Wichita State WBB - Miscellaneous

[oldtimewomen's hoopcoach]

I actually have spoken to Diamond and it was a simple matter of the coaching change. Nothing against coach Whitaker, but she was recruited by someone else who left before she even got to play her first game.

Many times when the coach leaves the player can transfer; I wonder why Diamond couldn't become eligible?

[flyingMoose]

Many times when the coach leaves the player can transfer; I wonder why Diamond couldn't become eligible?

Leticia Romero wanting to leave K-State after Deb Patterson's dismissal is another recent example from our area. She finally got her release after a protracted hassle and transferred to Florida State where she became eligible at the semester break. I have no idea why that same scenario did not play out for Diamond. However, typically a transfer must sit out a year when moving DI to DI but does not lose any eligibility. Probably someone more familiar with the NCAA regulations can expand/clarify.

[1972Shocker]

Many times when the coach leaves the player can transfer; I wonder why Diamond couldn't become eligible?

Because she was already enrolled in school, received financial aid and played in her Freshman year. What would have been a surprise is if she would not have had to sit out a year under the transfer rules. Usually, those kind of waivers require a family hardship issue such as transferring to a school closer to home due to a serious family illness or death. (i.e. Johnny Coy IIRC).

Rauno Nurger did not have to sit out a year because he received a full release from his LOI to Ole Miss and because he never signed a financial aid agreement with Ole Miss.

[1972Shocker]

Leticia Romero wanting to leave K-State after Deb Patterson's dismissal is another recent example from our area. She finally got her release after a protracted hassle and transferred to Florida State where she became eligible at the semester break. I have no idea why that same scenario did not play out for Diamond. However, typically a transfer must sit out a year when moving DI to DI but does not lose any eligibility. Probably someone more familiar with the NCAA regulations can expand/clarify.

Leticia Romero's issue was totally different. KSU had initially refused to grant Romero a scholarship release. She could still transfer but not only would she have to sit out a year she could not be on scholarship at her new school for a year. After getting an attorney involved and convincing KSU to back down and give her a release she transferred to Florida State. She still has to sit out a full year but she can be on scholarship from the get go with Florida State.

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11058363/leticia-romero-former-kansas-state-guard-transfer-florida-state-seminoles

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/big-12/kansas-state/article388860/Leticia-Romero-won’t-receive-transfer-waiver-from-Kansas-State-despite-John-Currie’s-change-of-stance.html

Diamond Lockhart had no issue whatsoever in obtaining her release. She is on scholarship at WSU but, of course, has to sit out a year absent any family hardship issue.

Follow-Up: Leticia Romero was granted eligibility for the 2nd semester at FSU recently by the NCAA. FSU filed a hardship waiver request on her behalf and the NCAA granted it. Hard to say exactly what her hardship was but it almost sounds like her hardship was KSU acted like a bunch of assholes in the way they treated her. It could be she has some family issues back in Spain that make it important for her to complete her education ASAP and return to home. It's hard to say. Are it may be that FSU is a P-5 power that has more influence with the NCAA.

[1972Shocker]

Many times when the coach leaves the player can transfer; I wonder why Diamond couldn't become eligible?

A player can always transfer, whether the coach leaves or not. But unless the player meets one of the NCAA Exceptions (which Diamond Lockhart does not) then they must sit out one year for a D-1 to D-1 transfer. A change in the coaching staff is not one of these exceptions. In addition, the player must obtain a release from her old school (which Diamond did) in order to be on scholarship during during that 1st year (which Diamond is). That year does not count against a player's eligibility but does use up a year of the 5 years to complete 4 time frame. In effect, it has the same impact as a voluntary redshirt year. So Diamond will still have 3 years of eligibility to use with 3 years remaining to use them (absent any future hardship waivers).

Note their is a One-Time Transfer Exception but this does not apply to D-1 football, men's or women's basketball and baseball. Therefore, if Diamond was a volleyball player, a softball player or a track athlete she would have been eligible immediately. However, this exception simply does not apply to D-1 women's basketball.

