SI has a piece up on their front page written by a former St. Joe's player about Martelli's refusal to grant approval to him to play for UAB under the grad school exception.  Martelli comes off a doosh, as usual.

sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/basketball/ncaa/12/19/todd.obrien/index.html

Oh, so sorry for Phil Martelli to have to read about his less-than-stellar treatment of recruits.

what do you think the "choice words" were?  I will donate $5.00 in the the Salvation Army kettle at my Giant and tell them in which poster's honor I am making the donation for the funniest choice words.

Reminds me of Seth Greenberg and Nigel Munson (not an exact comparison to be sure though).

St. Joe's boards seem to imply O'Brien had disciplinary issues going on behind the scenes.

Anyway you slice it though it's stupid pride to not let this kid play. 

Oh, so sorry for Phil Martelli to have to read about his less-than-stellar treatment of recruits.

Quite a story.  O'Brien is likely being a bit disingenuous claiming that the transfer is solely about academics.  His playing time had been cut into and clearly, he wanted to join a program where he'd be more appreciated.  However, for Martelli to take this stance is just remarkable.  Referring to his actions as those of a douchebag doesn't begin to do this justice.

The good news for O'Brien is that UAB plays at GW next week.  This represents the likely scenario of Martelli softening his stance by suggesting he'll think about reconsidering, allow Todd to play for UAB one game against GW, and then announce the day after the game that he's thought it over and will continue to refuse to grant his release, thereby ending O'Brien's playing career.  Sounds about right to me.

I had lunch last week with someone who played for Martelli.   He had nothing good to say about him.  (At the same time there was nothing terrible either.)   Pretty much the picture he painted was like VB's characterization of him....a doosh. 

The player's account here is seems embellished and self-serving.  Martelli seems like a total dick, but I would imagine that there must be something more going on here.  This seems so personal and vindictive.  I'm not saying the player did anything wrong - but there must be something more for Martelli to want to screw this kid over so badly.

I think this kind of thing is more common that you'd think.  Xavier Alexander accused Hobbs of doing the same to him.

In one sense, if I am following the timeline, Martelli got a little bit screwed by not having the young man back, if he counted on that.Would imagine he would have thought to ask, though.Our own situation with Jabari inidicates this is an issue--and how things can changed. Martelli might have been taken aback with one scholarship spot in late spring, though if the kid wasn't playing, what's the difference.

Don't really know Martelli, except he consistently comes off as an ass, at least to us. The problem with the whole thing is he found a young man who is obviously pretty smart, the son of a professor and he is seemingly articulate and certainly knows how to write. Martelli looks vindictive, hotheaded and like an ass. Business as usual.

Now Xavier Alexander.I didn't recall. Did Hobbs allegedly refuse to let him transfer to another D-1 school? Would like to hear about that. That was a bizarre incident: a starter transferring mid-season. A far cry from someone wanting to go to a graduate school in his field. 

I don't know what happened with Xavier Alexander, but his family accused Hobbs of not giving him his release in time to be able to transfer to a DI school.  He ended up going to a NAIA school.

 Thought the article was self-serving and not up to SI standards.  I had no sympathy for either party.  The coach is vindictive and deserves to be called out for that.  the player seems to have more fear of commitment than Kim Kardashian  and can't stay in one place for long.  Forgive my East Coast snobbery but I don't see his decision to transfer to UAB as academically driven.

I'm fairly radical when it comes to the NCAA but I think it's a total joke either way that schools get away with not guaranteeing a four year scholarship to players while remaining in control of where they play like this. Who cares if the guy wanted to go to UAB for basketball reasons?

My personal view is if the kid is not going to be all conference - let his butt go. 

Bullshit! Players are not cattle, or slaves. They are not owned. When one has freely expressed a desire to move ahead in his life and career, an institution of higher learning  should not impede him. Nor should it allow itself to have its academic policy dictated by a short , profane little bald man who hangs out in men's locker rooms.

Not to defend Martelli, but I wonder if he hadn't been given assurances by O'Brien that he was returning to SJU for the extra year causing Saint Joseph's not to offer someone else a scholarship they didn't have. Even so, playing this by the letter of the law on a marginal player not in their plans seems to be stupid at best. Just hate to see former GW assistant coach and good guy AD Don DiJulia caught in the middle of this. Would have to be a lot of undisclosed facts to make this situation smell better for the Philly school. I don't know, maybe they had planned to make O'Brien a very imposing wing-flapping Hawk. After all, GW made scholarship player Kent Reynolds suit up as the George Washington mascot one year.

