Zakai Zeigler suing for 5th year

[LittleCat]

Why should a player at a P-6 be granted an additional year if some mid-major and lower level programs had disrupted or cancelled seasons? The P-6s traveled on chartered flights and buses.

Why should players that began school in the fall of 2020 and 2022 and later get 5 years to play 5 but players that began in the fall of 2021 be the only group that can only play 4 seasons? In ZZ’s case he even had an injury that limited him to get exposure in 3x NCAATs.

Just answering your question to the best of my ability man. I don't really know. Like we've all said, the NCAA is goofy. I just know there was a lot of weirdness during that covid stretch, then NIL exploded, and here we are. Players fighting for as much as they get. I respect ZZ and he deserves more money than he probably got.

 

[cncchris33]

No, you all just keep pointing at other players who all played during covid, or got clearance because medical issues.

It’s like when your parents say no to something and instead of accepting it, you cry about how the kid down the street gets treated differently and it’s unfair to you.

I already said I don’t the players getting 5th and 6th years. Yes, this includes UK players. Yes, this includes Stute. Ya’ll keep bringing up him as if him and Zakai are somehow in the exact same situation. They aren’t.

Bottom line, if the ncaa changes the rule to allow guys to play 5 years with no limits, great. That’s not the rule though. I don’t want to see guys like ZZ abuse the system when they got their fair opportunity. I don’t remember this much crying about players 10 or 20 years ago when the ncaa continually screwed players out of eligibility for arbitrary reasons.

I'll back down as soon as you tell me the difference between Stute and Zeigler.

Your focused on the "why" of Stute, and I've already told you to throw out the covid year. I'm not concerned with that as we are both in agreement that covid is an extenuating circumstance that was equally applied at the time. I'm saying that Myles Stute competed in the NCAA's parameters of competition across 4 seasons...same as Zeigler. Yeah, he had a health issue that limited his time to less than 100% of games that season...so did Zeigler as a sophomore. They both competed in more games than the NCAA's VERY OWN RULES allow to qualify for a medical redshirt exemption. Yet, Stute gets a 5th year. Why shouldn't Zeigler?

Those two examples are like for like in terms of eligibility under the current NCAA rulebook, yet the NCAA made an exception for Stute. So, Zeigler suing for an exception is no different.

It sounds more like we'll have to agree to disagree in the end, but you matter-of-factly stating that ZZ has no footing to make this case is simply not true. At the end of the day, he's carving the path for those who fit his criteria the same way Diego Pavia did, the same way Stute did. Zeigler's primary point of contention is that his window of earning power was limited to 4 years because he chose not to redshirt, while guys who did redshirt were getting paid and would continue to do so across 5 years which is an opportunity he wasn't afforded. The 5 to play 5 rule would fix that and all the other issues and gives everyone an equal 5-year window to profit from NIL.

 

[cncchris33]

It's called arbitrary and capricious- a legal term. That's what the NCAA likes to do. They are random with their decisions, and that's why they have legal fights.

Now that NIL is involved, it's gotten worse because of anti-trust laws.

Exactly

 

[LittleCat]

I'll back down as soon as you tell me the difference between Stute and Zeigler.

Your focused on the "why" of Stute, and I've already told you to throw out the covid year. I'm not concerned with that as we are both in agreement that covid is an extenuating circumstance that was equally applied at the time. I'm saying that Myles Stute competed in the NCAA's parameters of competition across 4 seasons...same as Zeigler. Yeah, he had a health issue that limited his time to less than 100% of games that season...so did Zeigler as a sophomore. They both competed in more games than the NCAA's VERY OWN RULES allow to qualify for a medical redshirt exemption. Yet, Stute gets a 5th year. Why shouldn't Zeigler?

Those two examples are like for like in terms of eligibility under the current NCAA rulebook, yet the NCAA made an exception for Stute. So, Zeigler suing for an exception is no different.

It sounds more like we'll have to agree to disagree in the end, but you matter-of-factly stating that ZZ has no footing to make this case is simply not true. At the end of the day, he's carving the path for those who fit his criteria the same way Diego Pavia did, the same way Stute did. Zeigler's primary point of contention is that his window of earning power was limited to 4 years because he chose not to redshirt, while guys who did redshirt were getting paid and would continue to do so across 5 years which is an opportunity he wasn't afforded. The 5 to play 5 rule would fix that and all the other issues and gives everyone an equal 5-year window to profit from NIL.

I read lawsuit. Trust me, I get his argument. But just because others got hurt or played during covid, doesn't mean ZZ arbitrarily gets another year. Of course he would make money that he otherwise wouldn't. But that reason alone doesn't validate a 5th year for him (at least in my view). Is ZZ mad that he didn't get the play during 2020 or that he didn't miss months of games? I'm not sure how he is a victim.

 

[cncchris33]

I read lawsuit. Trust me, I get his argument. But just because others got hurt or played during covid, doesn't mean ZZ arbitrarily gets another year. Of course he would make money that he otherwise wouldn't. But that reason alone doesn't validate a 5th year for him (at least in my view). Is ZZ mad that he didn't get the play during 2020 or that he didn't miss months of games? I'm not sure how he is a victim.

