Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cletus_Tucker

Suriano, the move is off?

Recommended Posts

Even if true, it still doesn't get around Big Ten rules.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It helps if PSU promises to support a waiver request. He still has to sit a year but doesn't lose a year of eligibility on top.

 

I think I'm right about that - aren't I?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Edited by Jasonmitchell32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It helps if PSU promises to support a waiver request. He still has to sit a year but doesn't lose a year of eligibility on top.

 

I think I'm right about that - aren't I?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

I thought that he didn't have to sit out a year if he got the waiver, but I'm no expert on the Big 10 rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised Suriano ever entertained the idea of attending Rutgers considering the following:

  1. The university's founding fathers were slaveholders.
  2. New Jersey was one of the three largest slaveholding states outside of the South.
  3. Much of Rutgers University's history is built on a foundation of oppression and exploitation.

I wonder where he'll transfer to after Rutgers is dismantled and razed to the ground.

 

P.S. I wouldn't bring this up, but since ESPN just pulled announcer Robert Lee from the Sept. 2nd Virginia vs. William & Mary football telecast, I'm beginning to think its not too far-fetched.  According to the Washington Times, ESPN was concerned that having an announcer named Robert Lee "would be offensive to some viewers."  (This despite the fact that Robert Lee is of Asian ancestry.)

 

https://muckgers.com/slavery-academia-a-troubled-history-of-rutgers-university-e31b3c2f0f88

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/22/espn-pulls-announcer-robert-lee-university-virgini/

 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if true, it still doesn't get around Big Ten rules.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Sure it does. Penn State wouldn't offer this deal if they weren't able to get around the Big Ten issue.

 

It means Penn State told him they would ensure he is able to wrestle at Rutgers without losing a year if they get another year from him.

 

Which means they weren't giving him the full release they have the power to grant him.

 

This sounds like blackmail to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure it does. Penn State wouldn't offer this deal if they weren't able to get around the Big Ten issue.

 

It means Penn State told him they would ensure he is able to wrestle at Rutgers without losing a year if they get another year from him.

 

Which means they weren't giving him the full release they have the power to grant him.

 

This sounds like blackmail to me.

 

f67334bc58f2468bad15312669d5edaa0afe4c44

Edited by PSUMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 As a Penn State fan, if this is true I don't like it. If the kid would rather be somewhere else he should be. I wouldn't want a kid in the room that wasn't 100% in. I know it is easy for me to say as my check isn't riding on anyone's performance, but I would think Cael has enough cache that it doesn't matter to him either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure it does. Penn State wouldn't offer this deal if they weren't able to get around the Big Ten issue.

 

It means Penn State told him they would ensure he is able to wrestle at Rutgers without losing a year if they get another year from him.

 

Which means they weren't giving him the full release they have the power to grant him.

 

This sounds like blackmail to me.

 

 

You're choosing to assume Penn State offered the deal.  Is it black mail if the offer came from the Suriano camp?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No difference, it just depends of who you think gets the better side of the deal.

 

It's a huge win/win for both sides.   

 

Penn state stands to have a big hole in the line up at 125

 

Suriano stands to lose a year of eligibility.   

 

I suppose Suriano gets the better deal as Penn State has more than 2 years remaining.   Suriano is the one who loses eligibility that he can never get back.    

 

That said, I don't see this as the Suriano's black mailing Penn State since they get the better deal here.         Help me to view this from your perspective.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure it does. Penn State wouldn't offer this deal if they weren't able to get around the Big Ten issue.

 

It means Penn State told him they would ensure he is able to wrestle at Rutgers without losing a year if they get another year from him.

 

Which means they weren't giving him the full release they have the power to grant him.

 

This sounds like blackmail to me.

I don't believe the supposed deal exists for this very reason. Penn State does not have the power to overrule Big Ten bylaws, no matter what random forum posters claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised Suriano ever entertained the idea of attending Rutgers considering the following:

  • The university's founding fathers were slaveholders.
  • New Jersey was one of the three largest slaveholding states outside of the South.
  • Much of Rutgers University's history is built on a foundation of oppression and exploitation.
I wonder where he'll transfer to after Rutgers is dismantled and razed to the ground.

 

P.S. I wouldn't bring this up, but since ESPN just pulled announcer Robert Lee from the Sept. 2nd Virginia vs. William & Mary football telecast, I'm beginning to think its not too far-fetched. According to the Washington Times, ESPN was concerned that having an announcer named Robert Lee "would be offensive to some viewers." (This despite the fact that Robert Lee is of Asian ancestry.)

 

https://muckgers.com/slavery-academia-a-troubled-history-of-rutgers-university-e31b3c2f0f88

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/22/espn-pulls-announcer-robert-lee-university-virgini/

Interesting and good to know cause I never knew that about Rutgers or New Jersey but I don't think it played a part. Saying that about Suriano and Rutgers is like saying a kid that isn't white shouldn't play for Alabama or Mississippi colleges cause they were huge confederate states...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe the supposed deal exists for this very reason. Penn State does not have the power to overrule Big Ten bylaws, no matter what random forum posters claim.

 

If the deal exists and is proven to play out will you agree that Penn State was deceitful in not giving him the full release they said they would give him? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Penn State either gave him a release or lied in a press release where they said he was already given a release.

 

It does not matter what Penn State says to anyone; they cannot overrule Big Ten bylaws.

 

I don't think anyone is saying they would be "overruling Big 10 bylaws," but apparently there is precedent showing that if the former school supports the Big 10 waiver, it is likely that they won't lose the year of eligibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few separate relevant releases. They released him to transfer subject to other rules. I assume they previously gave him a release to talk to other schools.

This release is about forgoing his PSU scholarship (we're not 100% sure what that really means here).

And I should add there is a release (not given here to my knowledge since B1G rules apply rather than NCAA) to be immediately eligible rather than taking the year in residence.

Edited by gimpeltf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone is saying they would be "overruling Big 10 bylaws," but apparently there is precedent showing that if the former school supports the Big 10 waiver, it is likely that they won't lose the year of eligibility.

 

Funny how all those who were exempted had graduated from their first school and were not made after their freshmen year.

 

Do you really think the Big Ten wants to set precedent in granting exemptions to underclassmen wrestlers when football and basketball players/coaches/teams and television contracts drive the conference?

 

I highly doubt they want a wrestler to open the door for revenue sport transfers when they changed the rules in 2012 to include the year of residency.

 

The only way i see them changing is if a court or the NCAA tells them to. 

Edited by KSchlosser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He released himself...Was going lose the spot regardless...133 was an option but not what folks wanted!!!

 

P.S. The PSU "Train"!!!

Hey genius, who was taking his spot? This should be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...