Unless it is Alabama basketball.NCAA seems to have zero chance of winning any court hearing.
In all fairness, the Bediako case is pretty different from Chambliss.Unless it is Alabama basketball.
This is a basketball conversation, but there are over 100 former pro basketball players in NCAA basketball. The only difference is they didn’t play 2 years of college ball first. So yes, by the argument most rival fans claim that playing college ball first is the difference, LeBron would be allowed to play .In all fairness, the Bediako case is pretty different from Chambliss.
Dude was a pro for over two years and wants to play college ball again?
What’s next, LeBron James enrolling at Ohio State because he has 4 years of eligibility left?
They are deciding individual cases; not setting NCAA policy.Why are state courts decided national issues. That ruling, to me, should only apply to games in Oxford.
I will also say that if playing in the NBA/G League is a disqualification then professionally playing in Europe should be treated the same way.This is a basketball conversation, but there are over 100 former pro basketball players in NCAA basketball. The only difference is they didn’t play 2 years of college ball first. So yes, by the argument most rival fans claim that playing college ball first is the difference, LeBron would be allowed to play .
the answer we seem to get is "because". that works for some idiots.I will also say that if playing in the NBA/G League is a disqualification then professionally playing in Europe should be treated the same way.
Not sure why getting paid in euros is different.
Ha - yeah, that doesn’t even work with 6 year olds anymore.the answer we seem to get is "because". that works for some idiots.
You are right, but the precedent they set is used by other courts. What’s next, a player played in only two games in 2024, but had a hangnail, so he should get a medical redshirt for That year after the fact?They are deciding individual cases; not setting NCAA policy.
Though new policy may result