At UMass because he signed a LOI with us. Wow.

 Here's the link. 

 http://ht.ly/5rB0Z

Sorry

 http://ht.ly/5rB0Z 

Seems pretty stupid to me. Picking a college is hard enough without all these mysterious rules governing the process. Wonder how the vote went.

That stinks.  I hope Nero voted to let the kid play.  I get the transfrer rules within the confernece, but this situtation ought to be a clear exception,. 

Nero's not the AD until Friday

Sucks for Trey but the league has to be concerned about setting precident on switching schools within the A10.  Now if they allow T Davis to switch from GW to Umass this year, what if another recruit wants to go from Fordham to URI next season.  The league could argue that KH's dismissal created a unique situation but the league would be setting themselves up for a chalange. 

Since the A10 has already a rule in place that prevents LOI's from switching to other A10 schools, it's really the same thing as maintaining the non-transfer rule for existing players.  There is no special exception to that rule just because the head coach leaves, even though that may be the "fair" thing to do. 

hahahahahahaha

Seriously - How can they do this to this kid?????

 This is not the first time this has happened. Google Gus Gilchrist who tried to go from Vtech to UMD and was ruled ineligible. He didn't have to go to another A10 school and his advisors should have let him know that this was a legitimate possibility. The question for him now is where does he go from here. Prep school maybe, a smaller D1 school maybe. I can think of one A10 team that has an open scholarship where he wouldn't be ruled ineligible. 

Wonder if we would take him back.

One could make a compelling case that we owe him.

Another example of a rule hurting the kid and protecting no one. He doesn't want to come to GW, and by the looks of things GW does not want him to come here so what is the problem? These go to 11!

the rule is dumb and needs to be changed.  where's the market for intra league transfers that is different than the market for inter league transfers.  Did anybody tell the kid before he sought to go to UMass?  If I were him I  would never even play non-conference games against the A-10.  What a screwed-up conference.

I agree that the rule is dumb and should be changed, but the rule is out there and not that obscure, and someone should have adivised the kid.  I presume the rule exists to prevent poachers from the conference luring players from one school to another.  In this situation, I found it suspicious that UMass, which was not even listed as one of the school's Davis was considering, somehow signed him minutes after his releaes from GW.  Does not pass the stink test.  Too bad Davis got burned in the process, but I am pleased that UMass got slapped.

What's the point of the release in the first place if you can still be penalized for doing nothing wrong? Kid set foot on campus once in his life, never dribbled a basketball on behalf of GW and now he's completely stuck. I hope he can still get a DI school scholarship this coming season, otherwise his basketball ambitions may be permanently derailed before they were "allowed" to get out of the gate. Shameful.

What a terrible situation for the kid.  I'm on board with the rule in general--so as to prohibit coaches from poaching guys from the conference....but this is not that kind of situation.  Sad to see the AD's voted down the exception. 

 I agree with you LSF. Lets look at the timeline here for a minute because that's probably what the NCAA saw as well. SIgns with GW in April. Doesn't get out of his LOI after Hobbs is fired or Lonergan is fired. Finally gets out in the middle of June and commits to UMass without even visiting. Plus everybody hates Kellogg. 

 It looks like he's going to prep school for a year. Not sure where he ends up because the rule stops him from going to UMass for two seasons. BTW my guess is GW complained and that's how this investigation got started. That is usually how these things do. 

Your "guess" may be right DEA...I have no more idea than you do. But I hardly think the "investigation" needed to be instigated by anything. Davis had clearly signed an LOI with GW. He clearly requested his release. GW clearly gave it to him. Davis clearly cast his lot with UMass. GW and UMass are clearly both members of the A-10. The A-10 apparently has a rule restricting such shifts. GW may well have protested or voted against making an exception. But I seriously question the notion that GW held veto power over the situation.

i am surprised no one brought up that gw is partly responsiblle for what used to be called the "steve perry" rule.

steve perry was a starting forward for gw under bob tallent and quite the fan favorite (he was from somewhere in fairfax county as i recall).  anyway, when gimelstob came in, perry found himself in as deep a doghouse as has ever existed.  he transferred to rutgers (then in the a-10), sat out a year, and became a star. 

it was at that time that the a-10 adopted a rule stipulating that in-conference transfers had to sit out 2 years.

it is amazing that no one at umass thought of this.  that is clearly where the blame lies.

