WBB Former #1 Ranked Recruit Lauren Betts¥update bets to UCLA

[DBQ Hawk]

The dilemma I was thinking of was "can Iowa really add a transfer this year if it would already be over the scholarship limit for 2024-2025 with that player added".

I mentioned in a Tweet (but not otherwise in the message boards yet) that this issue will be back next year if Caitlin wants to use her Covid season and Iowa adds a transfer with multiple years of eligibility. At that point, Iowa would be over the scholarship limit and would need a roster subtraction for Caitlin to stay.

I don't think it's a huge worry at this point, though, because: 1) transfers out are still fairly likely as the Wetering example shows, and 2) we'll know a lot more about Ava's health by next year. The medical scholarship could be a solution to the scholarship problem next year.

IIRC, the NCAA said COVID years wouldn’t count against scholarship limits

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

I'm trained to look at rules/codes/statutes and offer opinions regarding how they should be interpreted.

The rule regarding "counters who become critically injured or ill" reads "A counter who becomes injured or ill to the point he or she apparently will never be able to participate in intercollegiate athletics shall not be considered a counter beginning with the academic year following the incapacitating illness or injury."

The "incapacitating injury or illness" rule reads, in relevant part, "If an incapacitating injury or illness occurs prior to a prospective student-athlete's participation in athletically related activities and results in the student-athlete's inability to compete ever again, the student-athlete shall not be counted within the institution's maximum financial aid award limitations for the current, as well as later academic years.

The "change in circumstances" rule reads, in relevant part, "If circumstances change and the student-athlete subsequently practices or competes at the institution where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred, the student-athlete shall again become a counter, and the institution shall be required to count that financial aid under the limitations of that by-law in the sport in question during each academic year in which the financial aid was received."

Questions:
1. Did Ava Jones become "injured or ill to the point he or she apparently will never be able to participate in intercollegiate athletics?" The answer would appear to be "yes."
2. Did Ava Jones' injury occur "prior to [her] participation in athletically related activities and result in the student-athlete's inability to compete ever again?" Again, the answer appears to be "yes."
3. Might Ava Jones' circumstances change where she could practice and participate? Again, the answer could be "yes."
4. If she is medically cleared, would Ava Jones be competing "at the institution where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred?" The answer to that question would seem to be "no."

Words and sentences are to be given effect. The "retroactive" rule - as written - would seem to apply ONLY where the the injury occurred at the institution where the athlete is returning to action. I'd argue that the injury happened in Louisville. Ava Jones was not enrolled at the University of Iowa and the injury could not have "occurred" at the University of Iowa.

I'd argue that the words "where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred" must be given meaning.

The rule could have been written as: "If circumstances change and the student-athlete subsequently practices or competes at the institution where he or she received financial aid for prior years, the student-athlete shall again become a counter, and the institution shall be required to count that financial aid under the limitations of that by-law in the sport in question during each academic year in which the financial aid was received."

But that's not how the rule was written. It has very specific words - "the institution where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred" - and rules of construction and interpretation require words to be given meaning and not ignored or read out of the the statute/code/rulebook.

I think that the U of Iowa's legal counsel / U of Iowa Compliance Department could make an awfully compelling argument that the "retroactive" rule - per the written words of the rule - does not apply to Ava Jones' situation.

Leistikow's source for the clarification on the rule was the compliance department. So maybe it's possible they could make that argument in the future, but it doesn't appear to be the position they are taking now.

 

[Franisdaman]

Does Linder have insight into his claim?

He has inside info that none of us have.

Check out the questions/comments & his responses:

 

[kceasthawk]

Not so sure. Article references a waiver procedure which may be applicable.

I'm sure that would go about as well as Drew Otts experience.....

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

FWIW I don't think Van Lith or Donarski make much sense for the roster. Van Lith is another ball-dominant guard. Part of the reason Caitlin is so special is because she's so ball-dominant. Put them on the same team and I'm not sure you get the best of either.

Donarski is probably better on the wing than Marshall or Martin, but I don't think the difference is so great that it really moves the needle. We also have a number of solid options at the 2/3 and adding Donarski would make the playing time issue at those positions far worse.

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

IIRC, the NCAA said COVID years wouldn’t count against scholarship limits

I think that was true for the first year or two but not now. If it was true Marshall and Martin wouldn't count toward the scholarship limit and the last week of "how can Iowa add a transfer" discourse wouldn't have happened.

 

[hawkod]

Jeff Linder is a beat writer for the Gazette. So, when he says "you'll just have to trust me" that Hailey Van Lith, Annesah Morrow and Lauren Betts won't be at Iowa next season, I imagine it's based on what he's hearing from his sources.

