ADVERTISEMENT

latest Suriano news

1. Does Suriano have to be enrolled at Rutgers to apply for the waiver?
2. Is Suriano currently enrolled at Rutgers?
3. Does PSU get to review the waiver prior to agreeing to it?
4. Has the waiver application been provided to PSU?
5. Do you think it would be reasonable for PSU or any B1G school to support a waiver application that is critical of the previous school?

All that really matters.
 
1. Does Suriano have to be enrolled at Rutgers to apply for the waiver?
2. Is Suriano currently enrolled at Rutgers?
3. Does PSU get to review the waiver prior to agreeing to it?
4. Has the waiver application been provided to PSU?
5. Do you think it would be reasonable for PSU or any B1G school to support a waiver application that is critical of the previous school?

All that really matters.

3 thru 5 don't actually exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dbldoofus
1. Does Suriano have to be enrolled at Rutgers to apply for the waiver?
2. Is Suriano currently enrolled at Rutgers?
3. Does PSU get to review the waiver prior to agreeing to it?
4. Has the waiver application been provided to PSU?
5. Do you think it would be reasonable for PSU or any B1G school to support a waiver application that is critical of the previous school?

All that really matters.


I've seen the waiver application. Nick claimed a hardship because his lungs could never get accustomed to the fresh air of central PA, needed to return to NJ. He also claimed that he was bothered that Cael kept calling him "Nico" through most of last season.
 
Actually the only one that matters is not on the list, is Nick registered for classes at PSU? They started today.

There used to be a late Registration and I still see one on the PSU Fall semester calendar for August 28th.
Does that mean the real deadline is next Monday?
 
I've seen the waiver application. Nick claimed a hardship because his lungs could never get accustomed to the fresh air of central PA, needed to return to NJ. He also claimed that he was bothered that Cael kept calling him "Nico" through most of last season.
Reminds me of back when I was coaching youth, me and the head coach were in the corner of one of our youngsters and our head coach kept yelling out orders for "Mark". After awhile he asks me why he isn't listening, to which I explain to him the kids name was "Erik"! Kid responded much better to his name over his brothers.;)
 
1. Does Suriano have to be enrolled at Rutgers to apply for the waiver?
2. Is Suriano currently enrolled at Rutgers?
3. Does PSU get to review the waiver prior to agreeing to it?
4. Has the waiver application been provided to PSU?
5. Do you think it would be reasonable for PSU or any B1G school to support a waiver application that is critical of the previous school?

All that really matters.
1. Unknown. Despite popular opinion that you do need to be enrolled, I've argued that there's no evidence that you do, and that more likely than not, based on available circumstantial evidence, the B1G did review it and denied.

2. There's no evidence Suriano is enrolled at Rutgers.

3. By the terms of the rule itself, there's no suggestion that the outgoing school has any say. That doesn't necessarily mean that what was reported was wholly inaccurate, because the B1G could've sought PSU's input on Suriano's application. Where the reporting went off the rails is where it described PSU's input as a "rubber stamp" because there's no evidence to suggest that the outgoing school holds any sway. It's the B1G's waiver to grant.

4. Unknown. There's no evidence that the waiver application was provided to PSU.

5. I mentioned earlier in that thread that, depending on the request, it could be very unreasonable for an outgoing school to support (whatever that means) a waiver application, the most obvious reason being legal liability. Since the contents of the petition/application are unknown, it's not especially helpful to speculate much further.
 
NYC around 2:35 pm. We should know Nick's decision soon.

20914340_10154748142615812_8321206973999417585_n.jpg
 
1. Unknown. Despite popular opinion that you do need to be enrolled, I've argued that there's no evidence that you do, and that more likely than not, based on available circumstantial evidence, the B1G did review it and denied.

2. There's no evidence Suriano is enrolled at Rutgers.

3. By the terms of the rule itself, there's no suggestion that the outgoing school has any say. That doesn't necessarily mean that what was reported was wholly inaccurate, because the B1G could've sought PSU's input on Suriano's application. Where the reporting went off the rails is where it described PSU's input as a "rubber stamp" because there's no evidence to suggest that the outgoing school holds any sway. It's the B1G's waiver to grant.

4. Unknown. There's no evidence that the waiver application was provided to PSU.

5. I mentioned earlier in that thread that, depending on the request, it could be very unreasonable for an outgoing school to support (whatever that means) a waiver application, the most obvious reason being legal liability. Since the contents of the petition/application are unknown, it's not especially helpful to speculate much further.

See, people say bad things about attorneys all the time, but they can be very useful. :)

I'll add this to #3. There are a lot of policy reasons why school #1's input would not have weight for the B1G committee. First, it encourages collusion between the two schools. Second, if, as has been suggested, school #1's input acts as, in effect, a veto or approval, then the B1G committee isn't really acting independently, which I think is sort of the point of the whole process., Third, the B1G is trying to discourage intraconference transfers. If the petition for a waiver is not sufficient for a waiver, why would school #1's input matter? If it is sufficient, same thing. I believe the only reason school #1 would be consulted would be if the petition alleged wrongdoing by school #1 that required factual investigation. And in that instance, school #1 is never going to support the petition, as you point out in #5. If, for example, Suriano's reason boiled down to "just because", I have to think the petition would be rejected out of hand.
 
I guess it makes sense that once he was removed from the roster, a decision had been made. If there was any doubt, I would think his name would have remained.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski
I have been informed if we hit 3,000 Suriano Stays in school! well maybe, but with a strong possibility of uncertainty
 
Anyone wishing Nick would announce a decision.....so you could stop visiting this thread 50 times a day.....including during work meetings, while walking the dog, while stopped in traffic, while walking to work from the garage. Not that I've done any of those things :)
 
Anyone wishing Nick would announce a decision.....so you could stop visiting this thread 50 times a day.....including during work meetings, while walking the dog, while stopped in traffic, while walking to work from the garage. Not that I've done any of those things :)
Yup, I have some good reading material in "the can" that I haven't touched in awhile. I now check out the "Suriano " thread instead. I really need to finish that book. Sorry if that was too much info.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ja1339
Anyone wishing Nick would announce a decision.....so you could stop visiting this thread 50 times a day.....including during work meetings, while walking the dog, while stopped in traffic, while walking to work from the garage. Not that I've done any of those things :)
I agree. I too have been checking this Suriano thread more than I want to admit. I check before I leave for work, on my phone during work multiple times a day, at stop lights on my way home, during dinner, after my kids are in bed, all evening after that, etc. OK, I have a problem and I admit it. I think I need to go to a 10 step program.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT