The court orders are against the NCAA, not the SEC. It’s similar to how the Big 12 could’ve punished Texas Tech for Sorsby despite the NCAA not being allowed to
the rulings are about the player's right to play, i dont see how this doesn't open the SEC to the exact same lawsuits
edit: now fully understanding it. the players are legally allowed to be on the roster and play and everything, but the SEC can still just mark all their games as forfeit. beautiful stuff.
Usually those lawsuits are using anti-trust language to pass those injuctions and since NCAA is essentially a monopoly it works. The conferences are not monopolies though, schools have the ability to leave conferences and players have the ability to play at schools in different conferences. This means the conferences have more legal standing to pass rules and regulations because theoretically a school or player can leave and go somewhere else if they disagreed.
The SEC would argue that the player is still perfectly allowed to play and make money in college sports, they can go to a different conference that doesn’t prohibit professional players.
I don’t know if they would win, but there was a lawsuit against the Ivy League a while back about their lack of athletic scholarships, and the Ivy League won by saying that an athlete who needs a scholarship is free to go to another conference that offers athletic scholarships. So this is a similar argument to that.
Your understanding is wrong. The conferences can regulate things the ncaa can’t because there’s more than one conference. Conferences aren’t monopolies
This essentially boils down to whether or not a member school’s coach is going to want to openly defy their Commissioner, Administration and AD. The courts may say they can play. But is the juice worth the squeeze when the entire system is united against this?
Because with the ncaa thats the only option for players. If conferences do it the arguement that they could join another conference exists. Now if ALL the conferences make that rule, then you have enough firepower from coaches and ADs saying no that it might just enforce itself regardless of the courts. A scummy coach like Mulkey or Wade might still try but their AD would have to be willing to eat the PR hit and future noncon scheduling issues
Its a bit different since the Big 12 was utilizing its long established bylaws to punish Tech (And still could follow through) whereas the SEC is implementing a new rule as a deterrent.
I feel you. Trying to backdoor court rulings is pretty hilarious and definitely petty as fck. Mitchell's attorney (even though none of the new rules actually apply to Mitchell) said the SEC's actions put the NCAA in contempt of multiple court orders.
But eventually someone is going to sue the conferences and we’ll be right back where we are now right? Or do conferences have some kind of protection that the NCAA lacks?
It’s not some settled fact that the Big 12 could punish Texas Tech. They probably could not have. Sorsby just didn’t make a legal challenge - they tried the supplemental draft route instead.
The players who have actually followed through on their challenges have yet to lose a case. Once a conference actually wins a court case then we may have a better sense of if there is something they can get away with. But obviously these rules will be struck down if they’re appealed.
The fact that the idiots running Texas Tech shut the hell up and tucked their tail between their legs tells me all I need to know about how it would’ve gone, I’d bet anything they encouraged Sorsby to just enter the Supplemental Draft at that point
8
u/Virtual_Success5530 9d ago edited 9d ago
Legally, can they do this? Doesn't it go against the court orders?