No one knows more about womens/girls basketball in Iowa than Jeff.

 

[AuroraHawk]

Leistikow's source for the clarification on the rule was the compliance department. So maybe it's possible they could make that argument in the future, but it doesn't appear to be the position they are taking now.

Agreed. I'm simply pointing out that there may be a "gap" in the rule which doesn't cover Jones' situation.

 

[anon_salmfilsntd0b]

IIRC, the NCAA said COVID years wouldn’t count against scholarship limits

That was only the case for '21-'22.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

That's what I'm talking about! Betts and Morrow are at the top of the wish list. That is a preseason #1 team right there. Make it happen Lisa!

Probably at the top of a bunch of wish lists. I don't follow women's BB a lot. Which of the two would be the higher priority. Seems like Morrow is a sure thing, and Betts could become a star with Jensen's coaching.

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

Probably at the top of a bunch of wish lists. I don't follow women's BB a lot. Which of the two would be the higher priority. Seems like Morrow is a sure thing, and Betts could become a star with Jensen's coaching.

I'd prefer Betts because: 1) you can't teach tall, 2) Betts could be the rim protector Iowa has lacked for years, and 3) I think Morrow is fairly similar to what an ideal version of Stuelke could be. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but If Morrow and Stuelke are the starting 4/5 Iowa would be at an extreme height disadvantage compared to some teams.

 

[Gabe Sifuentes]

I'd prefer Betts because: 1) you can't teach tall, 2) Betts could be the rim protector we've lacked for years, and 3) I think Morrow is fairly similar to what an ideal version of Stuelke could be. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but If Morrow and Stuelke are the starting 4/5 Iowa would be at an extreme height disadvantage compared to some teams.

As much as I like Betts potential to be a superstar, Morrow is a much bigger need with Warnock not coming back. Unless Martin slides to the 4 or Gyamfi explodes over the summer we don't have a stretch 4 on the roster.

 

[squeezebox]

As much as I like Betts potential to be a superstar, Morrow is a much bigger need with Warnock not coming back. Unless Martin slides to the 4 or Gyamfi explodes over the summer we don't have a stretch 4 on the roster.

Fair point, but Warnock was forced to slide outside. The lack of inside presence hurt Iowa. Hannah will certainly improve next year but 6’7” inside opens up the perimeter of Clark/Martin

 

[BBptg5]

hav

I cannot find an NCAA rule that explicitly states the limits.

But I have found several sites about being recruited to play ncaa hoops that list the scholarship limit as 15, but the average roster size is 16. Some have lines about going over the limit.

NCAA Women's Basketball Scholarships: Limits, Teams, Rosters

Everything you need to know about women’s basketball scholarships—and how to get one. View women's basketball scholarships by division.

www.ncsasports.org

Division Level	Number of Teams	Total Athletes in Division	Average Team Size	Scholarships Limit Per Team	Scholarship Limit Type
NCAA D1	349	5,588	16	15	Headcount
NCAA D2	311	4,826	15	10	Equivalency

How many scholarships are there for D1 women’s basketball?​

• Division 1 women’s basketball scholarships per team: 15
• Total number of D1 women’s basketball teams: 349
• Average team size: 16

We won’t sugarcoat it—NCAA Division 1 scholarships are hard to come by. Only 1.2% of high school athletes will compete at this level. Each Division 1 women’s basketball program can award 15 headcount scholarships. Division 1 basketball scholarships are full rides and cover all college costs, including tuition, housing, books, etc. After the 15 scholarships have been awarded, additional athletes on the team and considered walk-ons and aren’t eligible to receive athletic aid.

have said this on here on a few occasions now….the roster is: the names of the players who are eligible to participate in a specific game,,,the roster for that game. the number of players on a team is completely different. only 15 scholarships but there can be more players practicing and on a particular team. impossible to find anything that states the roster can not be fluid and change game to game.

 

[AEG82]

He has inside info that none of us have.

Check out the questions/comments & his responses:

View embedded media

View embedded media

View embedded media

View embedded media

Well...shit!

And adding Donarski does nothing for us so no sense in wasting the opening for her.

 

[skydog0784]

I'm trained to look at rules/codes/statutes and offer opinions regarding how they should be interpreted.

The rule regarding "counters who become critically injured or ill" reads "A counter who becomes injured or ill to the point he or she apparently will never be able to participate in intercollegiate athletics shall not be considered a counter beginning with the academic year following the incapacitating illness or injury."

