• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Judge might block NCAA from enforcing 5-year eligibility rule

Da Coach

Da Coach

Moderator
Staff member
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/1913277151542943885

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?
 
I think it is really challenging the 5 years to play 4 at an NCAA school. My understanding is that kid played 1 year at a juco and redshirted another. So he'd need a 6th year to get his 4 years
 
egib52 said:
I think it is really challenging the 5 years to play 4 at an NCAA school. My understanding is that kid played 1 year at a juco and redshirted another. So he'd need a 6th year to get his 4 years
Click to expand...

The NCAA 's "5 years to play 4" rule includes years played at juco's or other colleges like NAIA. So a kid who played one year, and redshirted another at juco would, by the rule, only be allowed 3 more years at a D1 (a total of 5 years) to complete the eligibility by the rule.


The NCAA used to be very strict about enforcing this rule. Kids who got hurt and missed a second season were out of luck. But then, around 2000, the NCAA started becoming more flexible, and allowing a 6th year in the case of multiple injury years. Recall in the early 2000's we had two players (Sam Singh and Will Egolf) who both had 2 full injury seasons with serious knee injuries. They had to file appeals with the NCAA and were both eventually granted a 6th year. Now it's common that these kinds of cases get the extra year given. We now even see occasional kids get 7th years.
 
FWIW- there's confusion about the "Pavia ruling" - but it did not apply to DII kids like Christian Davis.

.... in the Pavia ruling, the judge's injunction granted Pavia only ONE additional year despite that Pavia had spent TWO years in juco. The judge did not grant two years for the two he spent in juco.

In response, the NCAA opened up all players to the same deal - ONE extra year for any non-NCAA year they spent, and in addition, the ruling granted
the extra year only to players whose eligibility would have expired in spring 2025, AND the extra year must be used at DI in 2025-26.


The NCAA IS STILL APPEALING THIS INJUNCTION AND IT COULD BE OVERTURNED. But they issued the broad waiver to avoid numerous other similar lawsuits. As for expanding the waivers, that waits to be seen, anything & everything could still change. I'd hope at some point NCAA will win some of these lawsuits and end this near-infinite eligibility craziness.

One more thought... if a lawsuit is all it takes to get kids 5 or 6 years in college, then will we see the same at the high school level soon? I know there are differences, but virtually every state limits high school eligibility to four years. Will we soon see some kid who wants to stay in high school at public expense (instead of heading to costly Prep School) to rack up more career numbers and get stronger for college.
(I have read where Texas families are kinda already doing this but they start at the grade school level and hold their kids back a year or more, so by the time they reach high school they are way bigger, stronger and more developed and more capable of excelling and gaining football college scholarships.)
 
If the judge blocks this rule, could we see 40-y/o players spend their entire career moving from team to team picking up NIL checks along the way? HA!!
 
Da Coach said:
The NCAA 's "5 years to play 4" rule includes years played at juco's or other colleges like NAIA. So a kid who played one year, and redshirted another at juco would, by the rule, only be allowed 3 more years at a D1 (a total of 5 years) to complete the eligibility by the rule.


The NCAA used to be very strict about enforcing this rule. Kids who got hurt and missed a second season were out of luck. But then, around 2000, the NCAA started becoming more flexible, and allowing a 6th year in the case of multiple injury years. Recall in the early 2000's we had two players (Sam Singh and Will Egolf) who both had 2 full injury seasons with serious knee injuries. They had to file appeals with the NCAA and were both eventually granted a 6th year. Now it's common that these kinds of cases get the extra year given. We now even see occasional kids get 7th years.
Click to expand...

Exactly, but my point was is conjunction with the Pavia agreement he would get one more year, and thus is suing for that 6th year. I should have been more explicit.
 
Yeah, but the problem is they keep losing every lawsuit and it's costing them enormous amounts of money.
Here is another article critiquing the current NIL system. - https://www.foxsports.com/stories/c...s-lawless-cesspool-transfer-portal-must-fixed

Note that it mentions a $2.8 billion dollar class action lawsuit that the NCAA is attempting to settle that was brought by players from between 2016 and 2024 who weren't allowed to get paid for NIL. And if those players get paid, there could be a flood of more lawsuits by earlier players in every sport.
it could lead to the NCAA going bankrupt and going out of existence.
 
