NCAA denies Oklahoma's waiver request for Dorial Green-Beckham to play in 2014. OU says it accepts decision & continue to assist DGB— Dave Matter (@Dave_Matter) August 23, 2014
But nothing about Green-Beckham's departure from Mizzou indicated he was dismissed for reasons beyond his control. Tigers coach Gary Pinkel dismissed Green-Beckham on April 11 after Green-Beckham was the subject in a felony burglary investigation in Columbia, resulting from an incident where the wide receiver allegedly busted into a female's apartment and pushed her down several stairs. He was never arrested or charged with a crime.
Green-Beckham's admission to Oklahoma came with specific stipulations, including continued rehabilitation and drug testing, a source told ESPN.com's Brandon Chatmon. Green-Beckham will be subject to a "zero-tolerance" policy, which includes any failed drug test.
University of Oklahoma Statement on Dorial Green-Beckham Ruling by NCAA pic.twitter.com/U2cfG4Fk9c— Oklahoma Football (@OU_Football) August 23, 2014
Our colleagues over at Crimson and Cream Machine:
Earlier this month, Oklahoma filed a waiver on DGB's behalf citing the "run-off" rule in hopes of gaining immediate eligibility for one of the nation's top receivers. The "run-off" rule centers around the idea that a student is forced to transfer due to reasons outside of their control.
The rule helped LSU point guard become immediately eligible at Oklahoma St. after being dismissed. In most of the experts minds, DGB would receive the same treatment as the situation was nearly identical.
Q: In a case like DGB, you’re presented with the facts and you decide their fate?
A: Well, the student has to come forward and appeal on some basis, and I have to make a decision on whether to overturn or not the decision. I’m an appeals court. I don’t get involved at the lower levels. There is a separate process there that produces a result. If the student doesn’t accept that result, they have a right under current rules to appeal to me. But there must be a basis for that.
(At this point, a spokesman clarifies that Loftin had nothing to do with the original decision to kick Green-Beckham off the team.)
Oh, sorry, I misunderstood that. That decision was totally the coach’s call. I got a call from Mike one day saying, "Pinkel just called me and told me he was going to kick DGB off the team." I had nothing to do with that. He then appealed. The problem was what he did in this assault case (Green-Beckham was accused, but never charged, of forcing his way into an apartment and pushing a woman down a set of stairs) not because of his team dismissal. That was a separate issue totally. He then was brought before the student-conduct process to be looked at from the standpoint of being treated under our rules here for any student about this assault that happened off campus. That’s where I got involved. I had nothing to do with the decision to kick him off the team. I am involved with the student-conduct process as an appellate. I have nothing to do with the decision a coach makes to dismiss a player. That was something Pinkel made his own mind up about and informed the AD and me. I got a call from Mike within minutes, I think, of his being told by Pinkel. The same with Frank Haith when he kicked off the basketball player (Zach Price).