The "incapacitating injury or illness" rule reads, in relevant part, "If an incapacitating injury or illness occurs prior to a prospective student-athlete's participation in athletically related activities and results in the student-athlete's inability to compete ever again, the student-athlete shall not be counted within the institution's maximum financial aid award limitations for the current, as well as later academic years.

The "change in circumstances" rule reads, in relevant part, "If circumstances change and the student-athlete subsequently practices or competes at the institution where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred, the student-athlete shall again become a counter, and the institution shall be required to count that financial aid under the limitations of that by-law in the sport in question during each academic year in which the financial aid was received."

Questions:
1. Did Ava Jones become "injured or ill to the point he or she apparently will never be able to participate in intercollegiate athletics?" The answer would appear to be "yes."
2. Did Ava Jones' injury occur "prior to [her] participation in athletically related activities and result in the student-athlete's inability to compete ever again?" Again, the answer appears to be "yes."
3. Might Ava Jones' circumstances change where she could practice and participate? Again, the answer could be "yes."
4. If she is medically cleared, would Ava Jones be competing "at the institution where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred?" The answer to that question would seem to be "no."

Words and sentences are to be given effect. The "retroactive" rule - as written - would seem to apply ONLY where the the injury occurred at the institution where the athlete is returning to action. I'd argue that the injury happened in Louisville. Ava Jones was not enrolled at the University of Iowa and the injury could not have "occurred" at the University of Iowa.

I'd argue that the words "where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred" must be given meaning.

The rule could have been written as: "If circumstances change and the student-athlete subsequently practices or competes at the institution where he or she received financial aid for prior years, the student-athlete shall again become a counter, and the institution shall be required to count that financial aid under the limitations of that by-law in the sport in question during each academic year in which the financial aid was received."

But that's not how the rule was written. It has very specific words - "the institution where the incapacitating injury or illness occurred" - and rules of construction and interpretation require words to be given meaning and not ignored or read out of the the statute/code/rulebook.

I think that the U of Iowa's legal counsel / U of Iowa Compliance Department could make an awfully compelling argument that the "retroactive" rule - per the written words of the rule - does not apply to Ava Jones' situation.

Excellent analysis. Thanks

 

[UpstreamHawkeye]

Someone tell Betts LA is 1000 miles from Aurora while Iowa City is less than 800 miles away, and UCLA is playing in the Big Ten starting 2024.

 

[anon_salmfilsntd0b]

I'd prefer Betts because: 1) you can't teach tall, 2) Betts could be the rim protector Iowa has lacked for years, and 3) I think Morrow is fairly similar to what an ideal version of Stuelke could be. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but If Morrow and Stuelke are the starting 4/5 Iowa would be at an extreme height disadvantage compared to some teams.

As much as I like Betts potential to be a superstar, Morrow is a much bigger need with Warnock not coming back. Unless Martin slides to the 4 or Gyamfi explodes over the summer we don't have a stretch 4 on the roster.

Since, according to Jeff Linder, we're likely to get neither...how do we feel about Arizona's Lauren Ware? Top 30, 6'5" center out of North Dakota -- much closer to home for her. She strongly considered MN in HS so she's open to / at least familiar with the B1G.

She has 3 seasons of eligibility left. Not sure that's a good thing (since I think Bluder generally prefers to get more runway out of a transfer) or a bad thing (having a multi-year eligible student still technically precludes CC22 from taking her COVID year).

Alternatively, who's keeping tabs on the portal more closely? Who else is worth keeping an eye on? Even if odds were better for Morrow or Betts, fans shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket.

 

[Reymundo]

He has inside info that none of us have.

Check out the questions/comments & his responses:

View embedded media

View embedded media

View embedded media

View embedded media

Why do we think Linder is a fountain of inside information? I haven’t seen it so far.

 

[Franisdaman]

 

[nu2u]

Correct me if I am wrong

jesus christ have some consideration. The man has a family and already has a full-time job.

 

[TailgateTom]

Well………

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

Since, according to Jeff Linder, we're likely to get neither...how do we feel about Arizona's Lauren Ware? Top 30, 6'5" center out of North Dakota -- much closer to home for her. She strongly considered MN in HS so she's open to / at least familiar with the B1G.

She has 3 seasons of eligibility left. Not sure that's a good thing (since I think Bluder generally prefers to get more runway out of a transfer) or a bad thing (having a multi-year eligible student still technically precludes CC22 from taking her COVID year).

Alternatively, who's keeping tabs on the portal more closely? Who else is worth keeping an eye on? Even if odds were better for Morrow or Betts, fans shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket.

