Vanderbilt QB Diego Pavis won an injunction against the NCAA asking for an extra year of eligibility, saying his JuCo years shouldn't count toward the NCAA's eligibility rules.




Joey Aguilar and Kaedin Robinson both played in JuCo and exhausted their traditional eligibility, so they theoretically could file an injunction and get some time back.




This all just happened in the last few hours, so it's all so new. Once again the NCAA gets their butts handed to them in court and have to react. The NCAA's statement was to beg for Congressional relief.

That leads to the obvious question. Would you want Aguilar or Robinson back? K-Rob has a long recovery road from his torn ACL and meniscus suffered in November. Also, K-Rob signed with an agent, so I don't know how that complicates things.

Also, someone go find Banks Tolley, bring him back to Smith Stadium and put him in the cleanup spot.

BTW, if this thread veers into a discussion about slavery or California politics, I'm kicking everyone's ass.

California is great!!!

Hope Kaedin returns, and that he can play ball by September.

NattyBumppo'sRevenge wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:44 pm

California is great!!!

Slavery is bad.

I assume neither will want to return and/or new staff wants their own players

311neers wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:51 pm

Hope Kaedin returns, and that he can play ball by September.

When did he play juco? He transferred from UCF, and I thought went straight there from Christ School in Asheville.

So if JuCo no longer counts against eligibility:

2 years JuCo
4 years NCAA

I’m sensing a new way for players who have a bad first year to get some experience before getting back into the portal.

app97 wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:58 pm

311neers wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:51 pm

Hope Kaedin returns, and that he can play ball by September.

When did he play juco? He transferred from UCF, and I thought went straight there from Christ School in Asheville.

I definitely remember when we were recruiting him out of HS, he went to some 5th year or JUCO up in NY or NJ maybe. For some reason, I just remember him playing on a purple team.

T-Dog wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:38 pm

Vanderbilt QB Diego Pavis won an injunction against the NCAA asking for an extra year of eligibility, saying his JuCo years shouldn't count toward the NCAA's eligibility rules.




Joey Aguilar and Kaedin Robinson both played in JuCo and exhausted their traditional eligibility, so they theoretically could file an injunction and get some time back.




This all just happened in the last few hours, so it's all so new. Once again the NCAA gets their butts handed to them in court and have to react. The NCAA's statement was to beg for Congressional relief.

That leads to the obvious question. Would you want Aguilar or Robinson back? K-Rob has a long recovery road from his torn ACL and meniscus suffered in November. Also, K-Rob signed with an agent, so I don't know how that complicates things.

Also, someone go find Banks Tolley, bring him back to Smith Stadium and put him in the cleanup spot.

A Banks Tolley comeback would be wild. Would that buy him 2 more years?! Could have our own Cam Rising 26 year old on the team.

I think the 4-years of eligibility rule will be challenged next. Why have an arbitrary eligibility limitation; we're preventing people from "working". There is no limitation on how many years you can spend in school so why have a limitation on the number of years you can play ball (aka work).

At some point, some higher power is gonna have to step and tell all these players to get a damn job like the rest of the ppl who graduate college.

Future ruling of the NCAA or whoever.

2 years of JuCo with NIL $$$
4 years of college with NIL $$
THEN as many years as they want to play at said college as long as the NIL money is flowing to them.

When will the madness stop!! College sports will be 100% over for sure, because it's getting pretty damn close now.

Appst86 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 7:49 am

I think the 4-years of eligibility rule will be challenged next. Why have an arbitrary eligibility limitation; we're preventing people from "working". There is no limitation on how many years you can spend in school so why have a limitation on the number of years you can play ball (aka work).

