I have no skin in the game but 20 years from now those kids from DO are talking about how they beat St Francis in the closing seconds to win norcal. They aren't going to be saying oh we had some random kid who wasn't eligible play a few downs and disqualify us. This is administration at its finest. Do the pictures with the trophies vanish? No.... Not like Marshawn Lynch showed up and was there featured back during the playoffs. This stuff is getting old.
Del Oro forfeits 2018 titles
- Thread starter Streak One
- Start date
This kid was a JV player on ability and age. JV transfer rules are different I guess. He would have never even sniffed the field this year on varsity as he would have been 4th on the depth chart at his position even if he was hypothetically playing varsity. He sat out part of the JV season but just not long enough to meet the varsity sitout period, which is longer (As has been told to me) and didn’t matter at the time cause he wasn’t good enough.
Not sure what a transfer in 2010 has to do with this. Seems like your saying DO got away with an ineligible player playing for them for three years that didn’t meet the transfer rules at the time? Surely Cooper, Benzel and others would have known and complained the moment it occurred and turned them in if it was not within the rules. It’s too competitive, they would have been all over it. There are no secrets in South Placer sports.
Anyway, math should not be hard for adults who educate our kids given they teach them math.
Not talking about 2010. I'm talking about today. The kid was a nobody. Had no influence on anything.
From the article...
“Sac-Joaquin Section Assistant Commissioner Will DeBoard said that the section office received a call about a week and a half ago from someone mentioning that Del Oro may have used the ineligible player during its Nov. 9 quarterfinal playoff game against Tracy. Del Oro was asked to investigate.”
Someone tipped off the section office and then they asked them to look into and then DO self reported it. They really had no choice but to report it. They knew they were caught.
I’ve spoke with a parent from the players former school who thinks the tip came from someone at that school.
Assuming they knew before they were notified, you’re only ‘caught’ if you knew and intentionally withheld the knowledge previous to notification.
If the office called and said “hey, did you play touchdown Tommmy against Tracy?” And your reply is “yes, we did, why?” Or something close to that, not only have you self reported but it is how you first discovered you completely and royally screwed up.
I’m extremely disappointed in our program the last couple of years for things that have happened but I don’t automatically assume it was a nefarious plot to deceive before or after the incident. Maybe they knew and hid it but it’s just as easy to see they were oblivious cause they played the kid in the first place which demonstrates they didn’t know he was ineligible and only realized when they were notified.
First off I am not trying to bash Del Oro...I am comparing two instances where the same violation occurred in the same program. In 2010 the JV call up was a transfer who did NOT sit out. He was called up to varsity to "season" him. He exploded on the scene and scored numerous TD's and made an impact. IMHO the school violated the rule. The Sacbee reported on the success of the player, who became a D1 4 year player.
8 years later, times change, multi media becomes the rage and the same school violates the exact same rule and is forced to forfeit it's wins....
In no way either time do I feel the coaches were trying to sneak one over....it just happened...the first time made a huge difference and the second didnt matter.........things like 2010 are why the rule is in place.....
8 years later, times change, multi media becomes the rage and the same school violates the exact same rule and is forced to forfeit it's wins....
In no way either time do I feel the coaches were trying to sneak one over....it just happened...the first time made a huge difference and the second didnt matter.........things like 2010 are why the rule is in place.....
Agreed, and as rules go it is black and white. Some argue there is a grey area, but that is actually between the ears of the HC who is obviously missing some parts. Is DO going to look the other way?
Does anyone know if they mail the trophy and rings to ST Francis and Central Catholic? Seems like the right thing to do.
Someone please educate me on what the problem is and why the rule exists.
If a kid transfers from school A to school B between his frosh and soph years then plays a full season of JV ball — why should he then be ineligible to play Varsity after the JV season concludes?
10 weeks of JV >>> 30 day sit out period. I don’t get what the problem is.
If a kid transfers from school A to school B between his frosh and soph years then plays a full season of JV ball — why should he then be ineligible to play Varsity after the JV season concludes?
10 weeks of JV >>> 30 day sit out period. I don’t get what the problem is.
I think the deal is if they play varsity at all, even if it’s not until playoffs, they have to sit out. And playing JV doesn’t count as sitting out as far as I understand.
Which is utterly ridiculous IMO since playing JV all season is much longer a period of time than sitting out for 30 days.
In other words, it’s not a way to circumvent the process since the player ends up missing 10 Varsity games instead of 4 or 5. So I don’t get it.
If they were eligible for JV and completed the season, they should then become eligible for Varsity.
ThunderRam, you make some valid points, and I hope some school's AD motions the Section office to review the transfer policy or at least determine a more fair punishment starting next season. That doesn't let Del Oro off the hook for this last season though. Reading the Auburn Journal article, it seems like another school reported the error before DO came clean to the Section commissioner. I hope someone looks further into when the school knew about the JV kid's eligibility since this mistake really impacted CC and St. Francis as well.
