All up the the Lafayette County Judge now! Are the rebs willing to risk Chambliss playing under an injunction?
Printable View
All up the the Lafayette County Judge now! Are the rebs willing to risk Chambliss playing under an injunction?
All up to the Lafayette County Judge now! Are the rebs willing to risk Chambliss playing under an injunction?
Boy, what a tough blow for Petey.
Yes they are.
There won't be a risk when he gets the injunction. The language will say that the NCAA is enjoined from penalizing OM for Chambliss playing under the injunction.
No elected state court judge who is an alumnus of the school is denying that injunction. Especially one who played QB in college and loves football.
Pavia played under an injunction last year and was just fine. Hell Davon Booth played under an injunction too.Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainObvious
This will be a massive nothing burger. Chambliss will be OM's starter Week 1.
This is precisely what it is. I don't know how anyone that follows the world of collegiate athletics could even think otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Because our fans are hoping against hope that Chambliss can't play. Despite everything, and everyone, telling them that he'll be OM's starter next year. Hell, we have Colonel Kang, formerly ShotgunDawg here, on the 247 board saying we should refuse to take the field against OM next year. Because that will show them......Quote:
Originally Posted by State82
It's just like the tampering thing. We have fans that think OM is going to be given the death penalty or not be able to participate in the portal next year.
You serious Clark? This is the same bunch that tampered with a guy that had a signed NIL, a signed FAA and had already started classes at Clemson for the Spring semester. You think they give a flying flip about an NCAA ruling if they have an option to sue or get an injunction?Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainObvious
We got an injunction from a local judge in the Tyler years for Larry Gillard and Richard Blackmore to play ( had been ruled ineligible for the 10% clothing discount at an Okolona store that all MSU students received). The NCAA later appealed it to a higher court, and we had to forfeit 19 games that they participated in that still show as losses on our overall record.
Times have changed, and the toothless NCAA will fold like a wet blanket in this no-rules semi-pro college sports world.
What stops him from playing under one in 2027?Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
That was back when the NCAA actually fought stuff and they had set a precedent that athletes were AMATEURS. They stuck by this and would fight tooth and nail with people on it. The NCAA also didn't mind spending money to fight court cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldendawg
Nowadays, they just fight this stuff to check a box. If you actually pursue it further, they won't do anything.
Absolutely nothing. The NCAA just has to hope he is ready to move on, similar to Pavia.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Until there's a way for the ncaa to sue these judges personally, it won't stop.
Under what basis would they sue the judges personally exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Exactly, that has no bearing today. If this Chambliss decision was back then it would be final already and he would be out. As we all know though, today, the judges make all decisions. NCAA is a powerless entity.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
No idea. They're obviously making a mockery of their oath though. There has to be some way to stop this crap:Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Ask ChatGPT about this, and this was the response...
Why judges can override the NCAA in the first place
The NCAA is a private association, not a government body. That means:
Its eligibility rules are just contractual rules
Players can sue under things like antitrust law, due process, or contract law
If a judge thinks the NCAA rule is unlawful or unfairly applied, they can issue an injunction letting the player compete
Once a court order is issued, the NCAA cannot legally ignore it.
What the NCAA can do to limit this
1. Write clearer, more defensible rules
A lot of eligibility lawsuits succeed because NCAA rules are:
Vague
Applied inconsistently
Changed midstream
The more clear, objective, and consistently enforced the rule is, the harder it is for a judge to poke holes in it.
2. Build stronger internal appeals processes
Judges often step in because athletes argue:
?I had no fair process inside the NCAA.?
If the NCAA provides:
Transparent hearings
Neutral decision-makers
Reasoned written decisions
Courts are more likely to say: ?This is an internal matter?stay out of it.?
3. Use collective bargaining (future-looking)
If athletes are eventually classified as employees (or partially so), eligibility rules could be:
Negotiated via collective bargaining agreements
Much harder for courts to override (like pro sports leagues)
This is a big structural shift, but it?s probably where things are headed.
4. Change enforcement, not eligibility
Instead of fighting eligibility in court, the NCAA can:
Let the athlete play under injunction
Later vacate wins, impose fines, or penalize schools if the NCAA ultimately prevails
They already do this sometimes?quietly.
5. Appeal and wait it out
In many cases:
The NCAA loses a temporary injunction
But later wins on appeal after the season is over
Not satisfying, but legally common.
Hoops' idea of a flat rule of 5 years of play 4 is the way to go. Once you sign a scholarship, your eligibility is out 4 or 5 years from then. No exceptions
5 years to play 4 is what we have right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Just give everyone 5 years and that will curb some of this.......maybe.