PDA

View Full Version : Angel Nunez



seacatfan
09-17-2014, 02:57 PM
So according to a story on the Spokesman Review's splash page, he lost an appeal and is now listed as a Sr. Uh oh, that wasn't the plan. If he doesn't get an extra year of eligibility restored, his GU career might be fairly nondescript.

Zagdawg
09-17-2014, 03:02 PM
He has this year to shine when he gets on the floor-- I am not going to close the book on him before he has an opportunity to play in a game his senior year.

exclusivelee
09-17-2014, 03:53 PM
This seems like a crooked situation. How exactly is Nunez's situation any different from that of Matt Carlino?

Nunez did not get to play any games as a sophomore while he was at Louisville. He suffered an injury (concussion) during preseason which sidelined him. He transferred from Lousiville after the conclusion of his Fall 2012 classes and immediately started classes at Gonzaga for Spring 2013, sitting out a full season until after the conclusion of Fall 2013 semester classes.

I thought the only question would be whether Nunez could still get 3 years of eligibility remaining at the start of the 2013-14 season. How do they decide to steal a year of eligibility away and allow him only 1.5 years?

DixieZag
09-17-2014, 05:40 PM
The story actually raises more questions (for me) than answers. Somehow, at least at this point, this is the WCC's decision: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/sep/17/now-gonzagas-nunez-listed-senior/

The Bulldogs’ waiver appeal was denied by the WCC months ago, said Shannon Strahl, Gonzaga associate athletic director and compliance coordinator. Strahl said HIPPA laws prevent her from commenting on why Nunez’s appeal was denied.

I had no idea that the conference had a thing to do with it.

Strahl said Nunez shouldn’t have been listed as a redshirt sophomore last season because he competed in the year in which he transferred.

Gonzaga is in the process of “gathering information for an NCAA appeal,” Strahl said, “but we don’t have any precedent to put his case forward. So we’re being very methodical with it and seeing what kind of case we can put forward.”

This isn't that novel. He played in a couple of exhibition games, was devastatingly injured and then transferred. I guess the question is how much the Exhibition games will be counted against him, but that's not something that's never happened before. I'm confused, some here will know a lot more.

Reborn
09-17-2014, 05:55 PM
I believe he will win his appeal. Why wouldn't he?

Mantua
09-17-2014, 09:16 PM
Who exactly in the WCC is making the decision?



(Who is carrying a grudge?)

hooter73
09-17-2014, 09:39 PM
Who exactly in the WCC is making the decision?



(Who is carrying a grudge?)


ding ding ding...

ZagaZags
09-17-2014, 10:16 PM
ding ding ding...

I doubt this will stick. We should see Nunez for 2 more years.

zag67
09-18-2014, 05:31 AM
For his sake I hope they make it right. He deserves the chance to play. Good luck this year and hope we see you next year

Zagcity
09-18-2014, 06:23 AM
For his sake I hope they make it right. He deserves the chance to play. Good luck this year and hope we see you next year


Amen

hooter73
09-18-2014, 07:33 AM
He absolutely deserves the opportunity to be eligible. Grant Gibbs got what, like six years of actually playing time but Angel gets two and a half?

willandi
09-18-2014, 08:04 AM
If they can find out who, in the WCC, is responsible, they should be able to find out why. I would think that w/o massive reasons (which I don't see existing) it should cost them their position...at least as how it pertains to having a vote in matters such as this. It really is supposed to be about the student athletes, not the competing programs.

However, I can see a situation such as the Heytvelt situation where several schools complained about illegal contact, and GU was singled out for animosity.

hooter73
09-18-2014, 09:53 AM
Exactly, its the same thinking as rich people have enough money, lets take them down a peg! If this is really a WCC thing then we've already seen other issues (like last years schedule) trying to "balance" the league, keep it "fair"... what a bunch of crap. No way anyone loses their job over it either like they should. There is no accountability for ridiculous busybody-ing.

ZionZag
09-18-2014, 10:40 AM
Right on Hoots..........you know your S--T


Exactly, its the same thinking as rich people have enough money, lets take them down a peg! If this is really a WCC thing then we've already seen other issues (like last years schedule) trying to "balance" the league, keep it "fair"... what a bunch of crap. No way anyone loses their job over it either like they should. There is no accountability for ridiculous busybody-ing.

RenoZag
09-18-2014, 11:15 AM
http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i/grab-a-pitchfork-and-flaming-torch.png

seacatfan
09-18-2014, 11:42 AM
As much as GU's conference brethren may dislike them for their dominance, where would the WCC be without the Zags? Completely off the radar, no games at all on TV other than the conference tourney. GU has done their best to drag the rest of the conference up. Thanks for nothing I guess. I mean St. Mary's has had some good teams. Pepperdine used to back in the day. BYU coming on board certainly changed things. I wonder if that would've even happened though without Gonzaga being Gonzaga? Anyway my point is in the current age of saturation of college sports on TV, I think the WCC would be out in the cold if Gonzaga hadn't started their run in the late 90's. They would essentially be like the Big West or Big Sky. Don't see many of their games on TV during the regular season. Okay, rant over.

VaBeachZAG
09-18-2014, 12:15 PM
As much as GU's conference brethren may dislike them for their dominance, where would the WCC be without the Zags? Completely off the radar, no games at all on TV other than the conference tourney. GU has done their best to drag the rest of the conference up. Thanks for nothing I guess. I mean St. Mary's has had some good teams. Pepperdine used to back in the day. BYU coming on board certainly changed things. I wonder if that would've even happened though without Gonzaga being Gonzaga? Anyway my point is in the current age of saturation of college sports on TV, I think the WCC would be out in the cold if Gonzaga hadn't started their run in the late 90's. They would essentially be like the Big West or Big Sky. Don't see many of their games on TV during the regular season. Okay, rant over.

