I'm going to play Devil's Advocate on this one. He was not "ineligible" to play sports at WV in the sense that we normally think of when we hear or use that term. The school (apparently) took no action whatsoever against him and considered him eligible to attend there and play sports there. The court restricted him from attending the school since it would cause him to be around the girl. It may be a fine line, but I just don't think it's quite as clearcut as it might seem upon first read.

 

If the literal interpretation isn't clear enough, then the intent of the rule is obvious enough to wash away the gray area IMO.

If the literal interpretation isn't clear enough, then the intent of the rule is obvious enough to wash away the gray area IMO.

 

I guess eventually we'll find out, but if the rule was applied the way you believe, then obviously he would have been ineligible. Since he was ultimately determined to be eligible and since there's just no way this information would have not somehow made it to KHSAA (is there!?), I'm guessing it doesn't cover court-related penalties/restrictions. I find it hard to believe that both WV and NCC intentionally deceived KHSAA about what was taking place. And it would have taken both of them to misrepresent the situation in order to get past KHSAA.

As an NCC alum, I am a bit surprised that based on the circumstances surrounding the transfer, that he was allowed to play sports. I understand accepting the Student into the school, I understand 2nd chances, but it is not like he was a year removed from the incident. He was sentenced in February, and played baseball games in March. Would NCC have allowed a player already on the team, with a similar charge, to play in the season? If so then things have significantly changed up on the hill. I hope that they were not aware of the detail circumstances.

I wonder how WV signed the release fully knowing that the younger brother was in middle school.

Doesn't pass the smell test.

I wonder how WV signed the release fully knowing that the younger brother was in middle school.

Doesn't pass the smell test.

 

What's the issue with the younger bro being in middle school at Walton?

 

The form does not ask for reasons for the move or transfer.

What's the issue with the younger bro being in middle school at Walton?

 

The form does not ask for reasons for the move or transfer.

 

It does, apparently, ask you to sign off on it with a wink of an eye, it seems. From the KHSAA standpoint, it should send major red flags up if one kid transfers away in mid-season while his younger sibling stays home.

It does, apparently, ask you to sign off on it with a wink of an eye, it seems. From the KHSAA standpoint, it should send major red flags up if one kid transfers away in mid-season while his younger sibling stays home.

 

Agreed.

Perhaps I'll show my ignorance here (it's not the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last)...but what is the equivalent of the "death penalty" in college sports? Sounds serious.

 

Sorry I missed this, from Wikipedia:

 

The death penalty is the popular term for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)'s power to ban a school from competing in a sport for at least one year. It is the harshest penalty that an NCAA member school can receive.

 

It has been implemented only five times:

1. The University of Kentucky basketball program for the 1952–53 season.
   
2. The basketball program at the University of Southwestern Louisiana (now the University of Louisiana at Lafayette) for the 1973–74 and 1974–75 seasons
   
3. The Southern Methodist University football program for the 1987 and 1988 seasons.
   
4. The Division II men's soccer program at Morehouse College for the 2004 and 2005 seasons.
   
5. The Division III men's tennis program at MacMurray College for the 2005–06 and 2006–07 seasons.
   

I think you're only partially correct. In addition to money, my guess is they want people removed from leadership at WV.

I agree with both of you, and I agree with Guru, if they lied then there should be a price to pay, not sure about a "death penalty" as that would hurt kids not involved. But maybe tell them unless they resign there will be one placed on the school?

 

But what will people say if the family settles out of court?

 

But again, these are allegations, for the good people at WV I hope these are not true.

I agree with both of you, and I agree with Guru, if they lied then there should be a price to pay, not sure about a "death penalty" as that would hurt kids not involved. But maybe tell them unless they resign there will be one placed on the school?

 

But what will people say if the family settles out of court?

 

But again, these are allegations, for the good people at WV I hope these are not true.

 

I will be shocked if this goes to trial. My guess is a settlement takes place and part of the settlement is it can't be talked about.

Sorry I missed this, from Wikipedia:

 

The death penalty is the popular term for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)'s power to ban a school from competing in a sport for at least one year. It is the harshest penalty that an NCAA member school can receive.

 

It has been implemented only five times:

1. The University of Kentucky basketball program for the 1952–53 season.
   
2. The basketball program at the University of Southwestern Louisiana (now the University of Louisiana at Lafayette) for the 1973–74 and 1974–75 seasons
   
3. The Southern Methodist University football program for the 1987 and 1988 seasons.
   
4. The Division II men's soccer program at Morehouse College for the 2004 and 2005 seasons.
   
5. The Division III men's tennis program at MacMurray College for the 2005–06 and 2006–07 seasons.
   

 

So...another question regarding this...which sport would it affect, baseball or basketball? Or would it affect the entire athletic department? I'm kind of with TripleSevens as I don't know how it all works...thanks in advance..

So...another question regarding this...which sport would it affect, baseball or basketball? Or would it affect the entire athletic department? I'm kind of with TripleSevens as I don't know how it all works...thanks in advance..

 

Without commenting on this particular case I'd be stunned to see any version of a high school death penalty leveled at any school unless there is a serious crime or a serious case of continued cheating.

As an NCC alum, I am a bit surprised that based on the circumstances surrounding the transfer, that he was allowed to play sports. I understand accepting the Student into the school, I understand 2nd chances, but it is not like he was a year removed from the incident. He was sentenced in February, and played baseball games in March. Would NCC have allowed a player already on the team, with a similar charge, to play in the season? If so then things have significantly changed up on the hill. I hope that they were not aware of the detail circumstances.

 

So if NCC knew about the charges and let him play even though he should have been ineligible, shouldnt they have to forfeit there games.

I dont see how if the khsaa ruled him eligible. Should they have played him? That's a moral question that only those in the know can truly answer, and I am about 1000 miles from that group.

Sorry I missed this, from Wikipedia:

 

The death penalty is the popular term for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)'s power to ban a school from competing in a sport for at least one year. It is the harshest penalty that an NCAA member school can receive.

 

It has been implemented only five times:

 

1. The University of Kentucky basketball program for the 1952–53 season.

2. The basketball program at the University of Southwestern Louisiana (now the University of Louisiana at Lafayette) for the 1973–74 and 1974–75 seasons

3. The Southern Methodist University football program for the 1987 and 1988 seasons.

4. The Division II men's soccer program at Morehouse College for the 2004 and 2005 seasons.

5. The Division III men's tennis program at MacMurray College for the 2005–06 and 2006–07 seasons.

 

Thanks. I thought it was referring to something like this, but didn't want to assume. Now that I know for sure, I will say that lie or no lie, a death penalty certainly does not fit the possible infraction. If there was lying to the KHSAA, the lie involved just what the accusation said - to keep a boy's eligibility to play sports at another school. In other words the alleged lying is not even to get a kid eligible into their own program. That being said, I just don't get the penalizing of a lot of unrelated kids that had nothing to do with what happened, especially when the school is not being accused of any practice that is illegally or dishonestly advancing their own athletic program...like I said the alleged lie was to keep him eligible to play at another school. Furthermore, if it has only been implemented 5 times by the NCAA, I think it is safe to say it is only for the most severe cases in NCAA standards. By the way Guru...thanks for going back and catching my question.