking this type of thing to court could take years to battle it out, and I wonder if the U wants to spend the resources and possible damage to it's reputation should they lose such a potentially high profile case?

The university isn’t And imo won’t...I think if Memphis wasn’t listed in that restraining order they prob would have sat him.

(11-09-2019 09:34 AM)mapdude Wrote:  two questions to be answered:
1 Did NCAA have the details of the moving expenses when the first declared him eligible?
2 If Penny is a "booster", how is he allowed to recruit kids to play at Memphis? So the NCAA is going to prevent Penny from doing his job?

Do you even read the guidelines?
From the NCAA:
Only institutional staff members are permitted to recruit prospective student-athletes. Generally, NCAA rules prohibit anyone else from contacting (calling, writing or in-person contact) prospects or the prospect’s relatives or guardian for recruiting purposes.

http://www.ncaa.org/enforcement/role-boosters

Is the coach not an institutional staff member? So he can recruit even though he is a booster.

Coach Penny was on the road with these guys playing AAU ball. He probably did countless acts of kindness and charity. Provided meals and purchased a myriad of incidentals along the way. Not to mention had Alex Lomax living with him.
This is a shakedown because Memphis doesn’t have as much ivy on the walls as Kansas , Duke and North Carolina.

(11-09-2019 09:55 AM)Tor Johnson Wrote:  Coach Penny was on the road with these guys playing AAU ball. He probably did countless acts of kindness and charity. Provided meals and purchased a myriad of incidentals along the way. Not to mention had Alex Lomax living with him.
This is a shakedown because Memphis doesn’t have as much ivy on the walls as Kansas , Duke and North Carolina.

Definitely Memphis doesn't get treated like the P5 schools.

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

I'm of the opinion that Da' Rat or one of his evil minions is behind pushing the NCAA to go this route. He's butthurt over Wiseman and others that crippled his chances at a NC this season because they didn't sign with him, pure evil is all that is.

(11-09-2019 10:16 AM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

It's stupid, though. By the NCAA's definition, we are all “representatives of institutions athletics interests”. Therefore, there is not a single eligible student-athlete in the country.

(11-09-2019 10:27 AM)JCraft Wrote:  I'm of the opinion that Da' Rat or one of his evil minions is behind pushing the NCAA to go this route. He's butthurt over Wiseman and others that crippled his chances at a NC this season because they didn't sign with him, pure evil is all that is.

DJJ was the first player to ever recommit from Kentucky during the Cal era. So there’s that, too.

I was sad to see Marvin Ballin had passed in October 2018 because he could have made this hilarious publicly. He was my buddy and one of my best customers before I retired from the casino business the month before his passing.

(11-09-2019 10:16 AM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

word on the street is the payment info wasn't disclosed until after the clearance

i know that's not what the school and lawyers are saying, just what i heard

(11-09-2019 10:16 AM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 09:27 AM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(11-09-2019 08:55 AM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  NCAA claims it doesn't matter if one donates $10 or a $1M that makes you a booster. If that's the case ALL coaches are boosters. Pretty sure every coach has donated something to the school that make millions at coaching and definitely have donated to ther alma mater.

Juwan Howard (who just landed a top recruit) hasn't donated to Michigan? Yea right.

The NCAA would say that if all you are is a booster, then that's fine, but, if you're a booster and you help a recruit, then that's wrong. The defense here would have to be Penny's job when he helped Wiseman, as, clearly, he wasn't recruiting him for UofM at that point (at least not as its coach).

It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Memphis hadn't hired Penny, but still recruited Wiseman. Would they still say that Wiseman received benefits from a Memphis booster (Penny) and, therefore, couldn't sign with Memphis? I bet you could find hundreds, maybe thousands of kids helped by people who, at some point in their lives, contributed to colleges. You'd decimate college sports if you made them all ineligible.

If Memphis has not hired Penny, Wiseman would still be ineligible based on Penny being a booster.

People saying Penny wasn’t a booster because he made a million dollar donation 10 years ago are just kidding themselves. The real term the NCAA used is “representative of institutions athletics interests” and Penny met there standard by the donation, his status as a former player, and likely a fair amount of involvement with the program over the past 25+ years.

The university and Wisemans best arguments are 1. That Penny as a friend, former AAU coach, and current HS coach was just helping a family in need and would/did do similar things for others in need and 2. The NCAA inflicted serious harm on Wiseman and the university by changing courses for no apparent reason.

Argument 2 probably has the best legal footing IF the reports are true that they had all info in May and formally indicated he would be eligible and then changed their decision based on 0 new evidence. I’m not sure I buy the no new evidence deal as the NCAA doesn’t typically reopen things without some cause. I’m hoping that whatever new info they may have had turns out to be BS or insignificant to the point that a judge calls them on it and places a permanent injunction.

100% agree...

If the NCAA truly didn't get any additional evidence and then in turn stated that Wiseman was declared eligible in ERROR than Wiseman should be good.