Diego Pavia will get a sixth season of football, at least for now. For reference on the Dalkowski part, click here.
In essence, we are paving the way to make college football a minor league farm system…JUCO can now be your Single A and not count, and continue on for five more years at the end of that if the ruling holds up, whereas the two JUCO years would’ve counted towards the five year “clock” for college football players. Coupling with redshirting, injury season waivers, and other loopholes players have found, a football player could play into their 30s if they work the system right. Not bad work, if you can find it.
NCAA rules typically allow players a total of five years to play four seasons, but the current crop of college players have been granted an extra year on top of those limits due to the disruption of the coronavirus pandemic. Pavia argued in his initial complaint that the NCAA was unfairly limiting his ability to make money by counting his years in junior college — which is governed by a separate organization — against his eligibility.
“We’re not saying the NCAA can’t have eligibility requirements,” said Ryan Downton, Pavia’s attorney. “But a junior college season shouldn’t be the equivalent of an NCAA season when the junior college season has no meaningful opportunities to earn NIL, no television exposure. They take other athletes [who are playing somewhere outside of high school] and don’t hold those seasons against them.”
Downton cited junior hockey leagues and post-graduate prep school leagues where athletes compete after finishing high school without losing any of their eligibility.
The judge’s ruling Wednesday specifically addresses the NCAA bylaw that deals with junior college players. It does not restrict the NCAA from enforcing the rest of the restrictions it has in place on the number of years athletes can play a sport in college, but the limited injunction could signal that the court system sees the NCAA’s eligibility requirements as an illegal restraint. Campbell is the third judge in the past year to issue an injunction on NCAA rules due to concerns that they limit the athletes’ ability to maximize their earning potential.
NCAA lawyers argued in their response to Pavia’s lawsuit that a ruling in favor of the quarterback could have far-reaching implications.
“A mandatory injunction changing the status quo is not just about plaintiff, but rather stands to adversely disrupt the collegiate experiences and opportunities for tens of thousands of prospective and current student-athletes just as the next college football transfer window is opening,” the lawyers wrote.
In a statement Wednesday night, the NCAA said it was “disappointed” in the ruling and made an appeal to Congress.
“Altering the enforcement of rules overwhelmingly supported by NCAA member schools makes a shifting environment even more unsettled,” the statement read in part. “The NCAA is making changes to deliver more benefits to student-athletes, but a patchwork of state laws and court opinions make clear that partnering with Congress is essential to provide stability for the future of all college athletes.”
Stability for the future of all college athletes? It’s a little late for that now, ain’t it?
Well, if JUCO doesn’t count…
Just saying.
Question JP, when does the Covid extra year go away, does it just apply to guys who were on a college roster in 2020? At this point, the NCAA is as useless as a second handle on a shovel.
HBTFD
Whit, it only applies to those student-athletes who were in school during 2020. The last of the pandemic athletes should be fully cycled out next year (yes, Carson Beck could come back for a Covid year if he wanted).
Thanks, EE… that’s what I thought.
Also, comments are showing up almost immediately now without having to back out and then come back. 👏👏👏
Should a student athlete not have the resume for next level competition (no matter the sport), why leave, when the checks cash for 5 or 6 years right here on earth and all this will….GOD IS GREAT, BEER IS GOOD, PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!!
As I said many times on the old blog, one of the reasons NOT to treat sports like business, is because sports is a competition and to have any competition worth the name, the competitors must agree upon the rules in advance; otherwise it is just a free-for-all, much like boxing was before the Marquess of Queensbury standardized them. This ruling is simply just another chink in the descent to the free-for-all, which is really the greatest threat to college athletics. And this is also why the NCAA is begging so strongly for the antitrust exemption – because if any federal judge in the country can determine that an NCAA rule is “anti-competitive” and invalid, again we end up with a free-for-all. My desire to see our group of mercenaries beat up on Alabama’s group of mercenaries is certainly/has been waning…..
The NCAA is now losing more than Vanderbilt does. Quite the accomplishment. They, meaning the university presidents, have no one to blame but themselves. It’s been hard to tell if our own Jere Morehead is part of the clueless problem or that the Power Conference schools are still voted down by the majority of smaller schools. How much longer does the NCAA even exist for the large schools? Even an anti-trust bailout doesn’t resolve the need for internal reform of the governing structure.
The romance of amateurism was gone when they became whores.
The cat was out of the bag (O’Bannon) before Morehead became chair.
This ruling essentially says that the NCAA’s rulemaking power around eligibility cannot conflict with an athlete’s capability to earn NIL. If a former NFL player wanted to return to college to earn NIL, why should some arbitrary rule about 5 years of eligibility preclude that? If a player knows he has no NFL future, why can’t he earn NIL money in college as long as a school is willing to admit him? That seems a stretch, but that’s exactly what the judge in this case is allowing with granting the injunction.
The NCAA should have reformed itself on NIL. They also should have defended their power to determine eligibility all the way to the Supreme Court.
At this point, I don’t know if employee status with a CBA or an antitrust exemption will save college sports, but the NCAA is on its last legs.
but the NCAA is on its last legs. From a revenue sport governing body that is absolutely correct.
– Based on how these rulings have been going, I don’t see any way the NCAA could have reformed itself anymore than they can control what is going on now.
– The idea that pay for play will evolve into unlimited eligibility which will involve into no longer needing to be a student we be complete with wide acceptance of a CBA in super leagues.
Hmmmm…so Stetson can come back? Give that man a good NIL deal and offer him playing time!
I agree with what you wrote, but our own 27 year old Stetson Bennett isn’t a great counterpoint.