Any update on Joey?

#6
#6
Can he enter the portal given his current status?

At this point Joey is going to have to decide what he wants to do if a decision is made after the portal closes. If Tennessee gets another QB his chances of starting again are likely low. He should probably enter the portal and then decide whether to try and come back or find a new school if he gets his injunction.

Don't get me wrong. I 100% want Joey back. But in this crazy era, him not declaring for the draft and not entering the portal may bite him and could make getting a replacement QB hard for Tennessee.

Interesting times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cobb-Webb 1989
#7
#7
JCHateSteve said:
Can he enter the portal given his current status?

At this point Joey is going to have to decide what he wants to do if a decision is made after the portal closes. If Tennessee gets another QB his chances of starting again are likely low. He should probably enter the portal and then decide whether to try and come back or find a new school if he gets his injunction.

Don't get me wrong. I 100% want Joey back. But in this crazy era, him not declaring for the draft and not entering the portal may bite him and could make getting a replacement QB hard for Tennessee.

Interesting times.
Click to expand...

Joey is 100000% our starter if he gets to stay, regardless of Tennessee getting anyone else.

You don’t put the SEC’s passing leader on the bench.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volanta, lukeneyland, walkenvol and 10 others
#11
#11
Absolutely comical the lawyers start out with a Christmas poem...poke fun right in the eye of the NCAA !!!

I think citing the Nnaji case is a little flimsy as it's almost not an apples to apples comparison.

They are trying to compare Nnaji's time as a professional athlete to these guys time as Juco players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cobb-Webb 1989 and StarRaider
#12
#12
Interesting the NCAA is saying that high school seniors are harmed if JUCO players (of a certain age) are given extra years. My take is they are more harmed from the transfer portal than a JUCO player getting to play 4 years at the NCAA level verses just 2 or 3 based on how long they attended JUCO. I mean in the end said high school player, when he comes to college, has to beat out whomever is there for playing time. Not really sure the NCAA has a solid argument.
 
#13
#13
volfan102455 said:
Interesting the NCAA is saying that high school seniors are harmed if JUCO players (of a certain age) are given extra years. My take is they are more harmed from the transfer portal than a JUCO player getting to play 4 years at the NCAA level verses just 2 or 3 based on how long they attended JUCO. I mean in the end said high school player, when he comes to college, has to beat out whomever is there for playing time. Not really sure the NCAA has a solid argument.
Click to expand...

Right. If anything the opposite is true because more players from high school that aren't quite NCAA level will be able to go juco & still have a full 4 years if their skills improve. I'm especially thinking of situations where a receiver is in a high school district that runs power option & received no NCAA offers. This guy might catch on at a juco, then make an NCAA team. Without the favorable ruling, the jucos may become too crowded and rob him of the opportunity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami and volfan102455
#16
#16
IndianaVol said:
Absolutely comical the lawyers start out with a Christmas poem...poke fun right in the eye of the NCAA !!!

I think citing the Nnaji case is a little flimsy as it's almost not an apples to apples comparison.

They are trying to compare Nnaji's time as a professional athlete to these guys time as Juco players.
Click to expand...

It is the argument around age, which makes no sense as there are no age restrictions in the current NCAA regulations. In fact, a player could defer on college for say a missionary trip, military service et al and then get their four years making them be in the same age range as the JUCO players.

And if they say it is the experience, well that is common for both Nnaji and the JUCO players.

I don't know what will happen with the injunction but if the NCAA argument is age based it is very weak. And if they were to win based on that, then I think they would have to backtrack on some the exemptions they have in place and introduce the concept of age, which could disqualify a lot of players who are not even former JUCO players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheVolsFrog, sami and IndianaVol
#18
#18
kunsanvol said:
They've asked for a ruling before the portal opens, so we should know soon.
Click to expand...

A "Memorandum in Support of a Preliminary Injunction" cannot "solve" or end an entire trial on its own. Its sole purpose is to persuade a judge to grant a
preliminary injunction, which is a temporary order put in place while the main trial is ongoing [1].
Here is a breakdown of why:
  • Temporary vs. Final: A preliminary injunction maintains the status quo or prevents immediate harm until a final decision can be reached after a full trial on the merits [1]. It is an interim remedy, not a final judgment.
  • Purpose of the Memorandum: The memorandum is a legal document that lays out arguments and evidence for why the temporary injunction is necessary now. It addresses specific legal standards (like likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, balance of equities, and public interest) [1].
  • The Need for a Trial: The underlying lawsuit still exists and must be resolved. The claims and defenses of both parties still need to be fully litigated, which requires discovery, further motions, and eventually a trial (unless the parties settle the case themselves) [1].
  • Resolution: The trial itself is what determines the final rights and liabilities of the parties and leads to a permanent judgment or a permanent injunction, which is the final, non-temporary remedy [1].
In summary, the memorandum is a step in the legal process used to seek immediate temporary relief, but it does not bypass or conclude the necessity of a full trial for a final resolution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami, utvols1975, GlennTenn and 2 others
#21
#21
I’m sorry. I love what JA brought to us this year.

And my beef is much greater than him.

But are we going to a place where players can play through graduate school? All the way through a PhD?

Where does it stop? Because it already is ridiculous. And I hate to think where it could end up with 30-year-olds living off NIL in college football. It’s getting ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc and Volanta
#22
#22
EZE said:
I’m sorry. I love what JA brought to us this year.

And my beef is much greater than him.

But are we going to a place where players can play through graduate school? All the way through a PhD?

Where does it stop? Because it already is ridiculous. And I hate to think where it could end up with 30-year-olds living off NIL in college football. It’s getting ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I prefer we let them play through medical school but there just me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfan102455
#23
#23
EZE said:
I’m sorry. I love what JA brought to us this year.

And my beef is much greater than him.

But are we going to a place where players can play through graduate school? All the way through a PhD?

Where does it stop? Because it already is ridiculous. And I hate to think where it could end up with 30-year-olds living off NIL in college football. It’s getting ridiculous.
Click to expand...

NIL sucks for way more reasons than this, but I do agree with you.
 
#24
#24
camp_steveo said:
I doubt it will happen, but my opinion is that if someone is enrolled in classes with passing grades, they are eligible to play sports.

Nothing else should matter.
Click to expand...

I say this both cynically and with some degree of sarcasm - why should enrollment matter at all? If the NCAA's enforcement of eligibility requirements is unlawful and illegal, then how can there be any valid restrictions on who can play? I submit there should be none. If it's all or nothing, and the courts have clearly decided that nothing is the winning side, then so be it. No more restrictions -- none. No age limits, no eligibility limits, no transfer limits, no nothing. Someone wants to play, then they get to play, and no one - especially the schools that run the league - should be allowed to tell them or anyone else otherwise. Let it be the real free-for-all some have longed for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami and dduncan4163
#25
#25
Voltopia said:
I say this both cynically and with some degree of sarcasm - why should enrollment matter at all? If the NCAA's enforcement of eligibility requirements is unlawful and illegal, then how can there be any valid restrictions on who can play? I submit there should be none. If it's all or nothing, and the courts have clearly decided that nothing is the winning side, then so be it. No more restrictions -- none. No age limits, no eligibility limits, no transfer limits, no nothing. Someone wants to play, then they get to play, and no one - especially the schools that run the league - should be allowed to tell them or anyone else otherwise. Let it be the real free-for-all some have longed for.
Click to expand...
you're not supposed to say this out loud... Vandy just wants to lock down Diego for a 10 year NIL contract.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top