Has Skal Labissiere been cleared by the NCAA yet?
- Thread starter preacher_tom
- Start date
This comes up every time there are eligibility questions for a player or rumored eligibility questions. In these cases (or in any case) the NCAA does not make a formal announcement that a player has been cleared. The process just moves along under scrutiny with the assumption that the player will be considered "cleared" once they are on campus enrolled taking classes and they begin to practice with the team at the beginning of the season as long as a formal hold is not put on the process in the meantime. There is never any actual announcement officially. In reality, leaks and the media will tip us off before the season begins if there are really any problems.
Skal's issues have never been academics. So enrolling in school should be fine.
The question for Skal is whether or not his Guardian did something to jeopardize his amateur status. For example, if his Guardian did something similar to Cliff Alexander's parents he may be ineligible due to amateur issues (or he may be suspended for a number of games). For the record, there are no solid allegations of any wrongdoing at this point. Only innuendo and rumors from jilted Memphis fans.
The question for Skal is whether or not his Guardian did something to jeopardize his amateur status. For example, if his Guardian did something similar to Cliff Alexander's parents he may be ineligible due to amateur issues (or he may be suspended for a number of games). For the record, there are no solid allegations of any wrongdoing at this point. Only innuendo and rumors from jilted Memphis fans.
People realize that no recruits have been "cleared" yet. Or you could look at it the other way that if a player is on scholarship and is accepted, there are no issues until proven otherwise.
I mean, why don't people ask the same question about any other recruit? None of them have been "cleared" under the context this question is being asked.
I mean, why don't people ask the same question about any other recruit? None of them have been "cleared" under the context this question is being asked.
We won't know until he suits up and plays a game. People ask this same question year after year for many players in question, but it's pointless. Schools don't announce if a player is eligible or not. I bet this same question gets asked 100+ more times here though.
Yes. I've pretty much declared any "Skal/eligibility" question at this point a troll thread and any of the OP's a troll. Ban them.
Is Tyler Ulis eligible? Let me know when UK makes an official announcement to advise us that his Freshman year academics are in-line and he's able to become a Sophomore.
Is Tyler Ulis eligible? Let me know when UK makes an official announcement to advise us that his Freshman year academics are in-line and he's able to become a Sophomore.
Then let me be the first to apologize. Because of some the commits I have read that there could be eligibility issues with him. I simply ask a question. Skal even said in a interview he expected to be clear by the NCAA.
Don't sweat it too much. Calling for a ban is a bit overboard.
You weren't the first, and you won't be the last poster to ask this question. We won't hear anything official until closer to Big Blue Madness. Keep in mind though, that UK will not discuss eligibility concerns. The rule of thumb is: no news is good news. Now if we get to the start of practice and find out that Skal is being held out, then we can start worrying a little.
He is already on our roster and is a part of the team, so there is nothing to clear. The only thing that can happen is him being ruled ineligible. The NCAA won't say anything unless he is ineligible so no news means everything is okay.
If there were any legit issues UK would not have accepted his commitment.
UK & Michigan St. backed off of Cliff Alexander last year knowing something didn't smell right...and that's the truth.
UK & Michigan St. backed off of Cliff Alexander last year knowing something didn't smell right...and that's the truth.
Impressive that you dug up this old thread from May and responded to it with your first post ever.
For the record, Kanter's issues weren't "legit" so he might actually still agree with that statement.
