Itās actually really smart as a coach to put those players in early so they burn the year regardless that way youāre not training them and improving them so they can go use their eligibility somewhere else.
Same reason I said we shouldāve put Isaac Trout in that first game and not give him the extra year of eligibility somewhere else.
2 Likes
Another flavor is what happened in the Fourqurean case (emphasis mine): ORDER Granting Preliminary Injunction. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 2/6/2025. (Watson, Nathan)
The current differentiation between Division I and II rules ā allowing for different, limited participation without using a year of eligibility ā are not squarely implicated in this case because plaintiff played in 11 games in 2021, albeit briefly in most. Nevertheless, these ongoing inequities help frame plaintiffās request for an additional season of eligibility, especially since plaintiff and his coaches were operating under the assumption that he had burned a year of his college eligibility the moment he played a single snap at GVSU in 2021 ā presumably encouraging plaintiff and his coaches to continue to play snaps, however meaningless, given his mental state and limited participation at practices. In fact, Matt Mitchell, plaintiffās coach at GVSU, avers that he would not have played in 2021 at all, but for his being forced into action in several games due to injuries to other players despite not being physically ready or in a good mental head space.
Would any of that apply at all to Thomas? Dunno, there isnāt really the D1/D2 issue going on. But the idea is out there that you can considering mitigating factors for exceptions to the rule.
Might not be this year, but itās a matter of time before someone wins the court case where being an enrolled college student makes you eligible to play. Finish your 4 year degree, and use all 4 years of eligibility playing? Just start a grad school program, or hell, another undergrad degree.
Unless the NIL bubble totally bursts, why would a guy who is college good, but not NBA good, not play 8+ years of college ball?
1 Like
Itās kind of funny. In the era when the NCAA was pushing the facade of the student athlete the strongest, there were the harshest eligibility rules. If someone is a student in good standing, why are there any limits on a supposed extracurricular activity? I played intramural sports for like a decade! Now that things are getting professionalized, the eligibility rules are slowly being chipped away.
2 Likes
If you mean specifically the forcing a kid to play: yes, if Thomas can show he was forced to play DESPITE BEING INJURED, then he should get a waiver.
If you mean generally that the NCAA should consider mitigating factors, then I also agree. But the question then remains, whatās the mitigating factor/s? To me, āI was just over the limitā is not a compelling mitigating factor.
Is there some case being made / to be made by universities showing their interest in having players actually be students? Itās their $ and their brand is the school, therefore ā¦ that $ wonāt be around if people lose interest because thereās no attachment between player and school except a superficial one.
I mean, thatās my case for it. Iād imagine if universities were thinking anywhere past the immediate short term it would be theirs as well.
1 Like
What about āI literally couldnāt fathom that checking into that game would cost me 2 million dollarsā?
4 Likes
Yes, in antitrust terms, they are creating a ādifferentiated product.ā The judge in the 4-Quran case acknowledges that as the NCAAās procompetitive rationale. BUT then they go into this silly analysis that nobody knows what it means called āless restrictive alternativeā analysis. That is - could the NCAA achieve a differentiated product from the pros using a less restrictive alternative.
If you have no idea what that means, I have good news: you too can be a federal court judge. 
4 Likes
https://x.com/goodmanhoops/status/1914430602000084992?s=46&t=60E4X0iAKwGj-OEWmmLivA
Iām a little surprised by this. I heard OO was pricier to keep than I would have expected, but Texas Tech is paying a guy first round draft pick money and got some other splashes, BYU is running the ānot church fundedā but actually church funded with extra steps mercenary playbook around Dybantsa, Vitamin Water money at St Johnās is reeling in lots of big fish, and Louisville has to be spending a ton too.
Iād believe Kentucky is #1, but not sure I believe itās not even close.
2 Likes
Seems compelling, but would also apply to literally any freshman who checked into a game in 21-22. Every freshman shouldāve taken a redshirt year!
Yeah I was being quippy, but this is where the rules are clashing into reality. Decisions made four years ago are now having massive financial consequences for players, and there was simply no way to anticipate this financial landscape at the time.
While I agree with you on the technicality of the waiver rules, the courts are going to see things very differently. I think the NCAA would be smart (ha!) to grant a blanket fifth year, and then push hard for collective bargaining before the whole thing falls apart.
2 Likes
I think thereās a decent chance the NCAA grants a 5th year sometime in the next year or so, but then there will all sorts of questions about when it will apply / to whom it will apply.
And maybe coaches should leave a few roster spots open for that eventualityā¦
1 Like
Tony Bennett was a man ahead of his time. Remember when redshirting was terrible and no one wanted to do it. Now guys are suing to do it.
Meanwhile Christian Bliss
23 Likes
As for collective bargaining, that will have to be Congress.
Collective bargaining is illegal! Itās only allowed because there is an exemption to antitrust laws that allows unions to collectively bargain. Unions are collections of employees. Student athletes are not employees and the new admin. has reinforced that in that Fartmouth case (keeping this typo bc I like it). So currently, thereās no legal way for schools and athletes to legally collectively bargain.
So the only way to get around that is to create an entire new statutory structure that applies to college athletes. We shall seeā¦ This has been discussed but so far thereās not even a draftā¦
@AnonymooseHoo good article! Feel like Iāve seen that beforeā¦
Iām concerned our future German player is going to be tariffed, can they do something about that first?
6 Likes
See, TB is always right. I mean Pistol Pete couldnt even play as a freshman. NCAA was way ahead the game
1 Like
But that was the one year he didnāt RS anyone! (Taine and Igor both played)
1 Like
Not sure about tariffed but international players better watch their visa situations. Iād put some money on an international student athlete having their visa revoked this season. Already over 1,000 intl students impacted. Depending on the sport, there will some inevitable backpedaling and attempts at damage control. NIL and sports fans add a whole new dimension to this. Buckle up.
2 Likes
I hate Enfield, but I think the strongest case Malik has is that it was 2021-22 and Covid was still very much a thing. USC had games canceled and missed weeks of the season because of an outbreak in the winter. I would argue that redshirting players wasnāt really an option since you could have half of your team test positive and miss games. Guys needed to be ready to play.
3 Likes