Hardly a rant. More like unadulterated truth!

gonzagafan62
09-18-2014, 12:25 PM
Angel Nunez should be playing the next two seasons. Nuff said. This is a load of crap.

seacatfan
09-18-2014, 01:37 PM
Hardly a rant. More like unadulterated truth!

I realized I should probably make note of Santa Clara beating a highly seeded Arizona team (dang it!) in the NCAA Tourney behind Steve Nash and even more so LMU's run for a couple years during the Westhead era when they were scoring 100 ppg, plus Gather's tragic death and Kimble's stirring tribute to him that brought some national recognition to the WCC. But certainly Gonzaga has done it for a sustained period of time that no other WCC school can rival.

primal23
09-18-2014, 01:49 PM
What I don't understand, what's the WCC doing in this? Isn't eligibility given from the NCAA?

USF
09-18-2014, 02:01 PM
. But certainly Gonzaga has done it for a sustained period of time that no other WCC school can rival.

In the grand scheme of things, no WCC school will ever approach what USF has accomplished historically.

11 Sweet Sixteen Appearances.
7 Elite 8s (1955, 1956, 1957, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1974)
3 consecutive Final 4s (1955, 1956, 1957) Yes, the year AFTER Russel left.
2 National Championships.

Most WCC fans think that USF only won 60 years ago. But USF dominated the WC(A)C throughout the 1960s and 1970's, culminating with a No. 1 ranking in 1977.

LongIslandZagFan
09-18-2014, 02:13 PM
In the grand scheme of things, no WCC school will ever approach what USF has accomplished historically.

11 Sweet Sixteen Appearances.
7 Elite 8s (1955, 1956, 1957, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1974)
3 consecutive Final 4s (1955, 1956, 1957) Yes, the year AFTER Russel left.
2 National Championships.

Most WCC fans think that USF only won 60 years ago. But USF dominated the WC(A)C throughout the 1960s and 1970's, culminating with a No. 1 ranking in 1977.

Lets be realistic...

Most of those 11 S16s are the equivalent of second round games today. ALL were prior to the modern era. Comparing 1950s and 60s basketball with today is like comparing apples to oranges. It is a practice of living in the deep past. A better way to look at it is this... if a majority of your "glory days" are anywhere from 40-60 years ago... they aren't relevant. If it were the Zags I'd say the same thing. Also much of the greatness in the 1970s is what lead to the death penalty in 1982... just sayin'.

Zippyzaggy
09-18-2014, 02:23 PM
Plus 1. No comparison.

USF
09-18-2014, 02:26 PM
So what you're saying is that all NCAA basketball before 1999 is irrelevant? And I'm surprised that you mentioned the "death penalty". I think you know better. Fr. LoSchiavo voluntarily shut down the program. USF never received the death penalty.

You dismiss USF's accomplishments as "ancient history" and yet you still talk about almost beating Arizona in the Elite 8 16 years ago. Some people think that's living "in the deep past".

You have been to ONE Elite 8. So has LMU. USF has been to 7. Yeah, I know, they don't count. And UCLA championships of the 60's should all be forfeited.

MTZag03
09-18-2014, 02:34 PM
USF has provided some excellent insight into the Angel Nunez eligibility situation.

Zagdawg
09-18-2014, 02:38 PM
Living vicariously through your grandparents is not a bad thing-- and it is cute the way the 5 fans over at dawns central pound their chests and say "see what happened" 50+ years ago.

Lets bring it forward into the present .......at least our life times so we can continue with this discussion about Mr. Nunez.

USF
09-18-2014, 02:42 PM
I have no idea what happened to Angel Nunez, but his eligibility has nothing to do with any WCC school. The NCAA doesn't need help screwing kids over. This is the risk school take with transfers. Lots of paperwork, especially if you claim medical or other "hardship".

seacatfan
09-18-2014, 03:44 PM
I didn't mention USF's accomplishments because as noted it wasn't during the modern era of basketball. I actually remember watching LMU on ESPN when Gathers and Kimble could both go off for 30+ any given game...maybe even in the same game. Past accomplishments still count (ask UCLA fans about that), but it was a different era. Somewhere between all the hype of the Magic Johnson-Larry Bird title game matchup, the creation of ESPN and more regular season games being broadcast on TV, and probably some other key events, it's hardly even the same sport as it was prior to then.

DixieZag
09-18-2014, 05:42 PM
Can someone explain why the WCC had any say in this whatsoever?

It is obvious that it is not the final say, but I didn't know the conference had a thing to do with it. I thought these things were done directly to main HQ in Indiana or Montlake or wherever the hell they meet now.

RenoZag
09-18-2014, 05:46 PM
For the courageous few who have no problem with me posting, I say thank you. For those who are obviously afraid of see differing opinions aired on your board, I say goodbye and good luck. Go Dons!

USF, 5/22/2014

Promises, promises. . .

229SintoZag
09-18-2014, 06:37 PM
I am as big a Gonzaga fan as anyone here.

For the record, I do not need to bag on USF's prior glory or minimize it to be proud of the modern Gonzaga program or its accomplishments.

USF's two national titles, three final fours, etc., are all commendable and worthy of note, not derision. Yes, they happened long ago, but back then we still had gravity; the hoops were still 10 feet off the floor, and the dimensions of the court were the same. Yes, there was no shot clock or three point stripe, but the game was still the same basic game.

