So maybe she is really evaluating the documents and the things that she is looking at.

Yeah.

You know, put yourself in the judge's shoes and you just made a decision, wrote a 37 page order in the trial court level, basically making your decision on what you believe should happen, given the claims that are made.

And so to go back to that same judge, you know, seven to 10 days later and ask for different relief.

It's almost like asking, you know, a parent that says you're going to bed every night at nine o'clock and then continue to go back and say, no, but we want it to be midnight.

And obviously, you know, the judge in my book has made up her mind.

And this is just more of a procedural formality more than anything is the appellate court has already said you need to go back to the trial court, ask for your stay.

If things happen quickly with the Protect College Sports Act, how could that affect any of these court rulings and whether or not these athletes are eligible or ineligible?

Yeah.

And I wanted to say this too, is that calling, you know, something just an eligibility rule does not by itself immunize or prohibit it from being an antitrust, you know, violation.

They ... he's still got hoops to jump through there.

And obviously he, he sued and the other athletes sued on different grounds, whether it's breach of contract or it's an arbitrary rule that was against them.

But I gotta remind you about the Supreme Court case from five years ago, Alston v. NCAA, and that was really the landmark case where the, you know, Judge Kavanaugh gave it, you know, or I thought just a ... stated with conviction that the NCAA cannot essentially, you know, fix, uh, the labor market.

They're, they're running this monopoly and m- benefiting billions off of student athletes.

And so Alston made that clear that when it independently comes to competing members of a, of a sports league collectively agreeing to restrict competition, like the SEC and the Big Ten are trying to do, that agreement can then fall within the Sherman Act.

Is there any chance that this, this gets solved before college basketball gets into full gear, or no way?

Everyone takes one and then we're good into the age based model after that.

Respectfully, I don't.

As a former student athlete in the NCAA who reaped all the benefits of the institution that it was behind, as a former college basketball coach, you have to have bylaws in place.

You have to have some level of regulation.

You have to have basically a governing body overseas so there is not just complete dysfunction.

Now, could the NCAA have made different decisions or maybe taken a different path throughout the course of time? Well, of course, in hindsight, everything's 2020.

And we all could have done different things, you know, had we seen what would happen in the rearview mirror before.

In your expert opinion, do you have a gut feeling on what you think is going to happen next?

Uh, what is the latest with, with all that?

Yeah, so the, the, obviously the NCAA wants, uh, this to be on an expedited basis.

They're wanting Judge Sweeney to act.

Uh, they went so far as to actually put, uh, a bold deadline that if she does not act by 2:00 PM Eastern on today, August 10th, that they're ready to proceed forward on an emergency basis to the Tenth Circuit appellate court.

Um, to me, quite the bold strategy, um, to push, uh, the envelope, so to speak, with a judge that ultimately could decide your fate.

Um, but they feel that they're, they're at the end of the, the line here, that they have no other hope but to be more aggressive and try to get this before the Tenth Circuit because here's the issue.

Everything comes down right now to the calendar.

Um, what's your take on these cases? Like, what is your take on what type of confidence do you have that these players are, number one, gonna be eligible for the start of the season? And if they're eligible for the start of the season, is this something that coaches have to worry about the rug being pulled out from under 'em in December or January?

[laughs]

And in, in, in this case, there's no doubt this absolutely shocked, um, the airwaves and, and went viral quickly with reactions, with takes, with all of those things as to what's actually happening in college sports.

Um, this was a, uh, from a even a legal perspective, somewhat of a shocking decision, um, just given the state of where things are at right now.

You know, as you mentioned, um, this was a significant NCAA eligibility ruling, and I can't recall something this m- of this magnitude so soon to school starting that's ever happened before.

And so of course people are on edge, and rightfully so.

I can't imagine how many text messages you got based on the number that I got from coaches wanting direction, uh, or athletic directors asking for input on where this could potentially go.

Um, the, the interesting part about this case out in Colorado, it's a federal court case, not a state court case, which is a huge difference, is the plaintiffs in this case, which consisted of approximately 12 student athletes, filed for what's called class certification.

'Cause I feel like if I'm the NCAA, I come out with a statement today or Monday saying, "Hey, you know what? You can play these guys if you want, but we ruled them ineligible, and if you do play them, we," meaning the NCAA selection committee, "can hold it against you."