NCAA was going to start looking at the appeal today....Conference call between ISU and NCAA set for Dec 18....What takes so long, I don't know...That's all the information I have.
Question about Lucca Ruling today
- Thread starter BryceC
- Start date
NCAA was going to start looking at the appeal today....Conference call between ISU and NCAA set for Dec 18....What takes so long, I don't know...That's all the information I have.
Did the rule change or did the designation of who interprets the the rule change? I could be wrong, but my understanding is that it is the latter.
I haven't seen any clear explanation of the entire case from either the NCAA or ISU. What I have seen is that the NCAA calls it a long standing rule. There was a push to amend the rule in 2001, but it was rejected by member schools. Supposedly no change since at least that time so probably no help for Lucca's cause. I believe that what has happened is that the NCAA clearing house now has the responsibility to determine compliance with the rule. Previously each school basically made their own determination - supposedly with a very favorable slant in favor of their own interests. Hence the change to involve the compliance committee to achieve more consistent interpretation.
The reason for the pessimism is that the existing rule has supposedly been enforced properly thus far. Member schools (not the NCAA) have chosen not to modify the rule. The only appeal at this point is to admit guilt while asking for special dispensation. The easy out for an appeal committee is to take a firm stance. When they start to deviate, it raises the question of how past appeals have been decided as well as the impact on future appeals.
The only chance I see is to allow a phase-in of the stricter interpretation that takes into account past cases where schools wrongly certified their own players.
I wouldn't get your hopes up. Having this review board go against the NCAA's initial ruling would be highly unlikely. I think this is just a token so the suits in Indy can say they have an appeal process. If you look at the cross section of the board, they aren't exactly power brokers in collegiate athletics. I hope I'm wrong, but like others have said, expecting nothing.
Like others have said, I wouldn't get your hopes up. Even if they did lessen the suspension, I doubt we'd see him until the middle of Big 12 play. I don't think they'd let him back early enough for the conference opener based on everything so far.