Ware averaged 5.7 ppg and 4.2 rpg in 21.7 minutes in 2021-2022 and missed all of last season with an injury. I haven't seen her play so maybe that production is explainable, but that really doesn't scream "impact transfer" to me.

I reviewed The Athletic's transfer portal ranking and frankly outside of Betts and Morrow there aren't many forwards/centers that look particularly intriguing.

 

[Fair Child]

He states he does in the thread.

He’s an Iowa State fan.

 

[anon_salmfilsntd0b]

He’s an Iowa State fan.

He is a fan of all 4 state schools.

 

[HIWILLE]

Fair point, but Warnock was forced to slide outside. The lack of inside presence hurt Iowa. Hannah will certainly improve next year but 6’7” inside opens up the perimeter of Clark/Martin

And Marshall.

 

[khael-hawk]

Ware averaged 5.7 ppg and 4.2 rpg in 21.7 minutes in 2021-2022 and missed all of last season with an injury. I haven't seen her play so maybe that production is explainable, but that really doesn't scream "impact transfer" to me.

I reviewed The Athletic's transfer portal ranking and frankly outside of Betts and Morrow there aren't many forwards/centers that look particularly intriguing.

Betts numbers don't scream impact transfer either, but she would be. So would Lauren Ware. I doubt we take either unless a multiyear player leaves. Don't be shocked if we end up with someone like the girl from KSU with only one year left to play. We still don't currently have a scholarship available after next year, if CC comes back. That means a multiyear player isn't in the cards unless something opens up.

 

[anon_salmfilsntd0b]

Betts numbers don't scream impact transfer either, but she would be. So would Lauren Ware. I doubt we take either unless a multiyear player leaves. Don't be shocked if we end up with someone like the girl from KSU with only one year left to play. We still don't currently have a scholarship available after next year, if CC comes back. That means a multiyear player isn't in the cards unless something opens up.

Perhaps. I shared this sentiment for awhile but I realized Clark may be more okay with moving on than we’d like to believe. Another run at the NC may be enough for her (esp if she wins it, with her 2 best friends that are also graduating). I don’t know why Bluder would still be trying to nab Prince if she wasn’t. Perhaps CC just wants to leave the team in good hands. Or it’s also possible Bluder is just doing what’s best for the team’s future regardless of Clark’s plans. Which is to continue to recruit elite kids we can play for four years.

OTOH, I was thinking about the depth chart yesterday. I think Shateah likely left bc Bluder told her she is 4th in line at the 4 and at the 3. Not great odds for playing time.

Goodman by contrast hasn’t entered the portal. Makes sense tho, bc she is likely 2nd or 3rd at the 5 if Stuelke and O’Grady start next year.

But if Bluder grabs even a Top 100 4 or 5 from the portal, Goodman likely moves down to 3rd or 4th in line.

Add that to the impending arrival of Ava Heiden and Ava Jones’ likely eventual medical retiring, I think odds are decent we have another spot opening up. Not to mention all the chatter from the Swarm about being able to pay for “walk-ons.”

All speculation, and lots of time for things to sort themselves out.

 

[khael-hawk]

Perhaps. I shared this sentiment for awhile but I realized Clark may be more okay with moving on than we’d like to believe. Another run at the NC may be enough for her (esp if she wins it, with her 2 best friends that are also graduating). I don’t know why Bluder would still be trying to nab Prince if she wasn’t. Perhaps CC just wants to leave the team in good hands. Or it’s also possible Bluder is just doing what’s best for the team’s future regardless of Clark’s plans. Which is to continue to recruit elite kids we can play for four years.

OTOH, I was thinking about the depth chart yesterday. I think Shateah likely left bc Bluder told her she is 4th in line at the 4 and at the 3. Not great odds for playing time.

Goodman by contrast hasn’t entered the portal. Makes sense tho, bc she is likely 2nd or 3rd at the 5 if Stuelke and O’Grady start next year.

But if Bluder grabs even a Top 100 4 or 5 from the portal, Goodman likely moves down to 3rd or 4th in line.

Add that to the impending arrival of Ava Heiden and Ava Jones’ likely eventual medical retiring, I think odds are decent we have another spot opening up. Not to mention all the chatter from the Swarm about being able to pay for “walk-ons.”

All speculation, and lots of time for things to sort themselves out.

If Clark hasn't already decided she isn't coming back, Lisa is not going to consumer her scholarship for her covid year. Period.

