Beware of Judges running amok...

[Haggin_Hall_1983]

Last season, Alabama: Bediako, a 7-footer who played two college seasons then G League after declaring for the NBA, received a temporary court order allowing him five games for Alabama before a judge upheld the NCAA's ineligibility ruling tied to his pro contract.

I think our lineup is set- stay far away from this judicial ruling and adding any further players.

 

[JwUKFan11]

Ok Mitch

 

[UKgrad22]

Different situations/circumstances. Think Pope and Co. are holding out to see if guys like Mark Mitchell and Kohler will be allowed to transfer (didn’t enter portal ahead of time) before making a decision on who to add

 

[Beatle Bum]

I think you need to ride all of these waves to see where they end up. This could be a dead end, but not rolling with the wave would place UK at a disadvantage.

My only question is who would be Pope’s 15 if the graduated seniors were not potentially in the market. If he has some European big, for example, in the mix, it may be better to get him into class than see where the courts will land.

 

[CRZ4UK]

The only person who would have been scared to even look into the Wave was Mitch Barnhart.
Thank the lord he’s eating hey with his millions.

 

[gbl97]

It's a tricky situation. If you can get Hall (who is in the portal) but you tell him no thanks to pursue Mitchell, then Mitchell is ruled ineligible, that's regrettable.

 

[KapitalCat]

Mitchell and Kohler are risky because neither entered the portal in April. They can go back to their old teams under the Sweeney ruling. Hall entered the portal in April. He's good to go. He makes us really really good. If you can't get him you take him and don't look back.

 

[KYAnywhereEverywhere]

I think it'll stick that last year's seniors get another year. Would be hard pressed for the NCAA to make the stance that those seniors are cutoff considering that they aren't a year or more removed from playing.

 

[*Fox2Monk*]

At this point sign them and find another judge to grant them eligibility. apparently all these judges can rule however they want so dare the NCAA to stop them.

 

[Bluegrasskingreboot]

I think it'll stick that last year's seniors get another year. Would be hard pressed for the NCAA to make the stance that those seniors are cutoff considering that they aren't a year or more removed from playing.

It seems a pointless hill to chose to die on to me as well.

THIS is where the line must be drawn?

On something that they themselves already decided is allowed going forward anyway?

I didn't get the point of not allowing this year's seniors in from the beginning. We'll, other than some limp effort at "setting SOME boundaries".

Why waste time, resources, and money fighting this battle? Who could be winning really as in coming out ahead and benefiting tangibly besides the law firms in the whole exchange, even if they were to 'win" and dilute their own game?

 

[Im The Village Idiot]

I never understood the concept of watching a product you hate. I don’t care what the rules are or lack thereof. I want to watch Kentucky play and I want to see Ws throughout the schedule. I enjoy it — that’s why I wait all year for it and talk about it. It’s a simple and happy way to live. Control what you can control.

 

[vhcat1970]

^ Then why watch games where you team loses?

 

[SenseMaker_Cats]

I think it'll stick that last year's seniors get another year. Would be hard pressed for the NCAA to make the stance that those seniors are cutoff considering that they aren't a year or more removed from playing.

Why stop there? Once you do that the seniors before are only one year removed.

 

[Im The Village Idiot]

^ Then why watch games where you team loses?

Because I enjoy watching my team. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t watch. Really that simple.

I don’t enjoy losing the game to be clear but I still enjoy many things about the sport.

 

[73CAV]

Regardless of the various court rulings, if the Protect College Sports Act passes in the next six to eight weeks, and is signed into law (which now seems possible, if not likely), all of these discussions become moot. The Act protects the NCAA from anti-trust issues and allows it to determine eligibility. If it happens, a lot of staffs will have wasted time and resources which were needed elsewhere.

 

[Reggie Noble]

Why stop there? Once you do that the seniors before are only one year removed.

Because any class before 2022 is past their 5 year window, these,2022, players are not. They are not asking for the basic rule to be changed, they’re saying that they are in compliance with the basic rule and shouldn’t be excluded.

 

[KYAnywhereEverywhere]

It seems a pointless hill to chose to die on to me as well.

THIS is where the line must be drawn?

On something that they themselves already decided is allowed going forward anyway?

I didn't get the point of not allowing this year's seniors in from the beginning. We'll, other than some limp effort at "setting SOME boundaries".

Why waste time, resources, and money fighting this battle? Who could be winning really as in coming out ahead and benefiting tangibly besides the law firms in the whole exchange, even if they were to 'win" and dilute their own game?

Weird hill to die on is a great way of putting it.

 

[KYAnywhereEverywhere]

Because any class before 2022 is past their 5 year window, these,2022, players are not. They are not asking for the basic rule to be changed, they’re saying that they are in compliance with the basic rule and shouldn’t be excluded.

Perfect way of explaining it. I was having a hard time coming up with the words to say what you just said.

 

[SenseMaker_Cats]

Because any class before 2022 is past their 5 year window, these,2022, players are not. They are not asking for the basic rule to be changed, they’re saying that they are in compliance with the basic rule and shouldn’t be excluded.

My point being, what you just said wasn’t “the rule” the NCAA put out. So if a random judge can say “that’s not the rule, this is the rule”, why not just sue for now not getting to ask for an injury exemption because the guys before you got too.

I’m not rooting for that btw. Just saying if a random judge can change the rule, why couldn’t another one say, “well I think it should be this”?