Four Additional WVU Student-Athletes In Portal As Deadline Looms

Just ahead of the July 1 deadline to preserve immediate eligibility at their new schools, four West Virginia athletes have entered the transfer portal.

In baseball, senior Tyler Doanes and rising junior Matt McCormick are looking for new homes. Doanes, a graduate, played four years for WVU, hitting .289 with 34 doubles and 84 RBI from 2018-21. This past season, hampered by a wrist injury, he hit just .225, far below his performance level when healthy. Doanes started 140 of the 158 games he played for West Virginia.

McCormick, a catcher and infielder, hit .299 in 67 games over his two years as a Mountaineer, with 10 home runs, 19 doubles and 41 RBI.

In basketball, walk-on Spencer Macke has also entered the portal. The fan favorite played in just 10 games over the last two seasons, but had one of the best moments ever when he drained a 3-pointer near the end of WVU’s 97-59 destruction of Texas on Jan 20, 2020. That set off a wild celebration, culminating with Macke being carried off the court on the shoulders of his teammates.

In football, David Vincent-Okoli, who left the football team back in March, has also entered the portal. There was no indication of any potential return to WVU in the interim, and he now should be immediately eligible at his transfer destination.

Home Page forums Four Additional WVU Student-Athletes In Portal As Deadline Looms

  • This topic has 26 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated by Vulash.
Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 27 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #149148

    Just ahead of the July 1 deadline to preserve immediate eligibility at their new schools, four West Virginia athletes have entered the transfer portal
    [See the full post at: Four Additional WVU Student-Athletes In Portal As Deadline Looms]

    #149157

    Spencer,

    Best wishes to you!

    #149160

    transfer portal keeps giving and taken away

    #149238

    For Macke (and fellow walk-on Jay Moore, who is also in the portal now) this is not about wanting to play elsewhere. It’s a Title IX issue caused by the extra eligibility year that was granted due to the pandemic. With fewer female athletes taking advantage of the extra year than perhaps expected, and two men’s basketball players doing so, WVU would have been out of Title IX compliance had Moore and Macke been on the team this year.

    This is one of the side effects of the decision that wasn’t foreseen, and it totally due to Title IX, and it will likely affect a number of athletes at other schools too.

    #149240

    One other item – there have apparently been some “reports” that the walk-ons were “cut” from the team. Nothing could be further from the truth. WVU had no choice in this – it cannot be out of Title IX compliance. It’s possible that either or both could be back on the team next year.

    #149246

    Possibly a stupid (or at least ignorant) question, but why does Title IX care about non-scholarship players?  Other than a spot on the roster and use of facilities, what other benefits are they receiving that slants the balance toward men’s athletics?

    #149256

    Not stupid at all.

    Title IX is about opportunities for males and females. The actual federal title did not involve sports at all, it merely said that:

    “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

    Later rulings determined that those opportunities had to be in proportion with the student body male-female ratio. So, if you had a 60-40 M-F split, 60% of those opportunities have to be for women. (That’s a very rough description, and there are reams of paper and websites you can dive into to understand the whole history.)

    Further court and federal rulings decisions extended this reach, and that’s when it filtered into sports. So, you have to be within a small percentage ratio of players on the teams that reflects the school’s ratio as a whole.

    Title IX has had many good effects. but some bad ones. Some Olympic men’s sports have been cut to keep things in balance at schools across the country. Wrestling has been one of those, although it might be bouncing back some now as more women’s sports are added (minus the effects of Covid, although there have been more sports added than cut in the last couple of years).

    That’s why WVU added a women’s crew team, and kept womens track and field and tennis while cutting men’s. Had to keep the Title IX balance.

    This is a very short description that doesn’t begin to cover all of the ins and outs. But my main deal here was to make sure its known that WVU’s did not cut Macke or Moore or tell them to leave. There simply were no roster spots available for this year due to Title IX imbalance.

    #149259

    For Macke (and fellow walk-on Jay Moore, who is also in the portal now) this is not about wanting to play elsewhere. It’s a Title IX issue caused by the extra eligibility year that was granted due to the pandemic. With fewer female athletes taking advantage of the extra year than perhaps expected, and two men’s basketball players doing so, WVU would have been out of Title IX compliance had Moore and Macke been on the team this year.

    This is one of the side effects of the decision that wasn’t foreseen, and it totally due to Title IX, and it will likely affect a number of athletes at other schools too.

    KK, Unintended consequences of COVID, Portal and Title IX.  A way to keep in compliance is to limit the number of Walk Ons.  Hope these kids have a place to land at another school.  Maybe DII as a partial schollie?  May be a blessing in disguise for their pocket book.

    On the other hand, I didn’t know that Title IX included all players on the team …. including walk ons.  I was under the misunderstanding that it only included Schollie players.  Good to know.

    #149262

    No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

    Have they updated this provision  to accommodate the current definitions of “sex”?

    And why was this particular aspect of humanity made a specification?

    There are many others that could be “critical”!

    And how were the ratios to be applied determined?

    Where’s Andy Rooney or Paul Harvey when you need them?

    Just having some fun with the “brilliancy” and “forward thinking” displayed by whomever was responsible at the NCAA  “Office of political correctness”!

    We know so little about this organization and their makeup in terms of humanity@?

    Do they comply!!??