To those who would deride or dismiss the USF teams during their heyday, I respectfully disagree with you. They beat the best of the best and won a title two years running and were in three final fours. Perhaps we ought to make one final four before we start running our mouths here. Think about it people.

Zagdawg
09-18-2014, 07:14 PM
There is a time and a place for everything -- if we are talking about Angel and his eligibility and if we get off topic to talk about how great USF hoops was-- probably not going to get a whole lot of traction from the board in this specific thread.

USF was a fine program in its day-- now back to the regularly scheduled programing.....Mr. Nunez.

Hoping that he is granted one more year with the appeal.

SunDevilGolfZag
09-18-2014, 07:37 PM
In the grand scheme of things, no WCC school will ever approach what USF has accomplished historically.

11 Sweet Sixteen Appearances.
7 Elite 8s (1955, 1956, 1957, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1974)
3 consecutive Final 4s (1955, 1956, 1957) Yes, the year AFTER Russel left.
2 National Championships.

Most WCC fans think that USF only won 60 years ago. But USF dominated the WC(A)C throughout the 1960s and 1970's, culminating with a No. 1 ranking in 1977.

The old saying "What have you done for me lately" comes right to mind

LongIslandZagFan
09-18-2014, 07:40 PM
I am as big a Gonzaga fan as anyone here.

For the record, I do not need to bag on USF's prior glory or minimize it to be proud of the modern Gonzaga program or its accomplishments.

USF's two national titles, three final fours, etc., are all commendable and worthy of note, not derision. Yes, they happened long ago, but back then we still had gravity; the hoops were still 10 feet off the floor, and the dimensions of the court were the same. Yes, there was no shot clock or three point stripe, but the game was still the same basic game.

To those who would deride or dismiss the USF teams during their heyday, I respectfully disagree with you. They beat the best of the best and won a title two years running and were in three final fours. Perhaps we ought to make one final four before we start running our mouths here. Think about it people.

There is dismissing and there is relevance. My argument is that you cannot compare the game and the tournament back then to the modern era and those years are great for them and I respect what they did. But style and pace of play, tournament structure, level of ability and even basic rules of the game are not the same.

LongIslandZagFan
09-18-2014, 07:47 PM
So what you're saying is that all NCAA basketball before 1999 is irrelevant? And I'm surprised that you mentioned the "death penalty". I think you know better. Fr. LoSchiavo voluntarily shut down the program. USF never received the death penalty.

You dismiss USF's accomplishments as "ancient history" and yet you still talk about almost beating Arizona in the Elite 8 16 years ago. Some people think that's living "in the deep past".

You have been to ONE Elite 8. So has LMU. USF has been to 7. Yeah, I know, they don't count. And UCLA championships of the 60's should all be forfeited.

Self imposed DP... yes... but the DP nonetheless.

Before the tourney expansion is a good line of demarcation. Style, size, rules (many of them including scoring), speed, across the board ability level is not the same. Not even close. Wasn't 16 years ago... but yeah we can talk about it, it may be a closer reference point, but in many ways it has little to do with the Zag team of this year in some ways. BUT, they are relevant in much the same way what USF did in the 50s impacted what it did in the 60s and 70s. There is groundwork and foundation being laid. But if the Zags dropped off for a decade or more and then started to get good again.. then the relevance of the earlier years means very little. Does that make more sense?

MTZag03
09-18-2014, 09:00 PM
There is a time and a place for everything -- if we are talking about Angel and his eligibility and if we get off topic to talk about how great USF hoops was-- probably not going to get a whole lot of traction from the board in this specific thread.

USF was a fine program in its day-- now back to the regularly scheduled programing.....Mr. Nunez.

Hoping that he is granted one more year with the appeal.

That was what I was trying to say with my earlier post. No offense to USF. USF was an amazing program for a stretch. GU has been more relevant recently. Okay, that's all that needs to be said there. Let's move on with Angel.

Hijacking = bad

As for Angel, I really don't see how they can take a whole year of eligibility from him. He played like a month out of the entire year and somehow loses a full year? If some school in the WCC was advocating for that I don't really see how that is conscionable. Here's to the appeal.

KStyles
09-18-2014, 09:27 PM
Found it.

Angel participated in the first (http://www.gocards.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2012-2013/exhib01.html) and second (http://www.gocards.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2012-2013/exhib02.html) exhibition games in 2012. Only players in their initial year of enrollment at the institution are allowed to participate in exhibitions without having them count as a year of eligibility. That was his second year at Louisville. Therefore by participating in competition that year, 2012 then became his 2nd of 4 years, and last year, 2013, would've been his 3rd year.



14.2.3.1 Minimum Amount of Competition. Any competition, regardless of time, during a season in an intercollegiate sport shall be counted as a season of competition in that sport, except as provided in Bylaws 14.2.3.1.1, 14.2.3.1.2, 14.2.3.1.3 and 14.2.3.1.4. This provision is applicable to intercollegiate athletics competition conducted by a two-year or four-year collegiate institution at the varsity or subvarsity level. (Revised: 1/11/94, 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05, 5/9/06, 1/16/10 effective 8/1/10)

14.2.3.1.3 Preseason Exhibitions/Preseason Practice Scrimmages During Initial Year. During a student-athlete’s initial year of enrollment at the certifying institution, he or she may compete in preseason exhibition contests and preseason practice scrimmages (as permitted in the particular sport per Bylaw 17) without counting such competition as a season of competition. (Revised: 5/9/06)

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D115AUG.pdf

These are NCAA rules though, not WCC. Not sure where the WCC plays into this. Hopefully he can still swing another year out of this with the appeal.

