Chris Ledlum

fordham96 said:
Guys I will conclude with this, a lot of your post about how you think "they will win their petition.." is wish-casting.

Do you honestly believe that? Or do you hope that will happen?

I think you need to start with the realistic premise that it is unlikely but anything is possible.
Click to expand...

My opinion is that they have a decent shot at winning with legal action. You are correct, I have no idea if they are willing/prepared to go that route.
 
fordham96 said:
They were not "barred."

Their conference opted out. They had the option of transferring to a different school.

They were not slaves. They were not being held against their will to go to Harvard/Cornell/Princeton/Penn etc.

The fact that the Ivy League does not allow redshirt players is their rule as well. Is that "barring" a kid from playing in his 5th year when he still has eligibility?
Click to expand...
Different interpretation of "barred". The player should not have had to transfer from one "academic institution" to another because of Covid. On the sports side of the equation, where the NCAA determines eligibility, all other "student-athletes" are getting a FIFTH YEAR of playing eligibility because the door was open for them to play.
At the Ivy League schools, the door was shut......hence, barred from playing at the school of their choice, where they built an academic record.
You're saying they could have just transferred to DePaul and gotten a DePaul degree instead of Princeton. If basketball and academics are intertwined in calculating eligibility by the NCAA, then they are favoring the sports side over the academic interests of the "student-athlete".
Even LMF could argue that case!🥸⚖
 
Amaseinyourface said:
Of course I’m on Dingle and Ledlum and the Ivy League guys side. But weren’t there no fans that season?
Click to expand...
There were MEDIA contracts. Broadcast $$. Exposure. Training and development lost opportunities. Now, with unregulated NIL payments, the loss of substantial income by not being allowed to "play" a fifth year.
I don't believe the NIL impact was taken into account in 2020.
That is what can be tested in the courts.
 
Rocket said:
There were MEDIA contracts. Broadcast $$. Exposure. Training and development lost opportunities. Now, with unregulated NIL payments, the loss of substantial income by not being allowed to "play" a fifth year.
I don't believe the NIL impact was taken into account in 2020.
That is what can be tested in the courts.
Click to expand...
But is it the IVY league or the ncaa that they should have a problem with?
 
Final comment........if St. John's has the NIL $ to cover all its player needs and these two players are willing to accept their roles with the added talent, our depth will be excellent.
 
Amaseinyourface said:
But is it the IVY league or the ncaa that they should have a problem with?
Click to expand...
The NCCA obviously. They are the governing body!
The NCAA tomorrow could institute a rule allowing full-time graduate students eligibility and extend college playing to 5 or 6 years.
They have been pushed into a corner by the power conferences and the NIL legality.
College basketball needs to be redefined. The Ledlum case is miniscule compared to what could become a question of the validity of the NCAA rules in the current environment.
 
Marillac2 said:
It is patently unfair to deny Ivy players the extra year. In the age of NIL, they are also being denied a year of payment as well.

Most of these kids were forced to sit out in order to obtain their degree — which is supposed to be the #1 goal of college athletics.

It’s a shitty situation for these kids and even the NCAA will get this right in the end.
Click to expand...
Your first paragraph lays out the lawsuit that could be brought if the NCAA denies the request and is the basis of what the successful lawsuit that lifted the multi transfer rule restriction.
 
As much as our knowledgeable posters seem to disagree on this one on the merits , I still question waiting till this late to bring the appeal.
What was to be lost by raising this with NCAA in January?
 
SJU85 said:
The NCAA is the one keeping them from playing the extra year which everyone else has the option of taking advantage of.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with that. The ncaa gave them the option of playing in the 20-21 season. The IVY chose not to. If they played then, they still would have had the extra year with us last year.
 
Rocket said:
Different interpretation of "barred". The player should not have had to transfer from one "academic institution" to another because of Covid. On the sports side of the equation, where the NCAA determines eligibility, all other "student-athletes" are getting a FIFTH YEAR of playing eligibility because the door was open for them to play.
At the Ivy League schools, the door was shut......hence, barred from playing at the school of their choice, where they built an academic record.
You're saying they could have just transferred to DePaul and gotten a DePaul degree instead of Princeton. If basketball and academics are intertwined in calculating eligibility by the NCAA, then they are favoring the sports side over the academic interests of the "student-athlete".
Even LMF could argue that case!🥸⚖
Click to expand...
They "should not have to?" Why not?

Says who? What rule?

The Ivy League chooses not to allow grad students play in inter-collegiate athletics? Why not? I have no idea but it is their rule. So why should Ledlum have to transfer to play his last year? What if he does not want to transfer?

is that fair?
 
Amaseinyourface said:
I don’t agree with that. The ncaa gave them the option of playing in the 20-21 season. The IVY chose not to. If they played then, they still would have had the extra year with us last year.
Click to expand...
The Ivy League isn’t the organization that is currently preventing them from playing another year, the NCAA is. When the Ivy League decided not to play, the NCAA could have made an exception to include such players and allowing them the fifth year of eligibility like the rest but didn’t.
 
SJU85 said:
The Ivy League isn’t the organization that is currently preventing them from playing another year, the NCAA is. When the Ivy League decided not to play, the NCAA could have made an exception to include such players and allowing them the fifth year of eligibility like the rest but didn’t.
Click to expand...
With all due respect what is preventing them from playing another year is the fact they have used their 4 years of eligiblity.

Anything beyond that is an exception not a right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top