Started By
Message
Wetzel says NFL players that don't make training camp are next in line to get injunctions
Posted on 2/5/26 at 8:32 am
Posted on 2/5/26 at 8:32 am
From home town judges
"By not controlling who is or isn't eligible to play, the NCAA is quickly losing the ability to function as an organizing athletic body. This is far more important than, say, NIL compensation, where well-meaning arguments on all sides exist. This is basic stuff.
You can't play U8 soccer if you're 10. You can't be on a city team in the Little League World Series if your players hail from three states over. You can't play high school sports if you already graduated. You can't get drafted into the NFL until three years after high school."
The trend is to get a local judge to offer an injunction that allows a player eligibility, even in violation of clear NCAA rules. The player then competes through the season before dropping the case before it's even heard.
If that holds, then college football in August will be about grabbing any player with even the slightest argument for eligibility who just got cut from NFL training camps.
Come make seven figures in college ball rather than sit on a practice squad ... where maxed-out pay for rookies is $235,000 a year. Come play for us until injuries force an NFL team to bring someone in."
LINK
"By not controlling who is or isn't eligible to play, the NCAA is quickly losing the ability to function as an organizing athletic body. This is far more important than, say, NIL compensation, where well-meaning arguments on all sides exist. This is basic stuff.
You can't play U8 soccer if you're 10. You can't be on a city team in the Little League World Series if your players hail from three states over. You can't play high school sports if you already graduated. You can't get drafted into the NFL until three years after high school."
The trend is to get a local judge to offer an injunction that allows a player eligibility, even in violation of clear NCAA rules. The player then competes through the season before dropping the case before it's even heard.
If that holds, then college football in August will be about grabbing any player with even the slightest argument for eligibility who just got cut from NFL training camps.
Come make seven figures in college ball rather than sit on a practice squad ... where maxed-out pay for rookies is $235,000 a year. Come play for us until injuries force an NFL team to bring someone in."
LINK
8
Posted on 2/5/26 at 8:35 am to tigerskin
Maybe if they were consistent across the board these injunctions wouldn’t happen. They are giving 7th and 8th year eligibility to guys but denying Chambliss a 6th year for reasons that have already been proven false.
Denying Chambliss feels like a “punishment” for the tampering stuff with Clemson because they know they can’t do much else
They also denied an Oklahoma player a 5th year because he played 1 year of lacrosse his freshman year. It’s hard to take them seriously when they do shite like that
Denying Chambliss feels like a “punishment” for the tampering stuff with Clemson because they know they can’t do much else
They also denied an Oklahoma player a 5th year because he played 1 year of lacrosse his freshman year. It’s hard to take them seriously when they do shite like that
This post was edited on 2/5/26 at 8:39 am
Posted on 2/5/26 at 8:42 am to Henry Jones Jr
I agree with doing 5 years for everyone. No exceptions. But of course I believe lawyers would somehow find a way around it all.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 8:49 am to tigerskin
I propose a hard 24 year old cap on eligibility. The minute you turn 25, you are ineligible, even in the middle of a season.
Eligibility is also forfeited immediately upon written intent to enter a professional league.
Eligibility is also forfeited immediately upon written intent to enter a professional league.
This post was edited on 2/5/26 at 8:59 am
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:01 am to tigerskin
Seems remarkable to me that Chambliss may be the guy who breaks this system. I would understand if he were a player like Pavia, who is a great college football player but has no real NFL prospects. I'm no scout, but Chambliss seems like a legit pro prospect, is coming off a great year, looking at a weak QB draft, and a lot of unknowns around his current college team. It seems obvious, or at least not that risky, for him to go pro now and I don't understand why he's pushing so hard to return to Ole Miss.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:02 am to tigerskin
5 years, no matter what. You get one (1) redshirt, whether it’s medical or not.
Problem solved.
Problem solved.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:08 am to RB10
quote:
Problem solved
Someone would still sue.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:12 am to borotiger
quote:
Someone would still sue.