    #149264

    Tony. This has NOTHING to do with the NCAA. Title IX was a federal government law, and its scope was broadened in large part due to interpretations handed down by federal courts.

    #149265

    OOPS! Sorry!

    Guess the questions and criticisms are misdirected!

    Have to replace NCAA with whomever in government is responsible!

    Might be an indicator of what the NIL and college athletics can expect when congress gets involved?!

     

     

    #149267

    Tony, no reason to apologize for thinking the NCAA is inept, in oncompetent or bowing to politac correctness. You are 100% correct. But in this case the gov’t is the culprit. Title IX is a good thing but sometimes the gov’t needs to be a little more flexible.

    #149277

    I’m suprised by Doanes and McCormick. They were important parts of the baseball team.

    #149279

    Butler, 99.9% of the Title IX implications were created by court rulings, not by “the gov’t.” (Yes, I know courts are part of that structure, but just want to make it clear that the original law was, like many, significantly chnaged by rulings.

    Also, we know you hate the NCAA. However, you are also criticizing what it has done in opening up NIL and transfers. Can’t have that both ways.

    #149295

    Perhaps Macke and Moore can stay with the team in some sort of student manager / practice squad role this season, give the ratios time to return to normal, and then return to the roster next season.  It sucks to see kids put in the work, with minimal reward (i.e., no scholarship), only to lose their opportunity to bureaucratic red tape.

    #149296

    Kevin, I’m not criticizing the NCAA for opening up NIL and Transfers.  I’m critical about the way they handle the process.  The NCAA took a hands off approach to NIL in setting up any type of structure.  Now we have the Wild Wild West where each state has their own mandate.  Then in states that have no compliance regulations it’s left up to the Conferences or Universities.  Little structure at all as to oversight of the process, what is and what isn’t allowed.

    I’m in favor of kids being able to make money off of endorsements if it doesn’t have an effect on their eligibility.  Programs are trying to get out in front of this by educating the players on the effect of social media, agents and even taxes.   To see what this is going do the TEAM structure is yet to be determined.  Others have written about the red flags that could come up by boosters funneling their sponsorship fees to a limited few.  Then again there are bench players that have large social media followings.  Does (could) all of this take away from the players focus on the sport?  Let’s see how it works out.  The biggest red flag is how boosters fall into the equation of legal sponsorships vs handing out bags of money.  NCAA has never been able …… let me rephrase this ….. Never Wanted to control this.

    As for the Portal the “poaching” is rampant.  Don’t believe it.  Just ask Neal or Bob. I have always been in favor of some sort of transfer policy, especially for kids that are stuck behind great players for their whole career.  Good players all want and deserve a chance to be starters.  Imagine coming into the FR class being stuck behind Pat or Geno for 3 or 4 years.  Those kids want to move on.

    3 problems that NCAA has not addressed.

    #1 is any type of compensation for kids moving on to another school after being groomed for XX number of years. That recruiting and coaching along with all the educational cost is a hard cost for the program that has never been addressed.  Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn’t.

    #2 is the loss of schollie positions when a kid hits the portal.  That position has to be reimbursed somehow.  Schools lost an average of almost 19 players to the Portal by some outlet accounts.  How do you ever get your program close to 85 if you can only bring in 25 per year when you lose 19 to the Portal and then a yet undetermined number of kids that finish their eligibility or just leave the sport with eligibility remaining.

    #3 is poaching players.  It happens.  Neal Brown addressed this.  Huggins skirted the subject on Oscar because of Cal being a friend?  Some friend.  If anybody doesn’t think this is happening either blatantly by coaching staffs or by influencers, then I don’t know what to tell you.  We’ve seen it in FB and BB.  And who knows if there are bags of money floating around to get players to move from one team to another.  To think otherwise is foolish.

    #150193

    Agree with Tonyalto… Title IX is what you get when you let politics and the federal bureaucracy get involved in making things “fair”.  Tell me, how is punishing athletes on one side of the gender spectrum (see; Macke, Moore, and any other poor male athlete having to leave because of gender…. just to be “fair” you know 😠…) make it “fair” to the other…. and oh, let’s not even get into how they are gonna make it “fair” for all the other 72 thousand genders that, apparently, humanity has missed for these past thousands of years! The fact is, men’s sports, in general, are the far more popular spectator sports and make the lion’s share of ticket sales and merch income. But no one wants to live in reality anymore. But hey, let’s all sit in a circle and virtue signal to everyone else that we are “fair”…. bull sheet rock.

    #150201

    One thing that I think gets overlooked here is that this is one of those cases of unintended consequences. The original Title IX was pretty straightforward, including the basic declaration:

    “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

    It was later court interpretations that broadened the scope and set standards that the original authors never intended. Kinda like the US Constitution in that regard.

    #150270

    Maybe you can throw more buzzwords in there when you take that crap to the politics forum BSAE.

    #150276

    Additional proof that, no matter what rules you make, they will have unintended or even unwanted consequences. Title IX’s main goal, to make sure that females have the same opportunity as males, is unassailable. Implementing it can be tricky, in sports or in life, because one size does NOT fit all in anything. It’s damn near impossible to make a rule that doesn’t harm someone you’re trying to help or someone you didn’t intend to harm. 

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 27 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Home Page forums Four Additional WVU Student-Athletes In Portal As Deadline Looms

Home Page forums Four Additional WVU Student-Athletes In Portal As Deadline Looms