Joey Aguilar Hearing Live

[NighthawkVol]

1. The court granted a temporary restraining order:
A Tennessee judge already ruled Aguilar “has demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits” in his eligibility claim — which is exactly the legal standard needed for a preliminary injunction if the judge later applies it in full.

This is actually just one of 4 elements required to be met by the petitioning party in order to grant injunctive relief. But yes, it's a good sign that the Chancellor ruled that that element was met in the petition for emergency relief.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

I've argued numerous appellate cases and clerked for a couple of judges and this isn't true at all in my experience.

Why would you clerk for a "couple of judges"? Usually post grads who clerk for a judge (which is generally a high honor) only do so for one year. The only ones who do it more than once are incredibly highly accomplished (I'm talking Supreme Court level clerks). Also if you've argued before an appellate judge then you would know the briefs are how cases are won not oral arguments. Because anything you might say in oral arguments that would help your case better be in the briefs.

If you clerked you would know the process. Which relies heavily on the clerk to do all the legal research, draft an opinion for the judge, discuss said opinion with the judge, make corrections suggested by the judge, then attend oral arguments. By the time we reach the stage of oral arguments a preliminary opinion is already prepared. All you do after oral arguments is make minor changes. Then if we're in appellate court since only one judge writes the majority opinion, we would circulate the draft opinion to the other judges chambers for approval incorporating any further suggested changes.

What lawyers say in oral arguments has very little impact in the grand scheme of things. The decision is 90% ready before oral arguments even begin.

 

[Vol865]

Of course he will have an argument based on the TN statute the attorney discussed in the messages above which is what his attorney argued upon in court today.

Joey will be harmed next year by not being allowed to play both financially and as discussed in intangible ways of not being able to represent the Vols JUST like he is this year.

The argument is: what right does the NCAA have to say that JUCO counts and harm him financially and intangibly?

Next year's argument: what right does the NCAA have to say that 6 years or whatever is all the eligibility he has and harm him financially and intangibly?

Essentially, if all a TN player has to do is prove he and the community are harmed by the NCAA rules, which is what the entire hearing was about, you should win.

They set the precedent when they have everyone a blanket waiver last year. They should've denied everyone and they might b still have a leg to stand on IMO.

 

[adam.vol]

Bottom line is the NCAA is a private organization. Institutions that join the NCAA should be expected to follow the rules outlined by the NCAA. I understand that NIL changes the landscape, and antitrust laws come into play with college athletes having contracts. With that said, what the NCAA must make sure is their rules are enforced constituently across all teams and sports. Over the past couple years, those rules have been anything but consistent. I appreciate what Joey did last year, but if suddenly JUCO years dont count, players who are not 4 and 5 stars, will do the JUCO route, and then plan on transferring to the NCAA institutions. The result will be end the final end of collegiate sports and any "amateur" type leagues. COVID resulted in players being issued an additional year and I think this is where the lines getting blurred came into play. Look at Carson Beck, "transfers" to Miami and I think never took a class. The entire concept of student athletes is at risk.

‪This is about punishing anyone for using a competitor. The NCAA is ruthless against anyone who uses the NJCAA or NAIA. On the other hand, it has allowed professional athlete from other leagues across the globe to play in the NCAA (without penalty).

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

They set the precedent when they have everyone a blanket waiver last year. They should've denied everyone and they might b still have a leg to stand on IMO.

That doesn't change that you're watching, and apparently cheering because it's admittedly good for UT, the foundation being laid for challenging any NCAA "you only get to play X years" rules.

It's not good. It's helpful for us this year but it is very obvious that the argument Joey is using will be used to challenge any NCAA eligibility rules and like we've seen with NIL going out of control after challenges, like we've seen transfers go out of control after challenges...... we're now going to see eligibility go out of control.

But keep cheering like it's a good thing.

 

[Volador]

Joey - plead the 5th!!!! Wait, sorry, plead the 6th!!!

 

[utchs81]

Why would you clerk for a "couple of judges"? Usually post grads who clerk for a judge (which is generally a high honor) only do so for one year. The only ones who do it more than once are incredibly highly accomplished (I'm talking Supreme Court level clerks). Also if you've argued before an appellate judge then you would know the briefs are how cases are won not oral arguments. Because anything you might say in oral arguments that would help your case better be in the briefs.

If you clerked you would know the process. Which relies heavily on the clerk to do all the legal research, draft an opinion for the judge, discuss said opinion with the judge, make corrections suggested by the judge, then attend oral arguments. By the time we reach the stage of oral arguments a preliminary opinion is already prepared. All you do after oral arguments is make minor changes. Then if we're in appellate court since only one judge writes the majority opinion, we would circulate the draft opinion to the other judges chambers for approval incorporating any further suggested changes.

What lawyers say in oral arguments has very little impact in the grand scheme of things. The decision is 90% ready before oral arguments even begin.

I continue to be amazed by the vast knowledge base displayed by D4H, initially it was primarily all things football related and now it incorporates all things in the legal arena as well. How's your medical knowledge?

 

[VOLINVONORE]

Doubting he will win, but hoping he does.

