I went to the Albert Osuna hearing today/ Osuna update

#52
#52
@1RBFjr said:
I was working on a response earlier today, then there was some sort of internet hiccup and I lost the whole thing, so I started all over.

I’m just speculating on many of my responses, so I could be wholly wrong.

1. I think people knew that court was foreseeable— Pavia got his extra eligibility by going to court when he filed suit against the NCAA in November. I think there was great thought put into the Osuna situation and there was consultation with smart people early on. I'm guessing that Osuna started laying the groundwork by filing what he needed to file with the NCAA to see if first the NCAA would grant the eligibility without going to court.

Osuna’s lawyer did an excellent job laying out of the case and how Osuna should be granted eligibility. However, the NCAA attorney was no slouch.

2. I don’t know if it is a distraction or not. However I think it speaks volumes about CTV and CFA that they appeared to support Osuna. If that was my son in court, I would sincerely appreciate CTV and CFA being there for him, similar to being father figures. Going to court is nerve-wracking for many people.

Hunter Ensley was surely there for support as well. From the arguments, Hunter Ensley submitted an affidavit discussing how his NIL opportunities dramatically increased after making the great catch in Omaha, as mentioned in Mike Wilson's story. This NIL bump was woven in by Osuna's attorney that Osuna could be the next UT hero, thus impacting his ability to earn money from NIL, provided he gets eligibility to play at UT.

3. An educated guess is that Spyre (Vol Club) is involved. I've negotiated NIL (I'm on the student athlete's side) with that attorney for Spyre. He (and others in that firm) have spent untold hours representing Osuna, and I could tell it by observing yesterday with the polished presentation/argument. The attorney (and others in his firm) should be paid, IMO.

4. I don't know that calling it a money grab is accurate from the perspective of the legal arguments made. Yes, absolutely, money is involved. But money is one of Osuna's arguments: the NCAA is restraining/preventing me from earning money by not giving me eligibility. The ability or inability to earn NIL is a legitimate (legal) argument.
Click to expand...
Thanks for taking the time to answer these purely off the top questions.

Great to see some answers from a prospective of someone in the business and the approach that is being taken to help him navigate this matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeadVol77, chuckiepoo and @1RBFjr
#53
#53
taylorvol said:
No, he wasn’t selected in the 2024 MLB draft. He would profile as a DH (or PH) only and would be a liability on the bases. His K rate is relatively high and his age (24 yo) doesn’t help.
Click to expand...
Sorry if this has been answered but in D1 you only get 5years to play 4 season but if there is a redshirt or covid year in there he is only able to move down to a lower level to play if he doesn't move on to bigger better things? and they is why he was going to Tampa to play ?

Just trying to figure out why he would have been able to play at Tampa D2
 
#54
#54
@1RBFjr said:
Osuna’s lawyer did an excellent job laying out of the case and how Osuna should be granted eligibility.

I've negotiated NIL (I'm on the student athlete's side) with that attorney for Spyre. He (and others in that firm) have spent untold hours representing Osuna, and I could tell it by observing yesterday with the polished presentation/argument.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the kind words about my law partners! I can’t comment on the case, but I’ve appreciated your perspective and summary. I’m proud of them and their work on this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeadVol77, vol66, chuckiepoo and 2 others
#56
#56
TheMookieMonster said:
I hate to say it, but it’s not looking good for Osuna. A judge just ruled on a very similar case for a Georgia player in favor of the NCAA.

Click to expand...

The NCAA was given a timely arrow for its quiver, but this is out of a trial court and not out of the court of appeals (so it’s not binding on Osuna’s matter).

The NCAA is using this just as Osuna’s attorney would have if the opinion had a different outcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GenRRN, HeadVol77, chuckiepoo and 1 other person
#57
#57
Grnhead13 said:
Sorry if this has been answered but in D1 you only get 5years to play 4 season but if there is a redshirt or covid year in there he is only able to move down to a lower level to play if he doesn't move on to bigger better things? and they is why he was going to Tampa to play ?

Just trying to figure out why he would have been able to play at Tampa D2
Click to expand...
This is my question as well. Why is D2 treated differently than D1? How is eligible by the NCAA at another level of the same NCAA organization?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grnhead13
#58
#58
Grnhead13 said:
Sorry if this has been answered but in D1 you only get 5years to play 4 season but if there is a redshirt or covid year in there he is only able to move down to a lower level to play if he doesn't move on to bigger better things? and they is why he was going to Tampa to play ?