As if no one saw this coming:

This is a complicated situation with several possibilities. I can't believe UMass did not know of this rule. I also believe GW gave Davis his release (as they should have under the circumstances) knowing full well that if he went to another A-10 school he would have to sit 2 years making it unlikely that he would do that. I also think UMass could have "influenced" Davis to leave GW. I have no proof whatsoever but either UMass didn't know the rule (hard to believe) or they thought they could get a slam dunk exception and told Davis that as long as GW did not oppose it would hasppen. I think it is then possible that GW gave a release but learned there was some tampering involved and then opposed the exception.

BTW, Virginia Tech really fought the Gilchrist thing (just as they tried to limit Munson from transferring to GW). So fellow conference schools can really influence things.

Good call on Perry, Lowpost.  I really liked Perry and I am still pissed that he left.

Would he consider re-signing with GW or does GW want him?

He should move on.  I suspect there are many good non A-10 programs that have room for him.  Further, if his grades are good and he is eligible for $ there is the Patriot league - or wait - Vermont has an opening.

No matter what ... as I do feel bad for the kid and what he went through with GW ... the responsibility for this sits at the feet of the UMASS staff. As sad as it is, they must come by their reputation honestly. I wish the kid luck.

If he signed with GW, jumped to UMass, then resigned with GW, does he have to sit for 4 years?

the more I think about it, the dumber this is.  I understand the Steve Perry rule, I mean I would not want Journey ringing in my ears.  But that rule was put in a long time ago - I recall that guys not only signed LOI with the school, but also LOI with the conference.  Further the conferences were smaller, relied on recruting in regional markets, recruited in the same high schools etc.  (I'm old enough to remember when the ACC was only the two Carolinas, Maryland and Virginia).  There really is no intra league market for these kids that is any bigger a risk than poaching from other conferences.  A kid can go from Wake to say, Providence, but cannot go from UMass to Richmond.  What the heck am I missing?  An unhappy kid is going to transfer.  Who cares if it's within the league.  In fact, more power to a kid who can have the brass balls to transfer and then play in front of his old school with the type of chants, jeers and profanity.  These kids are from overseas, play at high schools 2,000 miles from their parents' homes, play AAU and high school schedules that put them in 30 different states in a 8 month period.  I am not getting this rule anymore.  I say cut the kid some slack and let him play at UMass.  I can see this hurting the conference recruiting if other conferences have abolished the rule (I do not know of course).

 ....or maybe he could go to GMU? Maybe he's Roland Houston's fifth cousin?

Its garbage especially when you considered Hobbs was all but fired when he got Trey to agree to come to GW.  Once again no consideration if GW was harmed (no) or UMass got an unfair advanatage over GW or the A-10 (no).  Sure hope GW did not stand in his way. I imagine in was a commissioner's decision

If he changes his name to Deuce Davis, he'll probably  confuse the A-10 into approving his scholarship.

Good luck to the young man. If he was a good enough student for KH to give him an offer, he deserves the best.

This whole "AD in waiting" thing with Nero is bizarre. Key decisions are being made.

Does anyone know any part of the real story?

Did Lonergan want Davis?

If  so, while one feels bad for the kid, his coming back wouldn't be terrible for either party.

Hard to imagine, UMass. didn't know about this rule. Kellogg at least seemingly by this without knowing all the facts, seems to be applying  the ethics of his former coach Calipari. 

See the stoplight turning red!