I *think* based on a quick peruse of the judgement that the NCAA will be able to keep the 4 year eligibility rule. I don't know how that rule would infringe on standing law since it's kinda similar to baseball's rules for how long a player can go back and forth from majors and minors and whatnot. I think this judgement was made because the NJCAA and NCAA are two different governing bodies. Because Pavia played in JuCo, he wasn't under the rules of the NCAA. Now he believes he deserves 4 years of eligibility in the NCAA, and the court basically agreed with him.
Someone might challenge the eligibility rule, but I don't know how they'd win that one. I think the NCAA does have authority to determine eligibility. However, I am very much not a lawyer.

AppState89 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 8:01 am

Future ruling of the NCAA or whoever.

2 years of JuCo with NIL $$$
4 years of college with NIL $$
THEN as many years as they want to play at said college as long as the NIL money is flowing to them.

When will the madness stop!! College sports will be 100% over for sure, because it's getting pretty damn close now.

There ain't no money in JuCo. There aren't very many JuCos even left, and even fewer have football.

Appst86 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 7:49 am

I think the 4-years of eligibility rule will be challenged next. Why have an arbitrary eligibility limitation; we're preventing people from "working". There is no limitation on how many years you can spend in school so why have a limitation on the number of years you can play ball (aka work).

This is the end of college football.

The future will actually be “Buckeye Football, sponsored by Ohio State University, Columbus”.

It will be played by paid employees of programs who operate under the same rules of the NFL. They will not be students, they will be year to year contractors no different from the mess hall staff, except in their pay. They will play football at college until they are 35 and then retire.


If every single rule that is challenged is found to be arbitrary, there are no rules, including that one must go to class. To me, it would seem as if someone or some group is bankrolling their desired cases based on what the impact of the outcome of that case would be, so that they can mold the sport to their liking.

We’ve seen certain partisans do this at the Federal level for decades. When something couldn’t get through Congress, they would bankroll a court case and push it through to the Supreme Court, knowing that the ideological make-up would make new law rather than interpret existing law, neither of which are what SCOTUS is actually supposed to do.

The point is, there is some dark money flowing in behind the scenes. Most likely from potential investors or money managers who see an opportunity to buy stakes in the schools athletics programs which will very soon be seaparate from the school completely.

The madness will stop when the bankrolling stops, and that will only stop when they reach their desired outcome. As of now, there isn’t a single rule that could withstand the judges in these cases.

MrCraig wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 8:11 am

Appst86 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 7:49 am

I think the 4-years of eligibility rule will be challenged next. Why have an arbitrary eligibility limitation; we're preventing people from "working". There is no limitation on how many years you can spend in school so why have a limitation on the number of years you can play ball (aka work).

I *think* based on a quick peruse of the judgement that the NCAA will be able to keep the 4 year eligibility rule. I don't know how that rule would infringe on standing law since it's kinda similar to baseball's rules for how long a player can go back and forth from majors and minors and whatnot. I think this judgement was made because the NJCAA and NCAA are two different governing bodies. Because Pavia played in JuCo, he wasn't under the rules of the NCAA. Now he believes he deserves 4 years of eligibility in the NCAA, and the court basically agreed with him.
Someone might challenge the eligibility rule, but I don't know how they'd win that one. I think the NCAA does have authority to determine eligibility. However, I am very much not a lawyer.

Baseball has collective bargaining. To have collective bargaining, you have to be employed I believe. To be employed, you likely don’t need to be a student at a university.

The eligibility rule is the most arbitrary of them all, if they are being treated as employees.

311neers wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:00 pm

app97 wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:58 pm

311neers wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:51 pm

Hope Kaedin returns, and that he can play ball by September.

When did he play juco? He transferred from UCF, and I thought went straight there from Christ School in Asheville.

I definitely remember when we were recruiting him out of HS, he went to some 5th year or JUCO up in NY or NJ maybe. For some reason, I just remember him playing on a purple team.

You are correct sir! Kaedin was a freshman all American at ASA community college.

We should recruit some players from UNC Charlotte since they all have 4 years of eligibility left.

NattyBumppo'sRevenge wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 19, 2024 9:23 am

We should recruit some players from UNC Charlotte since they all have 4 years of eligibility left.

Other JUCOs would have better talent though.