Just trying to figure out why he would have been able to play at Tampa D2
Click to expand...
Covid impacted players got an extra year so think of it as 6/5. Osuna played 5 total seasons so he was out of eligibility for D1. Tampa is D2 and where he was supposed to play this season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: knoxvol52
#59
#59
vol66 said:
By that point, Osuna had exhausted his NCAA D-I eligibility, which permits four seasons within five years. He entered the 2024 MLB draft but was not picked.

www.sportico.com

Tennessee Baseball Player Takes on NCAA in Latest Eligibility Case

Tennessee first baseman Alberto Osuna lost his bid for a temporary restraining order to play this spring but will have another shot later this month.
www.sportico.com www.sportico.com
Click to expand...
So if I understand things....Pavia hadn't reached his 4th season in D1 hence the injuction in his favor but Osuna has used all 4 of his allotted years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: knoxvol52, vol66 and chuckiepoo
#63
#63
@1RBFjr - Awesome break down. Thanks for taking the time to summarize this case. Honestly, I learned much more than any of the previous articles discussing this case. I guess my biggest issue has been understanding the difference between Pavia and Osuna's cases other than they play different sports and attend different universities. It's hard not thinking that the later of the two might be the NCAA's biggest influence for denying Osuna. It's hard to believe that the NCAA doesn't have an "ax to grind" with UT given recent events.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolGirl81, HeadVol77, chuckiepoo and 2 others
#67
#67
MFJones said:
@1RBFjr - Awesome break down. Thanks for taking the time to summarize this case. Honestly, I learned much more than any of the previous articles discussing this case. I guess my biggest issue has been understanding the difference between Pavia and Osuna's cases other than they play different sports and attend different universities. It's hard not thinking that the later of the two might be the NCAA's biggest influence for denying Osuna. It's hard to believe that the NCAA doesn't have an "ax to grind" with UT given recent events.
Click to expand...
In this case, I don’t think the NCAA had an ax to grind against UT. There’s another case going on in Georgia right now involving a Georgia baseball player, and the NCAA is fighting that one as well.

In the Georgia case, the judge also ruled against the player. Then, a short time later, the player pointed out that on the judge’s twitter account he’s listed as an NCAA football referee. The player has asked for his matter to be reconsidered or the judge to recuse himself in light of the discovery of the judge being an NCAA football referee.

 
  • Like
Reactions: VolGirl81, vol66, taylorvol and 1 other person
#68
#68
@1RBFjr said:
In this case, I don’t think the NCAA had an ax to grind against UT. There’s another case going on in Georgia right now involving a Georgia baseball player, and the NCAA is fighting that one as well.

In the Georgia case, the judge also ruled against the player. Then, a short time later, the player pointed out that on the judge’s twitter account he’s listed as an NCAA football referee. The player has asked for his matter to be reconsidered or the judge to recuse himself in light of the discovery of the judge being an NCAA football referee.

Click to expand...

Jackass judge. 🤦
 
#70
#70
chuckiepoo said:
Jackass judge. 🤦
Click to expand...
Being cynical here, and possibly being totally wrong, I wonder if the player (specifically, his attorneys) knew before the ruling that the judge was an NCAA football referee and hoped they would win with him despite that. But, if they didn’t win with this judge, planned to try to get a second bite at the apple by claiming the conflict issue after they lost. People do opposition research/ scouting.

OTOH, perhaps the player knew about the issue but didn’t want to go through the process of getting a new judge from the get-go because of a potential delay which could further push things out for the player.

Again, I could be totally wrong about everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cardvolfan, VolGirl81, volsagain and 2 others
#71
#71
@1RBFjr said:
Being cynical here, and possibly being totally wrong, I wonder if the player (specifically, his attorneys) knew before the ruling that the judge was an NCAA football referee and hoped they would win with him despite that. But, if they didn’t win with this judge, planned to try to get a second bite at the apple by claiming the conflict issue after they lost. People do opposition research/ scouting.

OTOH, perhaps the player knew about the issue but didn’t want to go through the process of getting a new judge from the get-go because of a potential delay which could further push things out for the player.

Again, I could be totally wrong about everything.
Click to expand...
Two great counterpoints. Still, doesn’t address the judge’s failure to recuse themself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cardvolfan and volsagain
#72
#72
chuckiepoo said:
Two great counterpoints. Still, doesn’t address the judge’s failure to recuse themself.
Click to expand...
I understand. However, the judge might have thought he could be impartial. I know nothing more than what I’ve read online, so that’s a huge caveat. I have no dog in the fight in this Georgia matter 😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: cardvolfan, chuckiepoo and taylorvol
#73
#73
@1RBFjr said:
Being cynical here, and possibly being totally wrong, I wonder if the player (specifically, his attorneys) knew before the ruling that the judge was an NCAA football referee and hoped they would win with him despite that. But, if they didn’t win with this judge, planned to try to get a second bite at the apple by claiming the conflict issue after they lost. People do opposition research/ scouting.

OTOH, perhaps the player knew about the issue but didn’t want to go through the process of getting a new judge from the get-go because of a potential delay which could further push things out for the player.

Again, I could be totally wrong about everything.
Click to expand...
Your hypothesis seems spot on. Thanks for providing your perspective. Much appreciated!
 
  • Like
Reactions: volsagain, @1RBFjr and chuckiepoo
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top