ZagaZags
09-18-2014, 09:41 PM
Found it.

Angel participated in the first (http://www.gocards.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2012-2013/exhib01.html) and second (http://www.gocards.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2012-2013/exhib02.html) exhibition games in 2012. Only players in their initial year of enrollment at the institution are allowed to participate in exhibitions without having them count as a year of eligibility. That was his second year at Louisville. Therefore by participating in competition that year, 2012 then became his 2nd of 4 years, and last year, 2013, would've been his 3rd year.



These are NCAA rules though, not WCC. Not sure where the WCC plays into this. Hopefully he can still swing another year out of this with the appeal.

Not sure why they won't give him a medical redshirt for his sophomore season. Grant Gibbs played forever.

exclusivelee
09-19-2014, 08:16 AM
Remember at the beginning of last season when Josh Smith was awarded 2 more years of eligibility after transferring from UCLA to Georgetown?

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/23/ucla-transfer-joshua-smith-eligible-to-play-immediately-at-georgetown/

Josh Smith arrived as a freshman at UCLA in 2010 where he played 2.5 seasons, transferred to Georgetown after the Fall 2012 semester.

The NCAA granted Josh Smith 2 more years of eligibility at the start of the 2013-14 season. Smith then had academic issues which kept him off the court for many games last season

Here's his stats from Sports Reference:

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/joshua-smith-1.html

229SintoZag
09-19-2014, 09:31 AM
There is dismissing and there is relevance. My argument is that you cannot compare the game and the tournament back then to the modern era and those years are great for them and I respect what they did. But style and pace of play, tournament structure, level of ability and even basic rules of the game are not the same.

That may be true, but if you think Bill Russell's USF teams would not give today's Zags a game, you are unwittingly unaware of your temporal bias.

My guess is that you think today's players are bigger, faster, stronger, and better than the players back then. This is not the case--Bill Russell would be WCC Player of the Year today, every year. The WCC has not produced one single player in the entirety of Gonzaga's run since 1999 who is an overall better player than Russell.

Players back then also had better fundamentals than today's players. This is true even into the 70s. Look at old video of guys like Pistol Pete and tell me one player over the past 20 years that had anything close to his skills, court vision, etc. There is none. Not one. Nobody is even close.

Every generation thinks that they are the best, the top, the culmination of all that came before, as if it is inevitable that we only make progress, and never regress, as time goes on. This is not the case. John Wooden, in 2006, said that Bill Russell was by far the best defensive player he had ever seen. I trust his judgment over the amateur hour armchair experts on this board.

titopoet
09-19-2014, 09:55 AM
That may be true, but if you think Bill Russell's USF teams would not give today's Zags a game, you are unwittingly unaware of your temporal bias.

My guess is that you think today's players are bigger, faster, stronger, and better than the players back then. This is not the case--Bill Russell would be WCC Player of the Year today, every year. The WCC has not produced one single player in the entirety of Gonzaga's run since 1999 who is an overall better player than Russell.

Players back then also had better fundamentals than today's players. This is true even into the 70s. Look at old video of guys like Pistol Pete and tell me one player over the past 20 years that had anything close to his skills, court vision, etc. There is none. Not one. Nobody is even close.

Every generation thinks that they are the best, the top, the culmination of all that came before, as if it is inevitable that we only make progress, and never regress, as time goes on. This is not the case. John Wooden, in 2006, said that Bill Russell was by far the best defensive player he had ever seen. I trust his judgment over the amateur hour armchair experts on this board.

I Love Pistol Pete, but I can name several. You are right in saying there is a temporal bias but it goes both ways. Man people think the bygone era was better, but the truth is that each era produces their great players. The skills of Lebron dwarf those of Pistol, as well as those of Dirk. Tim Duncan is no slouch either and his fundamentals are as good as anyone whose ever played the game. Russell was a defensive guru and would be an allstar today. Pistol had troubles in the NBA. He was a great player, but he would struggle in today's NBA as he did in his own era.

maynard g krebs
09-19-2014, 10:28 AM
Man(y) people think the bygone era was better

Pistol had troubles in the NBA.

Second point first. Maravich averaged 24.2 points, 5.4 assists and 4.1 rebounds over a ten year NBA career. Multiple times first team all NBA, Naismith Hall of Fame, number retired by both Atlanta and New Orleans. Averaged about 27 from his third year until his knee problems. I guess you could mean by "troubles" that his teams didn't win a lot, but other than Lou Hudson and Truck Robinson, he had little talent around him. Lebron is bigger, stronger, and faster, but his ability to do things with a basketball is not in the same league.

First point. The game peaked in quality in the 70's and 80's. Some years ago I heard an interview with Lionel Hollins when he was an asst coach w/ Vancouver. He said, paraphrasing, "we have to coach differently because players today don't have the skills we had". And it's true. Kids growing up before the 80's generally understood the game is based on cutting, screening, and passing. You can see it on the grass roots level all the way to the top. To an old timer like me who still plays pickup, it's frustrating as hell playing with people who stand around watching each other go one on one. Hollins' Blazer team, and the other great teams of the 70s-80s would run clinics on today's teams (IF, and it's a big if, the game was officiated as it was then.)

