BanditVol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2012
- Messages
- 4,927
- Likes
- 3,796
This may be a rehash. Apologies if so. Then disclaimer. This is the Google AI response, "your mileage may vary", but I don't seen anything below that seems incorrect. If it is, correct me! (or google AI, more properly).
Google AI response to "Pavia Lawsuits" (I thought there were two, but there is only one). Further commentary below!
The "Pavia lawsuit" refers to a lawsuit filed by Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia against the NCAA to challenge rules that limit eligibility for athletes who previously attended junior college. The lawsuit argues these rules violate antitrust laws by restricting players' ability to earn Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation and compete at the Division I level. Other athletes, like Tennessee quarterback Joey Aguilar, have joined the suit.
Legal basis: The lawsuit argues that the NCAA's "JUCO Eligibility Limitation Bylaws," specifically the "Five-Year Rule" and "Eligibility Clock," unfairly restrains competition in the labor market for college athletes.
Legal status: A preliminary injunction was granted, allowing Pavia to play in the 2025 season without counting his JUCO years against his eligibility. The NCAA has issued a blanket waiver for the 2025-26 season, but the lawsuit is seeking a more permanent, nationwide change.
Expansion: The lawsuit has been amended to include several other players, including Joey Aguilar, who are also former junior college athletes with eligibility concerns.
Future implications: A successful challenge could permanently alter how the NCAA counts junior college seasons against an athlete's Division I eligibility, potentially allowing many more athletes to have more seasons of competition.
Pavia's future: While the lawsuit is designed to set a precedent, Pavia himself has stated that 2025 will be his final season and he does not plan to seek a seventh year of eligibility.
NCAA's response: The NCAA and power conferences are lobbying Congress to pass legislation that would grant them antitrust protection to set their own eligibility rules and prevent lawsuits like this one.
Commentary: Assuming all of the above is correct, what prevents Joey from asking the courts to extend the injunction another year? Or TWO????
Here is my understanding.
Two years at City College of San Francisco. He has already gotten credit for the one year (2019) he played there as part of the injunction. The other year was the COVID year (2020), and thus does not apply either way to eligibility (NCAA just pretends it never happened one way or the other).
Two years Diablo Valley (2021-2022), which I have confirmed is a two-year school also.
Seems simple to me, he has TWO MORE YEARS, provided the court will grant them.
Tell me I'm wrong!
As for him burning his redshirt at CCSF in 2019...if it don't count, it don't count! Simple logic. Regardless, one more year would be fantastic. Can groom the 5-star while winning a naty (provided our defense returns to 2024 form or some approximation thereof).
Apologize if this all has already been covered, but that AI bot put it all so succinctly, it was an eye opener to me. Anyone else? Or is this old hat? I searched threads, but not long.
Google AI response to "Pavia Lawsuits" (I thought there were two, but there is only one). Further commentary below!
The "Pavia lawsuit" refers to a lawsuit filed by Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia against the NCAA to challenge rules that limit eligibility for athletes who previously attended junior college. The lawsuit argues these rules violate antitrust laws by restricting players' ability to earn Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation and compete at the Division I level. Other athletes, like Tennessee quarterback Joey Aguilar, have joined the suit.
Legal basis: The lawsuit argues that the NCAA's "JUCO Eligibility Limitation Bylaws," specifically the "Five-Year Rule" and "Eligibility Clock," unfairly restrains competition in the labor market for college athletes.
Legal status: A preliminary injunction was granted, allowing Pavia to play in the 2025 season without counting his JUCO years against his eligibility. The NCAA has issued a blanket waiver for the 2025-26 season, but the lawsuit is seeking a more permanent, nationwide change.
Expansion: The lawsuit has been amended to include several other players, including Joey Aguilar, who are also former junior college athletes with eligibility concerns.
Future implications: A successful challenge could permanently alter how the NCAA counts junior college seasons against an athlete's Division I eligibility, potentially allowing many more athletes to have more seasons of competition.
Pavia's future: While the lawsuit is designed to set a precedent, Pavia himself has stated that 2025 will be his final season and he does not plan to seek a seventh year of eligibility.
NCAA's response: The NCAA and power conferences are lobbying Congress to pass legislation that would grant them antitrust protection to set their own eligibility rules and prevent lawsuits like this one.
Commentary: Assuming all of the above is correct, what prevents Joey from asking the courts to extend the injunction another year? Or TWO????
Here is my understanding.
Two years at City College of San Francisco. He has already gotten credit for the one year (2019) he played there as part of the injunction. The other year was the COVID year (2020), and thus does not apply either way to eligibility (NCAA just pretends it never happened one way or the other).
Two years Diablo Valley (2021-2022), which I have confirmed is a two-year school also.
Seems simple to me, he has TWO MORE YEARS, provided the court will grant them.
Tell me I'm wrong!
As for him burning his redshirt at CCSF in 2019...if it don't count, it don't count! Simple logic. Regardless, one more year would be fantastic. Can groom the 5-star while winning a naty (provided our defense returns to 2024 form or some approximation thereof).
Apologize if this all has already been covered, but that AI bot put it all so succinctly, it was an eye opener to me. Anyone else? Or is this old hat? I searched threads, but not long.