That's EXACTLY what it means, actually. Zeigler isnt the one who would be arbitrarily getting the 5th year. He would be getting it in response to the arbitrary nature of Stute getting it.

The bottom line is this. Precedent has been set with the Stute case. He DOES NOT qualify for a medical redshirt by virtue of the NCAA's own rulebook, yet they are ignoring that and arbitrarily giving him another year of eligibility which will allow him the opportunity to profit from his name, image, likeness.

That. Is. The. Only. Argument. Zeigler. Needs.

If Stute has been given a 5th year out of pity outside of the NCAA guidelines for such, any court...if it interprets and applies the rulebook fairly across the board...will look at Zeigler's sophomore year and find that he missed the most important part of the season (arguably the most marketable portion) and determine that his value was damaged enough that he should qualify under the same parameters Stute does. 14 games played, 30 games played...it doesn't matter. Neither player qualifies by rule, yet one will benefit due to the arbitrary nature of the ruling body. The NCAA can be capricious about it, but the court system can not.

Lastly, please stop using covid when responding to me. It gives the impression that you somehow believe I'm using covid as a crutch or support for my argument. I'm not and never have. Leave it out of the discussion because it's irrelevant.

 

[Doctrippin]

The 5 years is probably going to pass. So, the only class that won’t benefit is this year’s senior class unless ZZ prevails.

It makes the uneven rulings so much easier when you give everyone 5 years.

Z is one of those anomalies: a college star but not fit for the NBA. The bigger stars won't stay 5 years. Football is where the 5 year rule will really help

 

[FeelVol]

fairness? How was he treated unfairly? If it was about money then he should have left UT and chased the bag elsewhere in years prior.

I believes he’s just using the lawsuit as a pretense so that he can just play another year of college ball. He knows he got his 4 years but he looks around at the confusion caused by the ncaa and thinks, “heck, I might as well sue too and it might even work”. No harm no foul. I get it.

But it’s lame to see all these athletes fighting for extra years when they have gotten their fair chance. You get 5 years typically to play 4 eligible seasons. ZZ got his 4 years in 4. Move along

Perhaps ZZ is actually wanting to work for his Masters degree as well as play ball. I love the idea of giving athletes an extra year to work on their graduate studies.Basketball will end for most but a degree will always be worth the time spent.

 

[walkenvol]

I wouldn't care one bit if ZZ wanted to stay here 10 years.

I would. My personal preference is for college athletics to be composed of 18-23 year old athletes like I’ve known my entire life. But, my preference doesn’t necessarily make it right nor the best choice - guess that’s the difference in myself and littlekitty. One of us knows the difference in our opinion verses the reality of the current system, along with one of us doesn’t go on other fanbase sites to debate our opinions. Maybe there’s a correlation here?

 

[walkenvol]

Z is one of those anomalies: a college star but not fit for the NBA. The bigger stars won't stay 5 years. Football is where the 5 year rule will really help

Not really an anomaly, Tshiebwe and Broome are 2 recent national POY winners who aren’t/won’t have meaningful nba careers.

 

[MinisterofDef#92]

That's EXACTLY what it means, actually. Zeigler isnt the one who would be arbitrarily getting the 5th year. He would be getting it in response to the arbitrary nature of Stute getting it.

The bottom line is this. Precedent has been set with the Stute case. He DOES NOT qualify for a medical redshirt by virtue of the NCAA's own rulebook, yet they are ignoring that and arbitrarily giving him another year of eligibility which will allow him the opportunity to profit from his name, image, likeness.

That. Is. The. Only. Argument. Zeigler. Needs.

If Stute has been given a 5th year out of pity outside of the NCAA guidelines for such, any court...if it interprets and applies the rulebook fairly across the board...will look at Zeigler's sophomore year and find that he missed the most important part of the season (arguably the most marketable portion) and determine that his value was damaged enough that he should qualify under the same parameters Stute does. 14 games played, 30 games played...it doesn't matter. Neither player qualifies by rule, yet one will benefit due to the arbitrary nature of the ruling body. The NCAA can be capricious about it, but the court system can not.

Lastly, please stop using covid when responding to me. It gives the impression that you somehow believe I'm using covid as a crutch or support for my argument. I'm not and never have. Leave it out of the discussion because it's irrelevant.

Pretty simple to understand...Lil' Cat being intentionally obtuse because he's all up in his emotions - doesn't matter how many times or ways it's explained to him.

 

[LittleCat]

I would. My personal preference is for college athletics to be composed of 18-23 year old athletes like I’ve known my entire life. But, my preference doesn’t necessarily make it right nor the best choice - guess that’s the difference in myself and littlekitty. One of us knows the difference in our opinion verses the reality of the current system, along with one of us doesn’t go on other fanbase sites to debate our opinions. Maybe there’s a correlation here?

Reality is the current system is 5 years to play 4.

Pretty simple to understand...Lil' Cat being intentionally obtuse because he's all up in his emotions - doesn't matter how many times or ways it's explained to him.