229SintoZag
09-19-2014, 10:55 AM
I Love Pistol Pete, but I can name several. You are right in saying there is a temporal bias but it goes both ways. Man people think the bygone era was better, but the truth is that each era produces their great players. The skills of Lebron dwarf those of Pistol, as well as those of Dirk. Tim Duncan is no slouch either and his fundamentals are as good as anyone whose ever played the game. Russell was a defensive guru and would be an allstar today. Pistol had troubles in the NBA. He was a great player, but he would struggle in today's NBA as he did in his own era.

I am not sure you and I agree on the definition of "skills."

I have no doubt LeBron is skilled, and I have no doubt he is bigger, faster, and stronger than Maravich.

But to claim he is more skilled than Pistol Pete is just absurd. Nobody with two working eyes who saw what Maravich could do with the rock--dribbling, passing, scoring--could make such a claim. Tim Hardaway has nothing on Pistol Pete's crossover.

mattydog73
09-19-2014, 11:16 AM
"The skills of Lebron dwarf those of Pistol...." "He was a great player, but he would struggle in today's NBA as he did in his own era.".

wow. just wow.

titopoet
09-19-2014, 11:35 AM
I am not sure you and I agree on the definition of "skills."

I have no doubt LeBron is skilled, and I have no doubt he is bigger, faster, and stronger than Maravich.

But to claim he is more skilled than Pistol Pete is just absurd. Nobody with two working eyes who saw what Maravich could do with the rock--dribbling, passing, scoring--could make such a claim. Tim Hardaway has nothing on Pistol Pete's crossover.

Lebron is also a better rebounder and defender (he defend 4 position Pete what a one on a good day, most days it was a half a position) Lebron is also a better passer, he can go inside or outside, post, drive, dish and shot out to three. His mid-range game is also far more polished with a variety of runners. Pete was a great player, but to claim that he is more skilled player than the most skilled player today? Lebron, and take his ego for what it is, is one of the greatest skilled players and belong on the list that includes MJ Oscar, Magic, Bird and Dr. J. Pete is nowhere near that level.

Kiddwell
09-19-2014, 11:39 AM
Who's the "big" who went from UCLA to Georgetown last year? No wait period. He played right off. Despite being a transfer. Also, someone earlier mentioned Grant Gibbs progressing into middle age at Creighton. (Last year Gibbs was 37 years old, for Pete's sakes.)

Given the two examples above, it sure seems to this fan that Angel should be given a concession: junior status. He's not a senior, WCC. He's a redshirt Junior.

The End. :explode:



:[

seacatfan
09-19-2014, 12:33 PM
I think I kind of derailed my own thread. As to USF and Final 4's and National Titles and Bill Russell, etc.--they accomplished things Gonzaga has not. I give them credit for that. If I seemed dismissive, I was mostly referring to the current age of television exposure, especially on ESPN, which is very important. USF's dominance in the 60's has zero bearing on that. GU's emergence in the late 90's does. That was my point.

jazzdelmar
09-19-2014, 12:39 PM
In the grand scheme of things, no WCC school will ever approach what USF has accomplished historically.

11 Sweet Sixteen Appearances.
7 Elite 8s (1955, 1956, 1957, 1964, 1965, 1973, 1974)
3 consecutive Final 4s (1955, 1956, 1957) Yes, the year AFTER Russel left.
2 National Championships.

Most WCC fans think that USF only won 60 years ago. But USF dominated the WC(A)C throughout the 1960s and 1970's, culminating with a No. 1 ranking in 1977.


All due respect, that's the Mesozoic age in college sports.

sittingon50
09-19-2014, 02:23 PM
Lebron is also a better rebounder and defender (he defend 4 position Pete what a one on a good day, most days it was a half a position) Lebron is also a better passer, he can go inside or outside, post, drive, dish and shot out to three. His mid-range game is also far more polished with a variety of runners. Pete was a great player, but to claim that he is more skilled player than the most skilled player today? Lebron, and take his ego for what it is, is one of the greatest skilled players and belong on the list that includes MJ Oscar, Magic, Bird and Dr. J. Pete is nowhere near that level.

Lebron a better passer? Are you dinging Pete for all the passes that bounced off teammates heads? I don't think this one is even close. JMO.

webspinnre
09-19-2014, 02:36 PM
In the 50s making the Sweet 16 meant you won a single game. In the 70s, depending on seeding, Elite 8 means winning either one or two games. That's the equivalent of making it to the round of 32 these days. Just saying they aren't the same.

The national titles are impressive, as are the final 4s, but it's a whole different era, and comparing across eras is tricky. I've got nothing against USF, and they deserve recognition for what they accomplished, but I'm not sure how what they did then is relevant to where they're at now.

Shanachie
09-19-2014, 02:42 PM
And now back to our regularly scheduled thread.


Not sure why they won't give him a medical redshirt for his sophomore season. Grant Gibbs played forever.

I think that the answer lies in the article linked at the beginning of this thread. Two quotes from that article:


Strahl said HIPPA laws prevent her from commenting on why Nunez’s appeal was denied.
...
Gonzaga is in the process of “gathering information for an NCAA appeal,” Strahl said, “but we don’t have any precedent to put his case forward. So we’re being very methodical with it and seeing what kind of case we can put forward.”

Reading between the lines, it looks to me like the issue is whether Angel was (or should have been) medically cleared to play in the spring of 2013. If he was medically unable to play the rest of the season after his injury, it seems that an argument for another year of eligibility would be warranted. However, if he had recovered and was medically cleared while the season was still in progress, he would likely not get medical redshirt. The mid-year transfer complicates the issue. Since he couldn't play at GU in the spring of '13 due to transfer rules, there was no incentive to have him cleared at that time. My guess is that the denial of his request for an additional year centers around that issue.