TR,
I think the way the rule reads is, Player transfers from school A to B after Frosh season with out a legitimate move, has the option to sit out 5 games of his JV season and will be eligible to move up for Varsity playoffs or he can play the full ten game JV season without penalty but cannot play up on Varsity in the playoffs........The player has the option....either way it is a way to mange athletic motivated transfers.....
In no way do I feel DO or Jesuit were trying to gain an advantage. Most of the time the players aren't impact guys....In 2010 Del Oro got away with one......but I think they were just as surprised when the kid exploded on the scene.
I think the way the rule reads is, Player transfers from school A to B after Frosh season with out a legitimate move, has the option to sit out 5 games of his JV season and will be eligible to move up for Varsity playoffs or he can play the full ten game JV season without penalty but cannot play up on Varsity in the playoffs........The player has the option....either way it is a way to mange athletic motivated transfers.....
In no way do I feel DO or Jesuit were trying to gain an advantage. Most of the time the players aren't impact guys....In 2010 Del Oro got away with one......but I think they were just as surprised when the kid exploded on the scene.
Of course not. Rules are rules and everyone needs to abide by them equally. My .02 cents is beyond that.
I think going forward the CIF/SJS needs to re-visit this rule. If a kid transfers coming in to their JR or SR year then they have to sit out 30 days regardless, as participating at the JV level isn't a possibility.
But if a kid transfers after their Frosh season, they aren't going to try circumventing the 30 day sit out (for Varsity) by playing a full season at the JV level since doing that would result in missing far more than 30 days and 4-5 Varsity games. That wouldn't make sense to do (if their intention all along was to play Varsity).
It only makes since to me to have them sit out 30 days IF they don't complete the entire JV season. But if they complete the JV season that should satisfy the 30-day rule and they should be eligible for Varsity immediately.
Or have the varsity kids who put in their time all year (literally all year) be the players who fill out the playoff roster and get the scrub minutes. The last regular season game roster is the roster that moves into the playoffs.
Whether the rule is stupid or not is moot. DO 100% knew of their infraction and did not report it so they could keep playing. They get caught later who gives a shit it doesn’t truly take away the wins and titles. They aren’t listed in CIF record book big deal.
Again, you’re assuming they knew. You don’t know that so when you make the comment “ come clean” you are saying you know they knew before hand. Please share with us how you know this to be fact?
Who at Del Oro told you they knew? You and Coop seem to know for fact they knew and didn’t report, every article says they self reported.
Did the principal tell you? AD? HC? One of the coaches? Which one cause I want to know so I can ask them personally.
You’re missing the point. Nobody is saying that because the rule is ridiculous DO should be forgiven. They violated current rules therefore deserve the punishment.
Don’t misconstrue things. Moving forward is what’s being discussed. And that’s not moot.
Last edited:
Right. Nobody should rush to judgement.
IDK when they knew exactly, but it’s clear they didn’t know the night they played Tracy or they wouldn’t have done it.
Perhaps they realized it once Jesuit self-reported and just decided to play it out. Or perhaps they didn’t realize until after the season. We can all speculate, but only those involved know for sure.
Rumor has it a parent from the transfer kids former school is who turned them in? So it wasn't a self report issue. Maybe they knew maybe they didnt, Makes no difference, the justice was served.
I am just speculating and I have no proof that Del Oro played out the post season knowing the JV player was ineligible. I would like proof, though. If the Section office and the CIF office has investigated and determined Del Oro actually did not know the player's status until after the state game, then it is hard for both the coach and AD to justify they did their jobs to protect their program, their student-athletes, and the integrity of the sport since all have been damaged by this report. If they did not check their players' eligibility especially after Jesuit forfeited to them due to the same violation, then that is an incompetent error. And if they just turned a blind eye, then that sets a very bad precedent in high school sports to think they won anything despite breaking the rules.
True, the coach and AD either knew, or should have known, especially after Jesuit’s forfeit. They have no one to blame but themselves. The Commish was just enforcing the existing rules.
Concur 100%. Nobody should be excusing Del Oro, Jesuit or anyone else that failed to understand and follow the rules as nearly everyone else did.
Agree, they both screwed up due to lack of managing their program. If Del Oro knew -- and one has to believe they at least asked the question immediately after hearing of Jesuit's infraction -- but waited until someone blew the whistle, that is even worse than just breaking the rule.
Lots of good questions being asked. I would think there is a good amount of coaches that want to know as well. I am sure this conversation is being had across our local football landscape by many.