I don't think there was ever much chance that WSU would meet any of these exceptions for Diamond and, in fact, I was surprised they were even trying although I guess it doesn't hurt to ask. The only exception that may have been a possibility in Diamond's case was the Family Hardship Waiver which are the most common and probably the most controversial because there is so much judgement involved.

[1972Shocker]

Here is another article on the Romero being granted immediate eligibility.

This is exactly why the hardship waivers are controversial. No real transparency and their doesn't appear to be much uniformity either. Sometimes the NCAA can be convinced and sometimes they can't. Not sure what made the difference in Romero's case but it's hard to believe KSU playing hard-ass made the difference unless the NCAA felt like her having to pay an attorney to convince KSU to reverse its unreasonable stance was an undue hardship (and it probably was) for which Romero should be compensated for by immediate eligibility (although she did miss 13 games this season prior to the ruling).

[1972Shocker]

Diamond Lockhart will not be eligible this year, though they tried. She will play next year and is a nice player.

Where do you see the Shocks using Diamond Lockhart? Point guard, shooting guard, combo guard? At only 5-5 I am thinking probably point guard but I have not had the opportunity to see her play.

[oldtimewomen's hoopcoach]

Where do you see the Shocks using Diamond Lockhart? Point guard, shooting guard, combo guard? At only 5-5 I am thinking probably point guard but I have not had the opportunity to see her play.

Very good point. She sees the floor very well, can drive and dish, hits the 15 foot jumper. With her, our half court offense would not bog down. She'd start for us right now.

[flyingMoose]

Leticia Romero's issue was totally different.

Well, I thought the question asked concerned eligibility-to-play. You point out that eligible-to-receive-a-scholarship is yet another issue. Letitia still had to sit out a year (just like Diamond) absent the hardship waiver.

[1972Shocker]

Well, I thought the question asked concerned eligibility-to-play. You point out that eligible-to-receive-a-scholarship is yet another issue. Letitia still had to sit out a year (just like Diamond) absent the hardship waiver.

I have no idea why that same scenario did not play out for Diamond. Probably someone more familiar with the NCAA regulations can expand/clarify.

Perhaps I expanded too much and clarified too little. My bad. Clearly KSU's refusal to initially release Romero was fundamentally a different situation than Diamond faced. However, you are correct in that once KSU reversed course the situations were the same other than the fact that Romero had to hire an attorney to fight KSU's decision not to release. Makes you wonder if the threat of legal action (a hardship for the NCAA after all) wasn't a factor in the NCAA's decision to allow Romero to play this year.

[WuDrWu]

Boy Loyola looks bad. They've only lost by fewer than 20 points twice since November....a 12 point overtime loss at Dartmouth and an eleven point loss at Mizzou. They're getting obliterated in conference play so far well, racking up losses by 26, 25 & 17 (oops, make that 3 games since November).

Bradley doesn't appear much better, with only a win over Mizzou preventing a 0-13 start. Illinois State has started O-fer but a mere 9 point loss to Southern gives a glimmer of hope for potential future success.

[1972Shocker]

Yeah, Loyola (RPI 278 ), Illinois State (RPI 311) and Bradley (RPI 339) are definitely going to be a drag on the RPI and make it very difficult to maintain an at-large worthy resume and that's assuming you win all 6 of those games. Lose 1 of them and you can forget about it.

[1972Shocker]

Boy Loyola looks bad. They've only lost by fewer than 20 points twice since November....a 12 point overtime loss at Dartmouth and an eleven point loss at Mizzou. They're getting obliterated in conference play so far well, racking up losses by 26, 25 & 17 (oops, make that 3 games since November).

Loyola lost at Indiana State today 64-37.

[RoyalShock]

Are the four Illinois schools that bad? Just perusing their records and scores it seems like other than SIU they are getting clobbered on a routine basis. ISU hasn't won a game. BU's only win was against Missouri, who doesn't look bad, making that one a head-scratcher.

Then I look at Drake, who is sitting 4-0 in conference (though they've only played the aforementioned IL schools, all blowouts) and being led by two sophs and two frosh. Are they that good? If so, they're going to be beasts for the next couple of years.

[RoyalShock]

I see there's some discussion of this above. I should have perused this thread a bit first.