Judge issues TRO saying SEC can’t enforce pro rule
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
There's much I don't understand about the legal system, but I really don't understand how a judge in Texas can just decide on his own that the SEC can't make/enforce rules.
I wonder how granular this can get. I suppose I can kind of see how courts can rule against NCAA rules, although I think it's absurd. It's a little less clear to me how a court can say how a private conference can enforce rules. Could a court force a certain school to allow a player on the team? If a former NFL player wanted to go Bama and they said "no", could a court step in a force them to accept the player?
With how things are going, I don't see why not.
With how things are going, I don't see why not.
The judicial system is a microcosm of our society in large. Many will not state the definition of a woman! From supreme court justices to the average Jo(sephine) on the street. When things get complicated for me, I institute the "LCD" philosophy: least common denominator. I go back to Genesis 1:27 and the latter part that "God created man and woman" ... they are clearly created and created uniquely with different functions. In our society today, it appears one has no standard and as a result, man is the measure and with Humanism, we can do whatever we want. Hopefully common sense will prevail here and I am thankful the SEC instituted penalties on the coaches and programs and not on the players themselves ...
My understanding is lower level circuit judges can rule on their circuit but not outside their jurisdiction and certainly not nationally. This appears to be part of a bigger initiative as the progressives attempt to undermine the Supreme Court with the lower court rulings/TRO's and dismantle the Supreme Court in the future.
The ruling is not absolute. The judge declared that the SEC could present their arguments against the ruling in court, at which time the court could decide its final ruling.
Admittedly, I am perplexed at the initial ruling since the SEC (and B1G,ACC) rules address coaches/school penalties if they were to admit one of these players, but does clearly state they are not allowed to do so. It is a technically to be sure.
Admittedly, I am perplexed at the initial ruling since the SEC (and B1G,ACC) rules address coaches/school penalties if they were to admit one of these players, but does clearly state they are not allowed to do so. It is a technically to be sure.
Many of the rulings handed down against the NCAA have hinged on student athletes having the same "rights" as other students, which is how we got unlimited transfers. If these guys want to go back to school, they are free to do so. What I'm not clear on is how a judge can force schools/conferences to allow them to play football. Surely conferences can have their own rules. Just b/c you're NCAA eligible doesn't mean you HAVE to be eligible to play in a certain conference. Hence the SEC's rule that you cannot transfer to another SEC program outside the regular portal window.
I think for most coaches not named Lane Kiffin, there is too much risk here. This is unlikely to be decided before the start of the season so there is great risk if the SEC ultimately prevails and you played an ineligible player then you risk forfeiting those games and other penalties.
If I were the SEC/NCAA and Lane continued on this path, I would absolutely pursue legal action for he and LSU allegedly orchestrating these lawsuits.
A tiger can't change its stripes. When Kiffin bolted UT for SoCal, he told players/recruits not to show up for class or they'd be stuck at UT. That was 20 years ago. Some wrongly assumed Kiffin had matured since then.
The man is an absolute slime ball...... but he sure can coach football. Imho, he will win several national titles at LSU if that is what he is truly after.
But on the other hand, he might be perfectly fine with just transferring from school to school picking up checks. IDK. Time will tell.
I don't think they have crumbled .... I read an article where this is "school led" (15 other schools) so this has brought the other schools together like no other event has .... I would not want my son playing for Kiffin ... not ever!
Just saw snippets while I was traveling but articles were saying the SEC intends to comply with the judge's TRO.
This reminds me of the ACC's requirement that one had to score at least an 800 on the SAT to be eligible to compete in varsity sports, a move which prompted USC to leave the league. And the court rule for the plaintiffs a year after our departure in a lawsuit which in effect nullified the 800 policy.
Whether or not we like it, there is precedent.
Eh, I don't think that carries precedent. Frankly, USC fans are probably the only people on earth who remember that rule. The main difference is that the 800 SAT score was purely arbitrary. The SEC's rule about not allowing not former pros back into college competition is not arbitrary at all.
I wouldn't be surprised if someone does research and finds that ruling to support their cause.
Well, FWIW, Kiffin says he will "of course" comply with the SEC rule, though they are still exploring legal options to make it happen.
Latest
-
01
GamecockCentral
Insider Report: A defender to remember as opener approaches
-
02
GamecockCentral
South Carolina women's basketball: Gamecocks must embrace national championship expectations
-
03
GamecockCentral
Three bold predictions for South Carolina with three days until kickoff
-
04
GamecockCentral
With three days until South Carolina football kicks off 2025 season, a look back at No. 3 Javon Kinlaw
-
05
TheBigSpur
A Trio of Topics on Kent State Football | Carolina Countdown No. 3