There are poster schools who’ve dissected CIF bylaws to the nth degree but still get busted at times. How a kid can actually move from home to a coaches house (not this case) and not get attention is like the Farmers ad: “It happened and we covered it.”
Other schools have leadership integrity. They know who they are. Their counterparts? “Karma’s a b*^#h.” Feel bad for the kids who relied on adults in the room, yet didn’t get that.
Other schools have leadership integrity. They know who they are. Their counterparts? “Karma’s a b*^#h.” Feel bad for the kids who relied on adults in the room, yet didn’t get that.
I agree they, DO, screwed up and the commish has to do what he had to do.
Justice has been served, because they knew the rules even if they didn’t know the kid had not served his full time. Stupid mistake.
In truth, I’m glad they got hammered because it will set an example and if they knew and didn’t report, I hope the ones that did know are all fired, but I’m being told the coaches didn’t know even though they should have known.
If you don’t know you violated a rule then for it to be brought to light, someone else has to illuminate it. I’ve heard the same rumor that it was someone from his previous school.
But it’s still self reporting when the league office calls and says “hey, did you play lilttle Johnny in the game against Tracy and how many JV games did he sit out?”
And they reply “yes we did and we’ve determined he sat out X number of JV games, which we now realize is not enough for him to have played on varsity” then you are self reporting.
You are confusing that the only way to self report is turning yourself in cause you discovered you made an error (being proactive) with confirming you did something that you didn’t know was a violation cause you thought it was ok (in this case the kid was clear to play) when someone asks you. Both are considered self reporting even though in DO’s case someone from Casa Robles (likely a Coach) initiated the inquiry because DO didn’t know they were in violation so there was nothing from their perspective to report.
Of course they were wrong and should have known and are now paying the price but suggesting they didn’t self report just because someone else tipped off the section is not truthful because when asked they said “yes, we did play little Johnny”....that is self reporting too.
For all we know that is exactly how it went down at Jesuit too. I don’t know this but it would be easy to to imagine that SJS were tipped about the Jesuit player too, they called Jesuit and Jesuit said “yep, we played him” and that was it.
RR, great insight, but consider once DO learned Jesuit was a forfeit game, they also learned why. So they knew the rule after that first playoff week. You know they immediately checked their roster and realized they played an ineligible player, too (should have been a double forfeit game!). They knew the rule, knew they played an ineligible player, but waited to be outed. To your first point, someone needs to go and return some integrity to that program.
http://cifsjs.org/coaches_and_administrators/transfereligibility/TransferRulings
This is the link to every transfer ruling in the section for every sport. It is public viewing. It shows exactly what the student-athlete can and cannot do. It will say SOP for Sit out period. Limited eligibility with JV option available which was the case in this instance or Unlimited eligibility.
Just like Three Bears stated it is not complicated. Everybody involved should have know.
This is the link to every transfer ruling in the section for every sport. It is public viewing. It shows exactly what the student-athlete can and cannot do. It will say SOP for Sit out period. Limited eligibility with JV option available which was the case in this instance or Unlimited eligibility.
Just like Three Bears stated it is not complicated. Everybody involved should have know.
If the kid was on that list, there is absolutely no excuse. And each team has to put each transfer through this clearing process?
The Grant fiasco, forfeiting playoffs.....sounds like inmates are starting to rule the asylum. Many years of great memories in Loomis, hoping to get back to those days.
The student-athlete's name that I've been told was in violation is listed on that site as:
If I'm understanding the above correctly, it tells me the student-athlete would have been eligible for Varsity football on 9/21 had they elected to sit out for 30 days. But they obviously chose the 'limited (junior varsity) option'.
What it doesn't say is that the student-athlete would be ineligible for Varsity competition once the JV season concluded. But apparently that is/was the case. The coaches and admin at DO should have been aware of it. But apparently somebody wasn't.
As I've made clear already, (IMO) that rule needs to be looked at going forward and strongly considered for change. It's beyond lame.
Last edited:
Here's my thing. If another school "tells" on another school...what's the big deal? The CIF doesn't have enough people to investigate. If another school knows exactly what has happened then they have to right to speak up. Call it what you want. If you don't like that...quit cheating. You can't tell me that "you don't know the rules". Or "didn't understand that one". Bullshit. Quit skirting around the rules. Quit playing games in the gray area.
If you're a school that keeps getting kids from all over the area (legally or by recruiting them) you better line up your I's and T's.
From what I gather Del Oro is still going to order a blue section banner as if they actually won it. Nope. It was vacated. It seems like some people think rules don't apply to them.
If you're a school that keeps getting kids from all over the area (legally or by recruiting them) you better line up your I's and T's.
From what I gather Del Oro is still going to order a blue section banner as if they actually won it. Nope. It was vacated. It seems like some people think rules don't apply to them.
Similar threads
