re: Judge Rules Players Can Go From NFL Training Camp Back to College

quote:

---

We could use all the help at FSU. Welcome back guys.

---

If only they granted prison inmates another year of eligibility, Free Shoes University would win the National Championship every year.

quote:

---

The problem is, that now sets a precedent.

---

What new precedent? Going in front of a judge is a very old precedent.

People are such drama queens nowadays.

quote:

---

What new precedent? Going in front of a judge is a very old precedent.

---

He's obviously talking about the precedent of a player going through the draft, not making a team, and returning back to college.

Are you just pretending you didn't understand his point?

quote:

---

He's obviously talking about the precedent of a player going through the draft, not making a team, and returning back to college.

---

It wasn't obvious. A player going through the draft or even signing a contract and trying to return via a judge isn't new either. It is more recent, though; it just has not worked out in the end before and may not now.

But this is a unique scenario and will not be a precedent for anything going forward unless you think the following scenarios will be applicable in the future.

The NCAA rolled out the new rule poorly, specifically denying current seniors when the rule was developed (though it was officially released after the end of the school year, no one can reasonably think they did not have this prepared beforehand).

A judge issued an injunction granting those seniors eligibility (whether that sticks or not is still uncertain), provided they are no older than 24 and have not signed a professional contract. That was Wisne v. NCAA

Players who entered the draft and signed a contract who would otherwise now be eligible under the injunction in Wisne v. NCAA sought the right to return to college and enter the transfer portal if they chose to, because they contend they would not have entered the draft had they been allowed that 5th year.

quote:

---

Are you just pretending you didn't understand his point?

---

It was poorly stated and unclear. And it was wrong anyway.

quote:

---

A few key things here:
*This was a federal ruling, so there’s no longer a blanket ruling on Class of 2022 fourth-year players to have a fifth year.
*This does not impact the hodgepodge of state rulings on fifth years. So players who’d returned to school based on the Colorado ruling will now need local state rulings to be eligible.
*Time is short on those state rulings, so they’d need to move fast on a TRO to stay eligible.
*The plaintiffs in Wisne can file a petition for reconsideration of the stay, but that’s unlikely. The calendar favors the NCAA here, as this is expected to hold for this season.

---

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