It sounds like these league policies will be enforceable

Yes. The players can take action against the conference but the schools are SOL for the most part

A judge can say their TRO or PI applies to the conference all they want. The conf won’t touch them regardless.

Sounds like collusion by the schools to disenfranchise the affected players.

quote:

---

Florida State sued the ACC over media revenue 2 years ago

---

I didn’t say they couldn’t sue, I just think that it’s unlikely.

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

It very much seems from the outside looking in that the B10 and SEC conspired to enforce this after the fact of it happening.

I’m just not how positive I am this is just these two conferences sticking their fingers in a dam.

And I’ve never heard of a private employer or club that can make its own rules when a judge has already issued an injunction on that very rule.

Any judge is only going to get pissed you tried to end run his ruling. He just issue a new injunction that says the sec suspending the coach and fining the school is just de facto banning the kid who has the injunction.


Oh well. I hate the whole system anyway.

Can this rule be retroactive if a player has already signed with a school? If so, then the player and school could potentially claim harm against the SEC.

If the players sue the SEC, then Sankey will say “this team will have to forfeit all games played with this player rostered etc.” or some bullshite.

So it seems as if the players can sue, but it won’t matter because the SEC will punish its members by not abiding by the rules. And if you think LSU is going to sue the SEC back, you’re mistaken. The ruling was unanimous 16-0.

Thank god this fricking nonsense is about to be over with.

So the league would be picking which injunction is enforceable?
If so then only allow 5 for 5 players to play. Everyone with a 6th year is ineligible. I don’t know if they really want to go down that road…?????

The issue isn’t with the 5 for 5, it’s that these players signed pro contracts

Right but if they had known at the time they could play another year of college ball they may have not signed the contract.

The NCAA late rule change caused harm to them. Had the rule change happened before they made the decision this would not be an issue.

quote:

---

The issue isn’t with the 5 for 5, it’s that these players signed pro contracts

---

But they signed before knowing they had another year of eligibility. There's extenuating circumstances to consider in their situation. Moving forward, I get the policy. But it shouldn't be retroactive in their cases.