Associate Professor, @BoiseStateCOBE. Ex-lawyer who now writes about college sports law, and finds it neat. I track litigation involving college sports.
New uNILateral Decisions: @mwalsh88, @Joe_Nickell, and I discuss Ohio governor Mike DeWine's executive order granting all Ohio Class of 2022 athletes immediate eligibility.
Can he do that? Should other governors do the same?
https://t.co/end8o8th1P
This week's uNILateral Decisions: @mwalsh88, @Joe_Nickell, and I sat down with @gregchickphd of @NILnomics to dig into some of the biggest economic and financial questions in college sports.
This was a great episode. Thanks so much to Greg for joining us! https://t.co/upGGaJ7us6
@LarsonSports I've read a lot of them! Definitely not all of them haha. And I've seen enough of them at this point to know that the 470 page filings just include 300 pages of the NCAA manual again, so that cuts it down. 😂😂
@retiredcoach23@JayBilas The injunction forces the NCAA to make them eligible. It doesn't limit their eligibility to within a particular state's borders.
Perfect example of how these Class of 2022 eligibility cases have gone against the NCAA more recently. Steen was initially denied an injunction based on good faith and fair dealing principles, but once the plain text of the bylaws was discovered, the same judge changed course.
BREAKING: Florida State forward Alex Steen has been granted a fifth year of eligibility by the Second Judicial Court in Leon County
Huge news for the #Noles
College sports aren’t immune from the First Amendment. Reporters have every right to stand on a public sidewalk and seek comment from players and coaches. Maryland football’s understanding of the First Amendment is as bad as its run defense, which is saying something.
@retiredcoach23@JayBilas The injunctions only grant eligibility the players who are filing the lawsuit. They do not make it so that every Class of 2022 player is eligible in the state.
New uNILateral Decisions: @mwalsh88, @Joe_Nickell, and I discuss Ohio governor Mike DeWine's executive order granting all Ohio Class of 2022 athletes immediate eligibility.
Can he do that? Should other governors do the same?
https://t.co/end8o8th1P
This week's uNILateral Decisions: @mwalsh88, @Joe_Nickell, and I sat down with @gregchickphd of @NILnomics to dig into some of the biggest economic and financial questions in college sports.
This was a great episode. Thanks so much to Greg for joining us! https://t.co/upGGaJ7us6
Exclusive: Wealthy backers of the Protect College Sports Act quietly rounded up support from major conservative political figures, a DraftKings executive, university presidents, and conference commissioners.
FOS obtained the emails revealing a network with deep political ties.
This obviously isn't true, but as usual the strangest part of accounts like this tweeting out clearly false information is the amount of people believing it 100%.
The $10 million minimum investment number is from 2025-26 to 2027-28, by the way. So there's time anyways.
Sources: An injunction was granted in California for the Glancey V. NCAA case, giving all members of the Class of 2022 involved eligibility through the end of the 2026-27 college basketball season.
The NCAA will appeal.
Keeping in tact the more recent trend of judges finding that the status quo is that Class of 2022 athletes are eligible because that's what the bylaws say.
Makes it much, much easier to justify an injunction.
Will write more soon after talking to more lawyers and getting more details, but another piece of good news for the players: this is a prohibitionary injunction, which will make it more difficult for the NCAA to win on appeal.
Update from California.
While this is just one comment that I'm taking out of context from the rest of the hearing, it seems pretty darn likely based on this that the players are getting an injunction,
@TexasTrialGroup Judge McGowan interrupts the NCAA's closing argument asking how it's logical that the class of 22 was excluded from the new rules, while classes before & after benefited. The NCAA's answer was that the players don't have standing to argue their case. Doesn't seem like this landed
@hunterschuler "No, it was fair, these players have gotten the full benefit of the rules they signed up for: four seasons in five years."
Might not have won over the judge, but it's better than a standing argument that got shot down back in 2004.