The only relevant detail in this matter is that Trey never practiced or played at GW for a single second.  Unlike Steve Perry who was a former GW player and who could have been in a position to provide Rutgers with inside information about GW (hence the two-year waiting period rule among in-conference transfers), Trey was in no position to provide UMASS with a leg up over GW.  This ruling is entirely unfair to Trey and UMASS.

No decisions are being made without Nero's input - that has been true from the day he was announced.

You would be right MV except for one thing - we do not know whether UMass attempted to influence Davis' decision to ask for his release. If UMass tampered with a player under LOI then that would change my opinion. But as of yet we have no evidence that happened.

I believe there was either some sort of tampering in this case or the board thought that there was. That explains how the ruling went down. Trey committed to UMass without visiting the school like 24 hours after he got out of his LOI. It's not like he got out in May and committed a month later. I had a feeling at the time that there was something dirty but I didn't think anything would come of it.

This whole incident will end up in the Media with negative repurcussions for the Atlantic 10 and GW. Since we have a new AD and a new Coach why not make it positive regardless of the recruits ability. Invite him to come back to GW and make it public. No downside to this and shows we care about people. If he turns us down thats his decision.

Given the fact that GW is the school that released Davis from his LOI, I can't imagine the other A10 schools voting down his eligability at UMass without GW actively lobbying against him playing at UMass.  Why would St. Bonnie, Richmond, LaSalle, Dayton or Charlotte be pissed about a player going from GW to UMass without additional information?

DEK.  I'll vote that one down.  Do you really want this player now under these circumstances?  To say he'd likely be an unhappy camper is putting it mildly.  How are his teammmates supposed to embrace someone who told them that he'd rather be at UMASS?  Plus, from Trey's point of view, GW should never have allowed Hobbs to visit him days before his release.  He must feel both used and burned by GW.  Sadly, this ship has sailed.

Everybody kept saying that GW should not play nice...should not release guys like Copes from their LOI.  Should make Trey come here....well, now GW apparently did not play nice (with reasons unknown).  All this is doing is hurting one kid....I feel bad for Trey.  I also think that Umass is in the wrong here---they knew the rule (regardless of the merit of the rule) and brought the kid in anyway, hoping he'd get an exception.  I'm guessing they never told him he might have to prep a year or sit out two years.....that's not looking out for the kid, at all.

We don't know for a fact that GW did not play nice - we are only speculating. And if GW did not play nice we need to know the reasons before we can pass judgment.

However, I do agree that Davis was a victim here in so many ways. But this should be a lesson to all recruits - you need to sign with a school that you will be happy at even if the coach leaves because there's a good chance that can happen. If you pick a school solely because of the staff, you run the risk you are going to be left with few attractive options. It's not just coaches leaving either - it's injuries etc. You must like the school. For that reason, I believe J. Davis has a good head on his shoulders because he didn't flinch and knew what he wanted.

I can not recall anyone here suggesting that players be held to their LOI's against their will.  Speaking for myself only, I am one who has commented that the school tends to be "the nice guy" or "pushover" a bit too easily but I never thought for a second that a player who opted to play for Hobbs and then decided against playing at GW for Lonergan should be forced to do so.  Can anyone cite an example of someone saying that Copes ought to have been forced to play for GW?

DEA, my concern is that GW's track record for being "the nice guy" is extensive.  We allowed NC State to change their date with us without any real compensation to speak of.  We allowed Providence to break an agreement with us.  We agreed to playing Navy two years in a row at the BB&T (sorry but that never should have happened).  We will gladly accept one-and-done road games against teams who are ahead of us in the pecking order but when it comes to teams below us, we'll do home-and homes with anyone (see: Howard).  So if Copes should academically qualify, my sense is that if he indicates he'd like to play elsewhere, we would not stand in his way.

Sorry- that was a quote from the board.  Concern about GW being the nice guy, and GW not standing in his way...

 http://www.gazettenet.com/blog/umass-sports/trey-davis-was-the-victim-of-a-bad-rule