Any player involved in a lawsuit against the NCAA will have their eligibility suspended until the lawsuit is resolved.
Problem solved.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:19 am to tigerskin
Perhaps its time to turn the clock back about 50 years. Back to a time that the NCAA required that college players attend class and make progress towards a degree. Most colleges followed this requirement in some form.
Re-establishing this requirement would 1.) dampen the portal and 2.) inhibit the ex-pro players attempts to return. It would also put some teeth back into the NCAA
Rodo
Re-establishing this requirement would 1.) dampen the portal and 2.) inhibit the ex-pro players attempts to return. It would also put some teeth back into the NCAA
Rodo
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:21 am to RB10
quote:
Any player involved in a lawsuit against the NCAA will have their eligibility suspended until the lawsuit is resolved.
That would absolutely never come close to happening.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:25 am to borotiger
He does have a point.
A five star local judge is truth
A five star local judge is truth
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:42 am to tigerskin
I don’t understand why the NCAA can’t legally make the rules for their sport. It’s like telling a country club they have to accept anyone and can’t charge them money for it.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:48 am to StringedInstruments
quote:
I don’t understand why the NCAA can’t legally make the rules for their sport.
It's all due to lower level judges setting precedents through bastardized interpretations of the Ed O'Bannon ruling.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 9:55 am to Rodo
Agree with turning the clock back but some judge would shoot that down as well. I think we have found the problem. The ncaa inconsistency with transfers put us here with the portal. The waiver was a sign of weakness should have held firm but scared of racism tag.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 10:52 am to Rodo
quote:
Perhaps its time to turn the clock back about 50 years. Back to a time that the NCAA required that college players attend class and make progress towards a degree. Most colleges followed this requirement in some form.
Exactly! I had to declare a major by my sophomore year.
Also, when was the last time you heard of a player being in danger of becoming academically ineligible? I can’t remember the last time I heard that. This used to be a big issue.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 10:57 am to RB10
quote:
5 years, no matter what. You get one (1) redshirt, whether it’s medical or not.
Problem solved.
that pretty much is the rule other than they can get a medical. problem is these guys are suing if it was juco, d2,d3 or if they didnt play just making up medical reasons.
finding any reason they can to sue
Posted on 2/5/26 at 10:57 am to tigerskin
Why isn’t there wording in the contracts being signed that a player will abide by the rules set by the NCAA….at least where revenue sharing is involved.
I don’t see how they can argue damages when it comes to outside NIL payments since anyone can pursue an endorsement deal, active athlete or not.
Maybe someone here can explain these pro me.
I don’t see how they can argue damages when it comes to outside NIL payments since anyone can pursue an endorsement deal, active athlete or not.
Maybe someone here can explain these pro me.
Posted on 2/5/26 at 10:58 am to Wildcat23
quote:
Agree with turning the clock back but some judge would shoot that down as well. I think we have found the problem. The ncaa inconsistency with transfers put us here with the portal. The waiver was a sign of weakness should have held firm but scared of racism tag.
the portal was forced on them by judges
Posted on 2/5/26 at 11:01 am to lsu777
The portal would still exist but the degree of difficulty would increase. Players would have to go to class and assure their credits would transfer if the portal jumped. Wouldn't end things but likely dampen as I said.
Rodo
Rodo
Posted on 2/5/26 at 11:03 am to Rodo
quote:
The portal would still exist but the degree of difficulty would increase. Players would have to go to class and assure their credits would transfer if the portal jumped. Wouldn't end things but likely dampen as I said.
they still have to go to class and maintain a gpa.
i dunno where yall come up with this shite
and no they wouldnt have to make sure they credits transferred because the whole point of the court ruling was that regular students were not restricted and if the players were student athletes the ncaa couldnt enforce any different rules on them
when you transfer as a reg student, you may lose credit hours, happens daily.
its like yall want to comment on things and give opinions but really have not researched it other than reading this board
Page 1 of 2
Latest Texas A&M News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News