CaliforniaZaggin'
09-19-2014, 02:54 PM
Rob Sacre played in legit games during his sophomore year and got a medical redshirt. Seems like same rule/exception/whatever can be applied here.

Time to lawyer up, GU.

GoZags
09-19-2014, 03:57 PM
So IOW where it appears some guys can get 2 total years of redshirt (even if they've played part of a year ... i.e. a regular redshirt year and a medical redshirt year in a season where they've played) the WCC has taken the position that Angel should get zero total years of redshirt. Right.


And now back to our regularly scheduled thread.



I think that the answer lies in the article linked at the beginning of this thread. Two quotes from that article:



Reading between the lines, it looks to me like the issue is whether Angel was (or should have been) medically cleared to play in the spring of 2013. If he was medically unable to play the rest of the season after his injury, it seems that an argument for another year of eligibility would be warranted. However, if he had recovered and was medically cleared while the season was still in progress, he would likely not get medical redshirt. The mid-year transfer complicates the issue. Since he couldn't play at GU in the spring of '13 due to transfer rules, there was no incentive to have him cleared at that time. My guess is that the denial of his request for an additional year centers around that issue.

maynard g krebs
09-19-2014, 04:06 PM
the WCC has taken the position that Angel should get zero total years of redshirt. Right.

I have never heard of the conference having a say in these matters, as others have mentioned in the thread. It would be interesting to know if any of the insiders like you, Bob, Angelo or a few others know anything about why we're hearing about the conference being involved in this particular case. Sounds really funny.

GoZags
09-19-2014, 04:35 PM
I have never heard of the conference having a say in these matters, as others have mentioned in the thread. It would be interesting to know if any of the insiders like you, Bob, Angelo or a few others know anything about why we're hearing about the conference being involved in this particular case. Sounds really funny.

I've "asked the question" but the "cone of silence" vis a vis this topic seems to be actually working (unlike how it worked for Maxwell Smart and The Chief).

ZagaZags
09-20-2014, 07:16 AM
I've "asked the question" but the "cone of silence" vis a vis this topic seems to be actually working (unlike how it worked for Maxwell Smart and The Chief).

http://hilobrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/cone-of-silence.jpg

I hope and pray this isn't the last season for Angel Nunez.

vandalzag
09-20-2014, 07:20 AM
Wow Nunez, to USF, to Bill Russel vs Lebron vs Pistol Pete...this thread is everywhere. Speaking of that smoked turkey vs oven roasted turkey for Thanksgiving pros and cons

RenoZag
09-20-2014, 07:20 AM
http://hilobrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/cone-of-silence.jpg

I hope and pray this isn't the last season for Angel Nunez.

Me too.

willandi
09-20-2014, 07:26 AM
In the year 1900, both Purdue and Amherst went undefeated 4-0. Were they Co-Champions?

GoZags
09-20-2014, 07:57 AM
Wow Nunez, to USF, to Bill Russel vs Lebron vs Pistol Pete...this thread is everywhere. Speaking of that smoked turkey vs oven roasted turkey for Thanksgiving pros and cons

Your recap missed my favorite part of this thread ... RZ's subtle calling out of the GBCW post from the San Francisco guy ... who got his nose out of joint back in May ... http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gbcw

LongIslandZagFan
09-20-2014, 10:14 AM
From what I have heard, there may be issues that could limit his eligibility. Not saying they are, but COULD. If he was injured but participated in practices that could impact it. I don't know what the underlying issues actually are, but from what I have heard, the WCC person rendering the decision is someone very highly respected... so unlikely there are shenanigans going on.

DixieZag
09-20-2014, 10:22 AM
From what I have heard, there may be issues that could limit his eligibility. Not saying they are, but COULD. If he was injured but participated in practices that could impact it. I don't know what the underlying issues actually are, but from what I have heard, the WCC person rendering the decision is someone very highly respected... so unlikely there are shenanigans going on.

Thanks.

Obviously I'm biased, but being that the NCAA is responsible for the final decision anyway, seems like the conference should back up its players (so long as it can somewhat be justified) knowing the NCAA can be hard core on these things. OTOH, sometimes there is some tendency to treat GU a little differently from the others - not saying it is a shenanigan b/c I believe the person made it objectively, just seems like sometimes some of the "us against them" problems that have been part of other issues makes them less likely to really go to bat for us. I could be dead wrong on that, others here will know more than me, including you.

Zagger
09-20-2014, 10:29 AM
Wow Nunez, to USF, to Bill Russel vs Lebron vs Pistol Pete...this thread is everywhere. Speaking of that smoked turkey vs oven roasted turkey for Thanksgiving pros and cons

Roasted - pros (I like the skin! - prolly be the death of me someday).
I'll bet Nunez is a major asset to the team this year. He's got to have learned a few of the Zag essentials since last season.

USF
09-20-2014, 12:24 PM
First, I have no idea if other WCC schools have any say in the eligibility of WCC players. I have never heard of that and I tend to doubt it. Second, with all due respect, do you really think that other WCC schools are that concerned with the eligibility of Angel Nunez and his 3.5 ppg (and one 3 pointer all year)? Now if Karnowski lost a year.....

vandalzag
09-20-2014, 05:45 PM
From what I have heard, there may be issues that could limit his eligibility. Not saying they are, but COULD. If he was injured but participated in practices that could impact it. I don't know what the underlying issues actually are, but from what I have heard, the WCC person rendering the decision is someone very highly respected... so unlikely there are shenanigans going on.