Agree.

 

[volfan102455]

The NCAA could actually address this by just agreeing that only years at schools that are part of the NCAA will count.

They already give players who are injured and can't play as many medical redshirt years as they can prove - so a player could in effect be injured from age 18 to 21 - then start playing at 22 and have 4 years. Same is true for mission trips and military service - those years don't count but are a deferral of the remaining years until the service is completed.

 

[TheVolsFrog]

Joey - plead the 5th!!!! Wait, sorry, plead the 6th!!!

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

The NCAA could actually address this by just agreeing that only years at schools that are part of the NCAA will count.

They already give players who are injured and can't play as many medical redshirt years as they can prove - so a player could in effect be injured from age 18 to 21 - then start playing at 22 and have 4 years. Same is true for mission trips and military service - those years don't count but are a deferral of the remaining years until the service is completed.

True. So a player like the guy at Alabama would still be eligible? "Only NCAA counts" and he left the NCAA for the NBA but returned still having eligibility.

If a player leaves for the pros, then comes back, why should the NCAA stop them? JUCO isn't part of the NCAA but neither is the NFL or NBA.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

I continue to be amazed by the vast knowledge base displayed by D4H, initially it was primarily all things football related and now it incorporates all things in the legal arena as well. How's your medical knowledge?

I have pretty good knowledge of almost every subject mainly because I was always curious as a kid. My favorite hobby was reading the encyclopedia before the internet became ubiquitous. With that said I'm not as well versed in medicine as I am legal stuff. But compared to the average person I would say I have pretty good medical knowledge.

 

[volfan102455]

True. So a player like the guy at Alabama would still be eligible? "Only NCAA counts" and he left the NCAA for the NBA but returned still having eligibility.

If a player leaves for the pros, then comes back, why should the NCAA stop them? JUCO isn't part of the NCAA but neither is the NFL or NBA.

Leaving for PRO ball should be treated differently. I think the NCAA rules need to be more clearly defined in that regard.

- If a player enters the draft but isn't drafted and has years left, should they be allowed to come back if they have years left? Maybe but there would and should not be any guarantees there will be a spot for said player on any team. Just like if one quits their job, then finds the job they were going to did not work out - the former employer is NOT required to take you back.

- If a player actually plays and/or takes money as a pro, I think their time in the NCAA should be over in terms of actually playing on a team.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Leaving for PRO ball should be treated differently. I think the NCAA rules need to be more clearly defined in that regard.

- If a player enters the draft but isn't drafted and has years left, should they be allowed to come back if they have years left? Maybe but there would and should not be any guarantees there will be a spot for said player on any team. Just like if one quits their job, then finds the job they were going to did not work out - the former employer is NOT required to take you back.

- If a player actually plays and/or takes money as a pro, I think their time in the NCAA should be over in terms of actually playing on a team.

That's the problem here.

The NCAA pays players too now so what's the difference with "pro ball" from the NCAA? Legally, good luck with that.

 

[utchs81]

I have pretty good knowledge of almost every subject mainly because I was always curious as a kid. My favorite hobby was reading the encyclopedia before the internet became ubiquitous. With that said I'm not as well versed in medicine as I am legal stuff. But compared to the average person I would say I have pretty good medical knowledge.

I'm surprised, I had you pegged to be from the internet generation as opposed to the Funk and Wagnalls one.

 

[mudhen]

AI says it far better than I could...

What is the probability that joey aguilar is successful in getting another year of eligibility?

It isn’t possible to put an exact mathematical probability on whether Joey Aguilar will be granted another year of eligibility — but based on the information currently available, there are clear factors both for and against his chances, and experts and sources seem to be uncertain or mixed about the outcome:

Factors that suggest he has a decent chance

1. The court granted a temporary restraining order:
A Tennessee judge already ruled Aguilar “has demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits” in his eligibility claim — which is exactly the legal standard needed for a preliminary injunction if the judge later applies it in full.

2. He remains protected from enforcement of the rule for now:
The temporary restraining order has been extended, meaning he can practice with the team while the judge considers the full injunction, demonstrating real legal momentum.

3. Similar legal challenges have succeeded recently:
Other players (like in the Pavia case) have obtained injunctions against NCAA eligibility rules that count junior college years — and Aguilar’s arguments are part of the same broader legal trend challenging those longstanding rules.

Factors that suggest his chances aren’t a sure thing

1. No final ruling yet:
As of the latest reports, the judge has not yet decided whether to grant a full injunction that would allow Aguilar to play in 2026; the decision has simply been delayed.

2. Conflicting views online and among fans:
Some observers believe an extra year for Aguilar is unlikely absent a strong waiver or clear legal precedent that carries the day.

3. The NCAA is actively defending its rules:
The NCAA is contesting these eligibility challenges on legal and regulatory grounds, and that defense — combined with judges’ hesitancy to broadly rewrite eligibility rules — means not all courts will rule in Aguilar’s favor.

What the current snapshot suggests

Legal experts and court precedent say: He has a solid argument and has already cleared one early legal hurdle (the restraining order) — a positive sign.