Thank you Dr Phil

 

[walkenvol]

Reality is the current system is 5 years to play 4.



Thank you Dr Phil

Your struggling to comprehend the reality. Reality is the system arbitrarily makes exceptions to the stated rules and is currently in a state of flux with everyone in the know saying the change to 5 years is imminent.

 

[MinisterofDef#92]

Reality is the current system is 5 years to play 4.



Thank you Dr Phil

#truthhurts

 

[LittleCat]

#truthhurts

Truth is, objectively it'd be fun to see ZZ again for a 5th year. Truth is, the rule hasn't been changed (and in my opinion shouldn't). But NCAA screwed up with Pavia, Stute and others. I think the lawsuit is a bit offbase, but it's worth a shot.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

Truth is, objectively it'd be fun to see ZZ again for a 5th year. Truth is, the rule hasn't been changed (and in my opinion shouldn't). But NCAA screwed up with Pavia, Stute and others. I think the lawsuit is a bit offbase, but it's worth a shot.

You’re getting there at least

 

[Sea Ray]

That would not be fun seeing him in another jersey.

He's got quite a bond with CRB and the Vol community. I doubt he'd want to leave that unless it came down to a paycheck

 

[LeannaVol]

I really hope this works out for ZZ and UT but I fear it will be like the Albert Osuna situation for the baseball team. All NCAA needs to do is drag their feet and the time will run out for this season. Then it allows them to do a fresh stat for the next season for the 5 years plan.

If ZZ is somehow ruled eligible this season, how many more players will want the same consideration and then you have teams trying to figure out scholarship limitations, players asking for a release based on other players returning, additional NIL deals being negotiated etc.

I know the lawsuit specifically asks for an injunction to allow him to play this season but there will likely be a lot of motions and hearings and things take time.

 

[wtmvol]

I really hope this works out for ZZ and UT but I fear it will be like the Albert Osuna situation for the baseball team. All NCAA needs to do is drag their feet and the time will run out for this season. Then it allows them to do a fresh stat for the next season for the 5 years plan.

If ZZ is somehow ruled eligible this season, how many more players will want the same consideration and then you have teams trying to figure out scholarship limitations, players asking for a release based on other players returning, additional NIL deals being negotiated etc.

I know the lawsuit specifically asks for an injunction to allow him to play this season but there will likely be a lot of motions and hearings and things take time.

It takes a unique player to fit this mold. For one thing, they have to be good enough for teams to be willing to complicate their roster situations, but not so good that they stay in the NBA draft process or go play professionally in Europe. Just because a player wants to come back for a 5th year doesn't mean the school has to make room for them. I'm sure there are others out there besides ZZ, but I don't think we're in danger of some avalanche of cases if they grant ZZ a 5th year.

 

[LeannaVol]

It takes a unique player to fit this mold. For one thing, they have to be good enough for teams to be willing to complicate their roster situations, but not so good that they stay in the NBA draft process or go play professionally in Europe. Just because a player wants to come back for a 5th year doesn't mean the school has to make room for them. I'm sure there are others out there besides ZZ, but I don't think we're in danger of some avalanche of cases if they grant ZZ a 5th year.

Good points but NIL money from a power 5 school would trump overseas money in a lot of cases. Tennessee has 4 players this year that could potentially fit that bill. I tihnk there are more than you might think.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

Good points but NIL money from a power 5 school would trump overseas money in a lot of cases. Tennessee has 4 players this year that could potentially fit that bill. I tihnk there are more than you might think.

After June 15 that number shrinks by a large amount

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I think a far bigger problem is the fake students that are on campus for less than a year with the biggest NIL deals instead of the kids that stayed academically eligible for 4 years getting to be student-athletes for a 5th year.

The NCAA should crack down on the schools with rosters full of one-and-dones. Reducing their roster sizes shouldn’t create difficult legal challenges. But maybe the blue bloods control the NCAA.

 

[MinisterofDef#92]

Truth is, objectively it'd be fun to see ZZ again for a 5th year. Truth is, the rule hasn't been changed (and in my opinion shouldn't). But NCAA screwed up with Pavia, Stute and others. I think the lawsuit is a bit offbase, but it's worth a shot.

Exactly

 

[LeannaVol]

I think a far bigger problem is the fake students that are on campus for less than a year with the biggest NIL deals instead of the kids that stayed academically eligible for 4 years getting to be student-athletes for a 5th year.

The NCAA should crack down on the schools with rosters full of one-and-dones. Reducing their roster sizes shouldn’t create difficult legal challenges. But maybe the blue bloods control the NCAA.

I agree but the whole concept of a true student athlete or amateur college sports has already been lost at the Power 5 level. Too much money at play. It has lessened the appeal for me, but come fall when Tn plays Alabama I will get pulled back in.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I agree but the whole concept of a true student athlete or amateur college sports has already been lost at the Power 5 level. Too much money at play. It has lessened the appeal for me, but come fall when Tn plays Alabama I will get pulled back in.

ZZ just wore a cap and gown and received his degree.

 

[Volprofch05]

You never have to leave college if you don’t want to, I am exhibit A on that