Toggle sidebar

NCAA RULING

karlchilders.sixpack

karlchilders.sixpack

All-Conference
Jun 5, 2008
20,984
4,772
113
You knew there would be challenges. Seems there is not a huge number that it affects.
They have to start somewhere.
 
P

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
60,136
31,085
113
Of course this was coming. You have to wonder why the ncaa made a point of excluding players who graduated hs in 2022. They just invited the lawsuit & you know there’s a judge somewhere that would rule against them. Just typical ncaa stupidity.
 
TheBannerM

TheBannerM

All-Conference
Nov 30, 2024
1,437
2,029
113
Malick Sylla is the only other class of ‘22 on last year’s roster.
 
GloryDawg

GloryDawg

Heisman
Mar 3, 2005
20,511
19,066
113
Ole MIss had a few four-year guys in baseball that did not get drafted. Ferris is one of them maybe.
 
The Peeper

The Peeper

Heisman
Feb 26, 2008
16,583
12,222
113
patdog said:
Of course this was coming. You have to wonder why the ncaa made a point of excluding players who graduated hs in 2022. They just invited the lawsuit & you know there’s a judge somewhere that would rule against them. Just typical ncaa stupidity.
Click to expand...
A judge somewhere you say? Pittsboro, MS maybe?

1000014758.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: patdog
D

Dawgzilla2

All-Conference
Oct 9, 2022
2,604
2,926
113
karlchilders.sixpack said:
For every older player that hangs in, it bumps a younger guy out.
Can take only so many.
Click to expand...
This was part of the NCAA argument; the rule is not anti-competitive because the players who used up their eligibility were replaced by younger players. The judge says that does not make the rule pro-competitive.

I suspect the NCAA will allow these players to be an exception to the roster limits, so any school signing them will not have to cut another player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howiefeltersnstch
D

Dawgzilla2

All-Conference
Oct 9, 2022
2,604
2,926
113
patdog said:
Of course this was coming. You have to wonder why the ncaa made a point of excluding players who graduated hs in 2022. They just invited the lawsuit & you know there’s a judge somewhere that would rule against them. Just typical ncaa stupidity.
Click to expand...
They did it to avoid roster chaos. Schools had already signed transfers and high school players based on the existing eligibility rules, and suddenly granting an additional year to players who were supposed to be finished is problematic.

Thats why they did this in between academic years. They intended the rule to apply only to players currently eligible. But it does exclude class of '22 players who did not redshirt.

The judge says that was an arbitrary decision. By that logic, any numerical limit to eligibility is arbitrary and should not be allowed.
 
P

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
60,136
31,085
113
Dawgzilla2 said:
They did it to avoid roster chaos. Schools had already signed transfers and high school players based on the existing eligibility rules, and suddenly granting an additional year to players who were supposed to be finished is problematic.

Thats why they did this in between academic years. They intended the rule to apply only to players currently eligible. But it does exclude class of '22 players who did not redshirt.

The judge says that was an arbitrary decision. By that logic, any numerical limit to eligibility is arbitrary and should not be allowed.
Click to expand...
Roster chaos is the norm the last several years. And you’re not talking about many players this will affect. The 105 limit isn’t arbitrary. There’s a reason for it. Making a rule that say 2023 grads get 5 years while 2022 grads only get 4 is arbitrary. Bottom
Line is right or wrong, the NCAA had to know this was just begging for another court case they would lose.
 
karlchilders.sixpack

karlchilders.sixpack

All-Conference
Jun 5, 2008
20,984
4,772
113
Dawgzilla2 said:
This was part of the NCAA argument; the rule is not anti-competitive because the players who used up their eligibility were replaced by younger players. The judge says that does not make the rule pro-competitive.

I suspect the NCAA will allow these players to be an exception to the roster limits, so any school signing them will not have to cut another player.
Click to expand...
And, so, who will actually pay the extra cost for those scholarships?
 
D

Dawgzilla2

All-Conference
Oct 9, 2022
2,604
2,926
113
patdog said:
Roster chaos is the norm the last several years. And you’re not talking about many players this will affect. The 105 limit isn’t arbitrary. There’s a reason for it. Making a rule that say 2023 grads get 5 years while 2022 grads only get 4 is arbitrary. Bottom
Line is right or wrong, the NCAA had to know this was just begging for another court case they would lose.
Click to expand...
They had to draw a line somewhere, and they would get sued either way.

And you're talking about a different type of chaos. Roster turnover is the norm. Setting your roster and then finding out guys you thought had exhausted their eligibility can come back is chaos, because someone loses the game of musical chairs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Maroon and White

Latest

  1. 01 Maroon and White Mississippi State vs. South Carolina History
  2. 02 Maroon and White Football Mississippi State Week 3 Preview: South Carolina Offensive threat
  3. 03 Maroon and White Football Mississippi State estimated 13th in CFP spending among SEC teams
  4. 04 Maroon and White Football South Carolina HC Shane Beamer points to Mississippi State's defensive scheme and prolific offense in Week 3 media session
  5. 05 Maroon and White Mississippi State Week 3 Preview: South Carolina Players to know
Top Bottom