But: A preliminary injunction isn’t guaranteed just because the restraining order was granted. The judge still has to decide if the full injunction — which directly impacts his eligibility — is appropriate.

So rather than a single probability number, the best way to think about it is:

Reasonably plausible or moderate chance: He’s not an underdog, and his legal position has some strong elements.
Not guaranteed: There’s still substantial uncertainty because the judge has not yet committed to the full injunction.

In plain terms

At this stage, many observers would describe his chances as “moderate to favorable, but far from certain.” The fact that he already convinced a judge he’s likely to succeed on the merits is significant — but until the injunction is actually granted, we can’t say he’s likely or certain to get another year of eligibility.

If you’re looking for a rough qualitative sense of likelihood based on current legal signals:

Better than 50/50 but probably not overwhelming (e.g., not > 70–80% certain) — in legal disputes like this outcome is uncertain until the judge’s ruling.

Thank you.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

Leaving for PRO ball should be treated differently. I think the NCAA rules need to be more clearly defined in that regard.

- If a player enters the draft but isn't drafted and has years left, should they be allowed to come back if they have years left? Maybe but there would and should not be any guarantees there will be a spot for said player on any team. Just like if one quits their job, then finds the job they were going to did not work out - the former employer is NOT required to take you back.

- If a player actually plays and/or takes money as a pro, I think their time in the NCAA should be over in terms of actually playing on a team.

CFB athletes already get paid in two ways in addition to NIL.

1. The money for expenses that they get from the NCAA vs Alston case ruling. i.e. "Alston Money".

2. Revenue sharing from the NCAA as a result of the House vs NCAA settlement.

They already get paid directly by the schools and the NCAA. In UT's case, it's around $170,000 per FB athlete. annually. That means that the Vols FB athletes are pros by any measure.

 

[adam.vol]

I have pretty good knowledge of almost every subject mainly because I was always curious as a kid. My favorite hobby was reading the encyclopedia before the internet became ubiquitous. With that said I'm not as well versed in medicine as I am legal stuff. But compared to the average person I would say I have pretty good medical knowledge.

Some people are baffled by reading. I can’t begin to count how many snarky little bookworms I ran across in my life who quipped “you should read more” over not knowing a quote or character from a fictional story. I was just interested in reading about things that actually happened..

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I have pretty good knowledge of almost every subject mainly because I was always curious as a kid. My favorite hobby was reading the encyclopedia before the internet became ubiquitous. With that said I'm not as well versed in medicine as I am legal stuff. But compared to the average person I would say I have pretty good medical knowledge.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

Why would you clerk for a "couple of judges"? Usually post grads who clerk for a judge (which is generally a high honor) only do so for one year. The only ones who do it more than once are incredibly highly accomplished (I'm talking Supreme Court level clerks). Also if you've argued before an appellate judge then you would know the briefs are how cases are won not oral arguments. Because anything you might say in oral arguments that would help your case better be in the briefs.

If you clerked you would know the process. Which relies heavily on the clerk to do all the legal research, draft an opinion for the judge, discuss said opinion with the judge, make corrections suggested by the judge, then attend oral arguments. By the time we reach the stage of oral arguments a preliminary opinion is already prepared. All you do after oral arguments is make minor changes. Then if we're in appellate court since only one judge writes the majority opinion, we would circulate the draft opinion to the other judges chambers for approval incorporating any further suggested changes.

What lawyers say in oral arguments has very little impact in the grand scheme of things. The decision is 90% ready before oral arguments even begin.

The guy I clerked for passed away and I concluded with another. Appellate courts don't HAVE TO grant oral arguments. In most cases they don't and if they do grant it, they want to hear from the lawyers. Trial judges definitely want to hear from the lawyers to sharpen the issues, they don't have the time or the staffs to wade through complex legal issues that appellate judges do.

 

[volsfan24018]

I have pretty good knowledge of almost every subject mainly because I was always curious as a kid. My favorite hobby was reading the encyclopedia before the internet became ubiquitous. With that said I'm not as well versed in medicine as I am legal stuff. But compared to the average person I would say I have pretty good medical knowledge.

Looks like you also read a thesaurus.

 

[Johnnyreb#VFL]

How did D4H highjack this thread mods make a move

 

[DonDiego]

I have pretty good knowledge of almost every subject mainly because I was always curious as a kid. My favorite hobby was reading the encyclopedia before the internet became ubiquitous. With that said I'm not as well versed in medicine as I am legal stuff. But compared to the average person I would say I have pretty good medical knowledge.

You missed a comma after 'with that said'. Otherwise, you're a genius.

 

[utchs81]

You missed a comma after 'with that said'. Otherwise, you're a genius.

I'm thinking that D4H follows the old Apache belief that only God is perfect and therefore they intentionally made mistakes in their baskets or tapestries. So, he intentionally omitted the comma.

 

[tennesseeduke]

No different than now, then? Schools will just "not be involved" in NIL like they are "not involved" now.

Schools desperately want to win and paid players for decades and decades. They are not going to suddenly stop using money to recruit.

Exactly