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

Betts numbers don't scream impact transfer either, but she would be. So would Lauren Ware. I doubt we take either unless a multiyear player leaves. Don't be shocked if we end up with someone like the girl from KSU with only one year left to play. We still don't currently have a scholarship available after next year, if CC comes back. That means a multiyear player isn't in the cards unless something opens up.

Betts absolutely looks like an impact transfer. She averaged 5.9 ppg and 3.5 rpg in 9.6 average minutes and shot over 60% from the floor. Ware was at 5.7 ppg and 4.2 rpg in 21.7 minutes. Betts was also on pace to average nearly 4 blocks per 40 minutes and didn't really get into foul trouble.

The reason Betts didn't play more is that Stanford's front court was loaded and she wasn't going to displace Cameron Brink, who is a Top 10 or even Top 5 player in college basketball.

 

[INXS83]

Take this with a grain of salt, but I've been told, and they could have been wrong, that a maximum of 15 players can dress for any given game and is the only real "roster limitation" in either men's or women's college basketball.

That's crazy. Walk-ons dress for home games, right? That would even put the men over 15 dressed for a game. Same for women.

 

[Bishop1971]

Chad Leistikow sent a text message yesterday detailing information that he received from the Iowa Athletic Department. Ava Jones can be placed on a medical scholarship and, so long as she remains on the medical scholarship, she does not count against the team's 15 scholarship limitation. While on medical scholarship, Jones could not practice with the team or play in games. Jones could, however, serve as a student assistant coach, travel with the team and sit with the team during games. Once she is medically cleared to play, the medical scholarship is over and her scholarship would count against the team's 15 scholarship limit.

Assuming that Leistikow is reporting accurately and assuming that reports of Jones being nowhere close to competing on the basketball court next season (if ever), one would think that Jones could be placed on medical scholarship and Iowa would have a scholarship available for someone transferring in . . . might be a perfect "one and done" opportunity for someone with one year of eligibility left.

Given Shateah Wetering's decision to enter the transfer portal, it would appear that Bluder may actually have the ability to add up to two more players for next year's team - while Ava Jones sits out on a medical scholarship.

Wow, i thought that if she was on medical she couldn't ever play at Iowa. Glad I'm wrong. I definitely want her here on scholarship so she has access to great rehabilitation for her injuries and because I love that Bluder is doing the right thing. Many schools would have pulled the scholarship but not Fran with Jok after his knees. He lost almost every scholarship offer but Fran refused to pull his. Great to be a fan of our teams when the coaches are exceptional people.

 

[icwesthawk]

Many schools would have pulled the scholarship much like Fran did with Jok after his knees

This is not true. Fran never pulled Jok's scholarship

 

[Bishop1971]

This is not true. Fran never pulled Jok's scholarship

That was my point. I wasn't very clear but if you read the next sentence i say Fran didn't. I really respect that and it paid off. I'll fix my post so it's what I meant to say.

 

[Bishop1971]

This is not true. Fran never pulled Jok's scholarship

Thanks for pointing out my poor writing. Even though English was one of my majors i still struggle to represent my thoughts correctly.

 

[troutstamp1]

No one knows more about womens/girls basketball in Iowa than Jeff.

Jeff is really not a Hawkeye fan, that I can tell you

 

[hawkod]

Jeff is really not a Hawkeye fan, that I can tell you

Maybe not, but he does know his basketball.

 

[khael-hawk]

Betts absolutely looks like an impact transfer. She averaged 5.9 ppg and 3.5 rpg in 9.6 average minutes and shot over 60% from the floor. Ware was at 5.7 ppg and 4.2 rpg in 21.7 minutes. Betts was also on pace to average nearly 4 blocks per 40 minutes and didn't really get into foul trouble.

The reason Betts didn't play more is that Stanford's front court was loaded and she wasn't going to displace Cameron Brink, who is a Top 10 or even Top 5 player in college basketball.

My point isn't that Ware would be as good a get as Betts. If we landed Ware, I would be doing backflips rather than thinking, well poop we missed out on Betts. Ware can go just about anywhere she wants.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Betts absolutely looks like an impact transfer. She averaged 5.9 ppg and 3.5 rpg in 9.6 average minutes and shot over 60% from the floor. Ware was at 5.7 ppg and 4.2 rpg in 21.7 minutes. Betts was also on pace to average nearly 4 blocks per 40 minutes and didn't really get into foul trouble.

The reason Betts didn't play more is that Stanford's front court was loaded and she wasn't going to displace Cameron Brink, who is a Top 10 or even Top 5 player in college basketball.

Didn’t get in foul trouble? In 9.6 minutes? I would hope not

 

[BraydonRoberts5]