Calling On the VN Legal Community

#1
Hunerwadel

Hunerwadel

Will Trade Racists for Refugees
Joined
Aug 29, 2018
Messages
7,157
Likes
9,753
#1
If there is such a thing.

Will someone with legal expertise please thoroughly explain exactly what all is at stake in the Pavia, Aguilar et al lawsuit. I'm sure there is more to it than most of us understand.

It seems to me that if the judge rules in favor to the plaintiffs he is saying private organizations and associations do not have the right to make their own rules or that perhaps some the rules they are making are may not meet constitutional muster.

It also seems to me that if the judge rules in favor of the plaintiffs a student in good standing should be allowed to participate in extracurricular activities for as long as he likes and is able.
 
#2
#2
Hunerwadel said:
If there is such a thing.

Will someone with legal expertise please thoroughly explain exactly what all is at stake in the Pavia, Aguilar et al lawsuit. I'm sure there is more to it than most of us understand.

It seems to me that if the judge rules in favor to the plaintiffs he is saying private organizations and associations do not have the right to make their own rules or that perhaps some the rules they are making are may not meet constitutional muster.

It also seems to me that if the judge rules in favor of the plaintiffs a student in good standing should be allowed to participate in extracurricular activities for as long as he likes and is able.
Click to expand...
Joey A withdrew from the Pavia lawsuit.

Joey is filing in Chancery Court in Knoxville hoping for a UT favorable judge, I'm sure, to let him play via injunction. See: the kid playing basketball for Alabama who played in the NBA briefly. He got an Alabama favorable judge to let him play.

It's an excellent strategy, legally, and will probably work for Joey A also.

As for "you only get XX years to play in college," all of these lawsuits erode the "traditional NCAA rules" for everything: transfers, eligibility, payment, etc.

At VN, we support the ones which help us (and we've done very well in the portal and with our NIL overall) and we'll support Joey A as "rightfully" getting to play, if he does.

We don't care about the damage on the back end because that's someone else's problem later.

Edit: I am not an attorney and the Holiday Inn Express breakfast is kinda "Meh" in my last visit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jackcrevol, mudhen, a vol n tears and 8 others
#6
#6
Heh. I can't imagine an actual lawyer wanting to first take the time to write out an acceptably "thorough" explanation sufficient enough to satisfy somone, wherein "thorough" is defined by one's subjective confidence in the outcome, and then deal with the fifteen thousand responses saying why the explanation is wrong about this or that or whatever.

"Explain this!" "It's already been explained multiple times." "Yeah, but explain it better!"
 
#9
#9
I know this might be to our benefit, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. I wish college sports adopted a U-23 model like organized soccer.
 
#10
#10
Hunerwadel said:
If there is such a thing.

Will someone with legal expertise please thoroughly explain exactly what all is at stake in the Pavia, Aguilar et al lawsuit. I'm sure there is more to it than most of us understand.

It seems to me that if the judge rules in favor to the plaintiffs he is saying private organizations and associations do not have the right to make their own rules or that perhaps some the rules they are making are may not meet constitutional muster.

It also seems to me that if the judge rules in favor of the plaintiffs a student in good standing should be allowed to participate in extracurricular activities for as long as he likes and is able.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we can call it the "Tommy Boy" ruling!
 
#13
#13
volfan4evr said:
Heard on 104.5 earlier that Joey is using the same lawyer that Nico used. Also, he's contending that he only played 3 years of NCAA ruled football and therefore should be granted one more year. Sounds fine to me.
Click to expand...
As well as President Trump
 
#15
#15
I don't pretend to understand the law at all. I did hear someone else say withdrawing from the other lawsuit is a smart strategic move. If the plaintiffs are ruled against in that lawsuit he would have a harder time filing another suit and winning. If the plaintiffs win the suit, without Joey A as a plaintiff, he will still benefit from the ruling.

They filed the new suit in Knox county which should be a favorable court for Aguilar and TN. So basically he has two ways of winning now instead of one or at least that is how I understand it.
 
#17
#17
Simply put,there is the fact that Joey played 2 years at a junior college.The ncaa is saying that Joey has no eligibility left because of playing those two years of JC ball,he used up his playing time.This coming from the NCAA that does not govern the junior colleges,does not even recognize the junior colleges and has no say or care about what junior colleges do.With Joey having played two years at App. St.,one at UT,he,therefore has one year of legal time to play remaining.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Native Orange, norrislakevol and TheVolsFrog
#18
#18
JUCO should not count against NCAA ELIGIBILITY. Period. And that goes for ALL PLAYERS. Not just because that would benefit us in the short term. Strength and Conditioning, Nutrition, Exposure, NIL and whatever else is not the same. LET THEM PLAY
 
#19
#19
I think the Bama Jude recused himself because he was a Bama grad. Don’t know who the Knox judge will be? My guess no decision until after the season starts and JA drops his suit.
 
#20
#20
Can y’all imagine the expense of not just paying lawyers for time but dispatching them to all of these various locations, the NCAA has to “bear”? They have to be licensed to practice in all of these different states.

By the way, still pizzes me off we not only invested in Nicco through the NIL but financed that deal against the NCAA on his behalf as well only for him/his father to become greedy.

On second thought, we actually had a better QB last year.
 
#21
#21
Hunerwadel said:
If there is such a thing.

Will someone with legal expertise please thoroughly explain exactly what all is at stake in the Pavia, Aguilar et al lawsuit. I'm sure there is more to it than most of us understand.

It seems to me that if the judge rules in favor to the plaintiffs he is saying private organizations and associations do not have the right to make their own rules or that perhaps some the rules they are making are may not meet constitutional muster.

It also seems to me that if the judge rules in favor of the plaintiffs a student in good standing should be allowed to participate in extracurricular activities for as long as he likes and is able.
Click to expand...
It is a bit of a mystery how a judge can just sweep aside rules of an organization.
 
#22
#22
I think it was a good move by Joey. But what about this. Most college players leave college with eligibility remaining. Now that they're getting paid, how long before we start seeing players go to the NFL, flame out, then come back to college for one more year (or 2) to make a few million bucks?

If they play 2 years of JUCO then ball out and get drafted, then never pan out they could come back at like 30 years ago and play 3 years of NCAA football? If these cases favor Joey and the Pavia lawsuit that could happen, no? Or am I missing something?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top