PonyFans.com

The 1986 suit was based on anti-trust laws. I wonder what would happen if our seniors filed a suit right before the AAC tournament based purely on equitable arguments that as seniors they will be irreparably harmed if they are not allowed to play in the post season? They could ask for a TRO in state court. This would not necessarily delay the imposition of the post season ban, it would prevent the NCAA from enforcing the ban at all until the court rules. There might be a chance that there would not be a hearing on the request for a permanent injunction until after the NCAA tournament if we get a favorable Texas judge. I am not giving legal advice, I'm just pondering the possibility that we should think outside the anti-trust box that was the thinking back in 1986 and focus instead on immediate equitable relief.

Stallion wrote:Only players who forfeit their FINAL year of eligibility due to the post season ban are eligible to transfer under a special transfer rule

In football if you have one or two years of eligibility...and the probation includes a bowl ban...you don't have to sit out a year if you transfer.

Basketball has to have something similar???

Edit...basketball postseason ban based on failing APR allows any academically qualified player to transfer without sitting a year. No other post season ban exceptions. That's weird.

And Texas Courts are notoriously parochial, ask Texaco.

The case would be removed to Federal court in about 48 hours

That was a funny movie

Enlighten me 94. Thought our AD issued a statement shortly after saying we will still not appeal. What am I missing where Turner and Hart have their back?

I think he's insinuating that we are "helping" them (players) with arranging counsel, directing them in what courses of action they can take, etc. While the school won't appeal (which I still think is the wrong choice), the school will back the players in whatever direction they choose to take.

It's like having their backs but not joining in the fight. Which personally, I don't consider as truly having their backs. It's basically saying "you guys fight this, let's get some bad press for the NCAA, and maybe that will help us" - but we still won't appeal as a university.

dbone wrote:

Stallion wrote:Only players who forfeit their FINAL year of eligibility due to the post season ban are eligible to transfer under a special transfer rule

In football if you have one or two years of eligibility...and the probation includes a bowl ban...you don't have to sit out a year if you transfer.

Basketball has to have something similar???

Edit...basketball postseason ban based on failing APR allows any academically qualified player to transfer without sitting a year. No other post season ban exceptions. That's weird.

Wrong the only way a Junior can transfer immediately is if it involved a 2 year post season ban. I posted the exact NCAA rule within the last week

Stallion wrote:

dbone wrote:

Stallion wrote:Only players who forfeit their FINAL year of eligibility due to the post season ban are eligible to transfer under a special transfer rule

In football if you have one or two years of eligibility...and the probation includes a bowl ban...you don't have to sit out a year if you transfer.

Basketball has to have something similar???

Edit...basketball postseason ban based on failing APR allows any academically qualified player to transfer without sitting a year. No other post season ban exceptions. That's weird.

Wrong the only way a Junior can transfer immediately is if it involved a 2 year post season ban. I posted the exact NCAA rule within the last week

Good Lord Stallion...try to be polite...and you fly in with an absolute "Wrong..." instead of a conversation.

I have now read all the pertinent NCAA guidelines for waiving the residency rule. And I see your point regarding the Junior classification...which wasn't my question. I genuinely didn't know about the APR postseason ban allowing the waiver in basketball.

Stallion wrote:The case would be removed to Federal court in about 48 hours

That's fine. But plead under a new theory to make the 86 ruling inapplicable to standing and let the NCAA lawyers face our players in the courtroom face to face. I want the TV cameras there when our guys walk out of the courtroom win or lose. Let them tell their story to the country.

This whole thing, with the school Not appealing, feels more like trying to help our seniors transfer than to get us in postseason

smupony94 wrote:

SMUHeel wrote:Excellent statement. Too bad the "adults" aren't on the same page and don't have their back

Too bad you are out of the loop

Does being in the loop mean not having the players' backs?

ponyboy wrote:

smupony94 wrote:

SMUHeel wrote:Excellent statement. Too bad the "adults" aren't on the same page and don't have their back

Too bad you are out of the loop

Does being in the loop mean not having the players' backs?

Do you weigh some players more importantly than others (i.e. the seniors this year over next years seniors)? Are the people who are saying we should support Nic and Markus really just wanting to watch us in the post season this year since they think this will be our best team? I seriously doubt that everyone on this board is as benevolent as they make themselves out to be.

Stallion wrote:The case would be removed to Federal court in about 48 hours

But if the players only sue for equitable relief, not monetary damages, would there be lack of monetary amount necessary for Federal diversity jurisdiction?

you've got to come up with some cause action-things that are not cause of action in and of themselves which I keep hearing from SMU fans-conspiracy, Class action, equitable (equitable what?), violations of due process(SCOTUS has stated NCAA as a private association is not a state actor so not required to provide constitutional due process)s. Those are legal concepts that require a cause of action that can stand on its own. I don't think I've heard any one on any board identify a specific cause of action that could be filed on behalf of the players with any real specificity. I myself have mentioned that if the NCAA sanctions go into affect you might be able to get a restraining order preventing NCAA from enforcing its penalty because of a failure to follow its own rules. About the best you could hope for is an order sending proceedings back to NCAA and directing them to follow their own rules. Nobody has even come up with specific procedural rules that weren't followed. Its all too speculative until someone comes up with a identifiable cause of action that states a claim upon which relief can be granted. I doubt there is one for students attending a university which is a member of a private voluntary association-the NCAA