Recruiting Football Talk VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
#111,202
#111,202
Chuckie said:
Moran. You were Swansoned by Mookie.
Click to expand...

😩




Shamed GIFs | Tenor
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, Big Orange#1, Glitch and 9 others
#111,204
#111,204
hotcypress said:
From reading various reports from the courtroom today, my prediction is that we don't get the injunction, but the judge will make clear where he's leaning (against the NCAA). Hopefully, this influences the NCAA to drop the investigation. I think the key issue here is the same as the temporary injunction. It's hard to prove irreparable harm when money could compensate the players. The schools probably have a better argument for irreparable harm, but I'm not sure how they quantify it, so it's not deemed to be a future or speculative harm.

It's another case of losing the battle but winning the war.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, in the court of public opinion, we’ll get skewered and labeled as whiny losers. So we kinda don’t want that to happen and best hope for the injunction.
 
#111,206
#111,206
Orange_Crush said:
The judge has already said two things that made the TRO and temp injunction superfluous, according to Spyres' attorney. (1) The NCAA will lose these Anti Trust NIL cases if they don't come up with something new. (2) They can expect to be sued for monetary damages based on NIL enforcement.

Unless the NCAA wants to be sued out of existence, they will be VERY hesitant to bring forth NIL enforcement. According to Spyre's very vocal lawyer, those statements basically equated to a restraining order without the need for a restraining order.
Click to expand...

I hate the NCAA will have time to "come up with something new". Can we just make this the case?

Really hope we keep every receipt of what they've said so far - so the judge can watch their mental gymnastics and inconsistencies go wild the next round.
 
#111,211
#111,211
Ten_Titans said:
Just one point of contention. I don't think the standard for "irreparable harm" is that money could not compensate the damages. That's a standard that could never be met. We use money to compensate for any kind of damage, including death.

I believe the standard is that there are more damages than ONLY the financial. And regardless of the outcome I think it is basic common sense that players and universities stand to lose more than just money from an NCAA investigation.
Click to expand...

You're right about the standard in the sense that they are looking for harm that can't be compensated by money, but an injunction is considered by the law to be an "extraordinary act". My fear is that the "common sense" harms you're mentioning may be viewed as speculative. While the TRO has an even higher standard, I think the judge's logic when it comes to the denial of that TRO will extend to this injunction unless the lawyers for TN and VA did a better job of presenting the non-monetary harms to the players in a concrete way.
 
#111,213
#111,213
hotcypress said:
You're right about the standard in the sense that they are looking for harm that can't be compensated by money, but an injunction is considered by the law to be an "extraordinary act". My fear is that the "common sense" harms you're mentioning may be viewed as speculative. While the TRO has an even higher standard, I think the judge's logic when it comes to the denial of that TRO will extend to this injunction unless the lawyers for TN and VA did a better job of presenting the non-monetary harms to the players in a concrete way.
Click to expand...
I'm not an attorney, but if I was, I would have gone to law school and have better opinions. With that said, I would argue that the NCAA has post-season bans and player ineligibility on the books as recourse for NIL enforcement, thus constitute the danger of very real, irreparable non-monetary harm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, cHiZzLeVOL, Volunteer821 and 1 other person
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top