Just when we thought maybe it couldn't get more bizarre, a New Jersey federal judge "is strongly considering granting a preliminary injunction that would prohibit the NCAA from enforcing its 5 year eligibility rule." His ruling could come next week. - https://x.com/WinterSportsLaw/status...77151542943885
This case involves a Rutgers football player who is suing the NCAA to get another year of eligibility on the basis that the NCAA's 5-year eligibility rule will deprive him of earning another $550,000 to $650,000 in NIL money. It is a similar case to others that have all gone against the NCAA and have lead to the recent rulings allowing junior college and non-NCAA athletes to be granted extra years of eligibility.
If this judge rules against the 5-year limit, could it mean that Duke Deen, Darius Hannah, Zek Montgomery, and other Bradley players could return and play?
This case involves a Rutgers football player who is suing the NCAA to get another year of eligibility on the basis that the NCAA's 5-year eligibility rule will deprive him of earning another $550,000 to $650,000 in NIL money. It is a similar case to others that have all gone against the NCAA and have lead to the recent rulings allowing junior college and non-NCAA athletes to be granted extra years of eligibility.
If this judge rules against the 5-year limit, could it mean that Duke Deen, Darius Hannah, Zek Montgomery, and other Bradley players could return and play?
Comment