Heading towards: NCAA is just a pro-league of post-high school players. If you’re good enough to make a team and get a contract you play regardless of age , # years in the league, etc… a mini NBA. Maybe a salary cap, trade deadline, and a couple other rules, but other than that it’s a dev. league to replace the G Leage with one that makes a lot more money and has more interest. Not saying I want this, just that it seems like the momentum now that they broke it.
 
My interest in college basketball is waning and if the report that good players from mid-majors can almost certainly get million dollar NIL money, I suspect we’ll see a mass migration next year. If that happens, I’m afraid I’ll be bowing out from the college game as I have no desire to follow a brand new team of players every year.

Half the fun of college basketball is watching kids grow and improve over the years and rooting for them through it all. Take that away, and what are we left with? Mish mash transfer portal teams every year? No thanks.

This all makes me very sad, but maybe it’s time to find something else to spend my time and money on.
 
Tommy said:
My interest in college basketball is waning and if the report that good players from mid-majors can almost certainly get million dollar NIL money, I suspect we’ll see a mass migration next year. If that happens, I’m afraid I’ll be bowing out from the college game as I have no desire to follow a brand new team of players every year.

Half the fun of college basketball is watching kids grow and improve over the years and rooting for them through it all. Take that away, and what are we left with? Mish mash transfer portal teams every year? No thanks.

This all makes me very sad, but maybe it’s time to find something else to spend my time and money on.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. NIL and the transfer portal are the worst things that have ever happened to college basketball.
 
It prove an immutable fact in life -
no matter how long or hard you work to get success -
if you are successful & have something desirable- they will always come after you with lawsuits to take it from you
 
Agree with both NIL and transfer portal are making college basketball less enjoyable. Have posted before about whatever happened to a player going to college to get a education first and foremost. In my humble opinion the current rules are here to stay but can be tweaked somewhat. How about for starters if a player commits to a program for certain amount of money and after one year he decides to go into the transfer portal he must repay all or part of the money he signed on for. If he signed up for more than one year and leaves after his first year that to me is breach of contract and must repay the NIL money back to the university. As for the portal I would limit a player to one transfer during his four year college time. If said player decides to move more than once he must sit out that year. Just suggestions that will probably never be seen. Just my opinion. Any other thoughts.:mad:
 
daveineureka said:
...How about for starters if a player commits to a program for certain amount of money and after one year he decides to go into the transfer portal he must repay all or part of the money he signed on for. If he signed up for more than one year and leaves after his first year that to me is breach of contract and must repay the NIL money back to the university. As for the portal I would limit a player to one transfer during his four year college time. If said player decides to move more than once he must sit out that year. Just suggestions that will probably never be seen. Just my opinion. Any other thoughts.:mad:
Click to expand...

The court cases that have been decided against the NCAA mostly involve lawsuits against the restriction of athletes' freedom to move to a different school and retain eligibility. So making a player sit out a year won't work. The courts have already ruled that the NCAA can't do that.

And your suggestion about putting stipulations into the NIL contracts that take back some of the money they were promised is a good idea. In fact, I've read that some schools have just started putting such clauses into the NIL contracts. But the money couldn't go back to the school, only to the NIL group that paid it initially.
 
Good to hear that certain schools are putting stipulations into NIL contracts. Maybe going forward more and more will do the same. If players retain agents to negotiate their NIL deals to me they are now living in an adult world and must be held accountable for their decisions. Enough said, now let's get some more recruits and look forward to next season.:lol:
 
Da Coach said:
The court cases that have been decided against the NCAA mostly involve lawsuits against the restriction of athletes' freedom to move to a different school and retain eligibility. So making a player sit out a year won't work. The courts have already ruled that the NCAA can't do that.

And your suggestion about putting stipulations into the NIL contracts that take back some of the money they were promised is a good idea. In fact, I've read that some schools have just started putting such clauses into the NIL contracts. But the money couldn't go back to the school, only to the NIL group that paid it initially.
Click to expand...

Rumor has it that one school my be suing soon to enforce an nil agreement that a player reneged on this spring. We will see if it comes to fruition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top