Here's what the President had to say to the student body: 

Dear Students,
 
Many of you have seen or commented upon a first-person story appearing yesterday on the web site of Sports Illustrated magazine.  The story was submitted by a former Saint Joseph’s University student-athlete whose request in mid-July 2011 for a waiver to play basketball at another institution during 2011-2012 was not supported by Saint Joseph’s.
 
I write to assure our students, faculty, staff, alumni and friends that Saint Joseph’s complied with all applicable NCAA procedures in this case.  It is clearly not a part of the University’s mission to block any student from pursuing their academic or athletic goals.  However, it is the University’s obligation to review all student-athlete waiver requests in a consistent manner and to evaluate the facts and circumstances of each request.  It is worth noting that SJU has supported such requests a large majority of the time across its many varsity sports.   If a request for a waiver is not granted and an appeal is taken to the NCAA, it is the national association, not individual member institutions, which makes the final determination on the eligibility of individual student-athletes. 
 
Federal law and the University’s own student privacy guidelines necessarily limit what the University can make public in matters involving individual students.  Such limitation applies to the current matter and the University is mindful of its obligation to all its students, including former ones, regarding their privacy. 
 
What can be appropriately shared regarding this matter is that Saint Joseph’s did provide all relevant information to the NCAA Legislative Relief Waiver Team, which, as a matter of public record, made an initial decision not to grant the requested waiver.  Upon further appeal by the student-athlete, the Division I Legislative Council Subcommittee for Legislative Relief concurred with the initial review and made its final decision to deny the appeal.  As only the student-athlete and his new university were parties to the appeal, Saint Joseph’s will not make any public statements regarding the appeal and its outcome.
 
Finally, I would be remiss in not acknowledging the consistent dedication -- to all students and alumni of Saint Joseph’s University -- that is displayed every day by athletics director Don DiJulia and men’s basketball coach Phil Martelli.  These are men who are respected across the nation for their actions and priorities.  We also acknowledge the athletic contributions while on Hawk Hill of the student-athlete in this case, and regret the differences of opinion that led to his dissatisfaction with Saint Joseph’s.
 
John W. Smithson ’68, MBA ’82
Interim President

Think the AD should overrule Martelli on this.  If the player does not want to be there, why force him to stay or not have the ability to go elsewhere.  Particularly with an OOC school.  This move gives a school a negative reputation with high school coaches and future athletes. It is just the right thing to do.

 

Martelli is a two bit whore and DiJulia and Smithson didn't make him behave. You would think that, of so many schools, St, Joes would benefit from this rule as much as, in this one case, it cost them.  Be a man.

St. Joe's needs a new PR firm, or new PR personnel.   What a poorly crafted statement.

The statement says absolutely nothing -- other than 'we were allowed to reject the waiver so we acted within the rules in doing so'.  If the point is that there is more to the story, but that they aren't allowed to comment, then that should have been the lead. 

Right from the beginning, the first statement (after the intro) is I want to assure everone that we followed the rules.  Well, that's answering a quetsion no one is asking.  What people are wondering is not whether SJU was allowed to reject the waiver, but whether they were right to do so.  It's like a politician accused of unethical behavior saying "I didn't break any laws" -- well, ok, but the question isn't whether it's leagal, it's whether it's ethical. 

And the first rule of PR is that when you address an issue, you respond to the main point, not try to answer a question that no one is asking, or you make it look like you are in the wrong.

A statement obviously written by attorneys, evading the issues.  It's hard to believe that statement will prove acceptable to anyone but the true believers at Hawk Hill but the powers in their hands (by NCAA bylaws) and they will probably be able to ride the storm out as attention will eventually shift elsewhere. 

Hopefully all rival recruiters will use it against Phil M when competing for players: i.e. "you don't want to go to St Joe's because Martelli's a total prick that will throw you under the bus the first chance he gets".

They all claim to be barred by the privacy laws from discussing the merits of these cases, and according to people on this board who seem familiar with those laws, that's the case.  That was the case, for example, when people wanted GW to explain publicly why Rice was thrown off our team.  I can't remember a player getting up and saying "I waive my rights under the privacy laws because I think I'd be better served if the school had to state its case publicly" or "the school is lying when it says the privacy laws prevent it from discussing the case publicly."  If it is true that the privacy laws are such a sweeping restriction, what can the school really say but we don't hate this kid, we try to comply with student-athletes' wishes when we can, and we complied with the laws and followed the correct procedures?  You could write the paragraphs of the press release in a different order, but it doesn't really matter if you're precluded from discussing the merits. 

St. Joes should have said "we'd be happy to comment fully if the student-athlete waives his privacy rights in this case."  Call the kid's bluff.