Interesting, I always thought the only thing that mattered is games played, is the stance that if he was OK to practice than the head injury is a non issue and not worthy of a Medical RS?

U Zig, I Zag
09-22-2014, 07:08 AM
He absolutely deserves the opportunity to be eligible. Grant Gibbs got what, like six years of actually playing time but Angel gets two and a half?

Grant Gibbs suited up with his own grandkids. That's how many years GG got.

LongIslandZagFan
09-22-2014, 08:16 AM
Interesting, I always thought the only thing that mattered is games played, is the stance that if he was OK to practice than the head injury is a non issue and not worthy of a Medical RS?

If you are doing full practices while on Med RS then perhaps you aren't really a Med RS is the thinking. I am not saying this is exactly the case, just saying that participation would be participation in the eyes of a Med RS.

cjm720
09-22-2014, 08:37 AM
If you are doing full practices while on Med RS then perhaps you aren't really a Med RS is the thinking. I am not saying this is exactly the case, just saying that participation would be participation in the eyes of a Med RS.

A concussion and say a broken leg are totally different IMO. Sure, I don't know the extent to how he practiced, but I always assumed he could practice - learn plays, gel, etc. but keeping the physicality down

LongIslandZagFan
09-22-2014, 09:03 AM
A concussion and say a broken leg are totally different IMO. Sure, I don't know the extent to how he practiced, but I always assumed he could practice - learn plays, gel, etc. but keeping the physicality down

Again, I am only discussing the abstract not his actual case.

americasteam
09-22-2014, 09:26 AM
When my daughter played college basketball, her freshman year she got really sick, then had an ACL injury and surgery. She ended up redshirting that year. She had never played a game but did practice during a small part of it between the sickness and the injury, as well as she did get out on the court and shoot around a bit, late in the season. The coaches just called it a regular redshirt as it was easier for them paperwork-wise. When she contemplated transferring later in her career there was going to be a problem as they should have claimed that first year was a medical redshirt. From what I understand, there's lots to fill out to get the medical redshirt, and lots of hoops to jump through, so they didn't do it, thinking a regular redshirt was sufficient.

If I was a coach and had Angel Nunez with a major concussion issue and was pretty sure I planned on calling his year a medical redshirt year, I'd be really careful about what he did and didn't do out on the practice court. And maybe the coaches did and it's just at the whim of the higher ups.

I hope Angel gets his extra year.

Kiddwell
09-22-2014, 11:41 AM
Grant Gibbs suited up with his own grandkids. That's how many years GG got.

Isn't Grant Gibbs now eligible for Social Security?



:]

LongIslandZagFan
09-22-2014, 11:51 AM
When my daughter played college basketball, her freshman year she got really sick, then had an ACL injury and surgery. She ended up redshirting that year. She had never played a game but did practice during a small part of it between the sickness and the injury, as well as she did get out on the court and shoot around a bit, late in the season. The coaches just called it a regular redshirt as it was easier for them paperwork-wise. When she contemplated transferring later in her career there was going to be a problem as they should have claimed that first year was a medical redshirt. From what I understand, there's lots to fill out to get the medical redshirt, and lots of hoops to jump through, so they didn't do it, thinking a regular redshirt was sufficient.

If I was a coach and had Angel Nunez with a major concussion issue and was pretty sure I planned on calling his year a medical redshirt year, I'd be really careful about what he did and didn't do out on the practice court. And maybe the coaches did and it's just at the whim of the higher ups.

I hope Angel gets his extra year.

I could see that being a possibility.

Malastein
09-22-2014, 12:15 PM
Well, I hope this doesn't become one of those unfortunate what's right versus what's the written rule tragedies. Having had a concussion about a year ago, I can say that they certainly affect your decision making process for quite some time among other things. He made the decision to transfer in the midst of that period, so he couldn't have 100% known the implications of leaving after playing in an exhibition game. This is like charging him with involuntary manslaughter, except he's the only victim because he only hit a dummy. Absurd.

primal23
09-22-2014, 02:25 PM
Well, I hope this doesn't become one of those unfortunate what's right versus what's the written rule tragedies. Having had a concussion about a year ago, I can say that they certainly affect your decision making process for quite some time among other things. He made the decision to transfer in the midst of that period, so he couldn't have 100% known the implications of leaving after playing in an exhibition game. This is like charging him with involuntary manslaughter, except he's the only victim because he only hit a dummy. Absurd.

Absurd is a new way to spell NCAA

DixieZag
09-22-2014, 05:05 PM
Well, I hope this doesn't become one of those unfortunate what's right versus what's the written rule tragedies. Having had a concussion about a year ago, I can say that they certainly affect your decision making process for quite some time among other things. He made the decision to transfer in the midst of that period, so he couldn't have 100% known the implications of leaving after playing in an exhibition game. This is like charging him with involuntary manslaughter, except he's the only victim because he only hit a dummy. Absurd.

Is there an organization more associated with doing the absurd choice than the NCAA?

Yes, the NCAA has rules and I understand rules are not rules unless they are enforced. But, in most other areas of society, the person enforcing the rules has the ability to stand back, big picture and look at whether rigidly applying the rules in that particular instance is a good thing or actually work against common sense and principles.

It seems pretty clear to me that Nunez missed a year primarily b/c "the worst concussion [a trainer] saw" and essentially played no competitive basketball. If that doesn't deserve a medical redshirt - b/c I don't see much difference than this and a guy who breaks a bone right before an exhibition game - I am not sure what can.

basketballzag
09-23-2014, 05:55 AM
Is there an organization more associated with doing the absurd choice than the NCAA?

Yes, the NCAA has rules and I understand rules are not rules unless they are enforced. But, in most other areas of society, the person enforcing the rules has the ability to stand back, big picture and look at whether rigidly applying the rules in that particular instance is a good thing or actually work against common sense and principles.

It seems pretty clear to me that Nunez missed a year primarily b/c "the worst concussion [a trainer] saw" and essentially played no competitive basketball. If that doesn't deserve a medical redshirt - b/c I don't see much difference than this and a guy who breaks a bone right before an exhibition game - I am not sure what can.

I'm confident that Nunez will get his extra year. There is no way on earth the WCC or NCAA want to have yet another public relations nightmare on their hands. Doesn't matter if there are other issues or not the public won't see it that way and it only adds to the anti-conference/NCAA fodder. If not Nunez will have one hell of a lawsuit he can bring on behalf of himself and others who have been similarly situated.

gonzagafan62
09-25-2014, 01:46 PM
I'm confident that Nunez will get his extra year. There is no way on earth the WCC or NCAA want to have yet another public relations nightmare on their hands. Doesn't matter if there are other issues or not the public won't see it that way and it only adds to the anti-conference/NCAA fodder. If not Nunez will have one hell of a lawsuit he can bring on behalf of himself and others who have been similarly situated.

Agreed

phxfireflames
11-06-2014, 07:40 AM
Looks very similar to Nunez situation. Should definitely get that year back.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11829487/duje-dukan-no-3-wisconsin-badgers-sit-first-2-gameshttp://

zag67
11-06-2014, 07:53 AM
Yes it does, now we just have to cross our fingers

bigblahla
11-06-2014, 07:58 AM
If I remember correctly the appeal is being lodged with the NCAA but the initial ruling that denied the additional year came directly from someone in the WCC office.....

Go!! Zags!!!

cjm720
11-06-2014, 07:58 AM
Looks very similar to Nunez situation. Should definitely get that year back.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11829487/duje-dukan-no-3-wisconsin-badgers-sit-first-2-gameshttp://

This comment at the bottom of the article is so true: "Unbelievable. Winston at Florida State has been caught stealing and accused of rape, yet he didn't miss a game. This guy got sick and is being punished."

Vanzagger
11-06-2014, 01:15 PM
In the climate of concussions these days you don't strip a guy a year for recovering. Donnie Daniels was on the radio last night and had a lot of great things to say about Mark, the program and Angel. I look forward to him taking the program to new heights.

CDC84
11-06-2014, 01:56 PM
This Nunez thing also effects recruiting. The staff went out recruiting this offseason under the assumption that Nunez had two more years in the program. Now he may have only one. I'm sure the staff would've preferred knowing about this well before recruiting season heated up. It's going to be more challenging now to replace him if the NCAA doesn't rule in his favor.

seacatfan
11-06-2014, 02:07 PM
If Nunez doesn't get back an extra year of eligibility, they can always add a free agent...I mean graduate transfer in the spring.

DADoZAG
11-06-2014, 03:24 PM
In the climate of concussions these days you don't strip a guy a year for recovering. Donnie Daniels was on the radio last night and had a lot of great things to say about Mark, the program and Angel. I look forward to him taking the program to new heights.

What show was Donny on?

Go ZAGS!

RRZagFan
11-06-2014, 03:31 PM
KGA Lockerroom
https://soundcloud.com/lockerroomkga/donny-daniels-gu-asst-coach

CDC84
11-06-2014, 03:55 PM
If Nunez doesn't get back an extra year of eligibility, they can always add a free agent...I mean graduate transfer in the spring.

They'll fill the roster spot, even with a juco, but they would rather have more options and more time to prepare.

The staff has learned by now that they can't rely on the grad transfers. Wesley sort of fell into their lap. They have lost out on a number of grad transfers in recent years....including guys they thought they had in the bag like Josh Davis. Once you get dropped by a grad transfer, there really isn't a backup plan. Unlike when you are recruiting high school kids for an extended period.

Zagdawg
11-06-2014, 04:03 PM
Depending on how we do this year-- we might have some good options wanting to come play here and get some good exposure.

seacatfan
11-06-2014, 04:28 PM
They'll fill the roster spot, even with a juco, but they would rather have more options and more time to prepare.

The staff has learned by now that they can't rely on the grad transfers. Wesley sort of fell into their lap. They have lost out on a number of grad transfers in recent years....including guys they thought they had in the bag like Josh Davis. Once you get dropped by a grad transfer, there really isn't a backup plan. Unlike when you are recruiting high school kids for an extended period.

I was just being flippant, I totally understand what you mean about knowing in advance how many roster spots you have open and trying to recruit accordingly. It seems like in this current age, most teams are dealing with rosters in flux more often than not. There are so many transfers that it's fairly hard to really be prepared and plug all the holes that might open.

DixieZag
11-06-2014, 05:54 PM
If the NCAA didn't respect the concussion (as I recall the trainer at the time said it was the most serious he'd seen) being as serious as an ACL tear or Achilles tear, it really sends the wrong message back against a sports world struggling to keep up with recent research on their effects.

Of course, I can think of no organization ever that has made more bizarre rulings than the NCAA>

WallaWallaZag
11-06-2014, 06:43 PM
Looks very similar to Nunez situation. Should definitely get that year back.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11829487/duje-dukan-no-3-wisconsin-badgers-sit-first-2-gameshttp://

major difference is that nunez transferred after his medical issue while the wisconsin guy stayed put...i'm sure if angel was still at louisville this would be a lot easier.