https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
Dan Murphy, ESPN Staff WriterDec 18, 2024, 07:03 PM ET
A federal judge in Tennessee granted an injunction Wednesday that allows Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia to pursue another year of eligibility and could represent another significant blow to the NCAA's ability to enforce its own rules.
Pavia sued the NCAA in November, claiming the organization's rule that counts a player's time in junior college toward his overall years of NCAA eligibility is a violation of antitrust law that was unfairly limiting his ability to make money from his name, image and likeness.
Judge William Campbell's decision Wednesday is not a final ruling on the case, but it prevents the NCAA from keeping Pavia out of college football until the case is resolved.
Pavia threw for 2,133 yards and 17 touchdowns in his first season at Vanderbilt, helping the Commodores to a 6-6 record with upset wins over No. 1 Alabama and Auburn. Pavia previously played two seasons at New Mexico State and another two years at a junior college in New Mexico.
"My Lawyers are legit!!" Pavia posted on X Wednesday night following the order's release.
NCAA rules typically allow players a total of five years to play four seasons, but the current crop of college players have been granted an extra year on top of those limits due to the disruption of the coronavirus pandemic. Pavia argued in his initial complaint that the NCAA was unfairly limiting his ability to make money by counting his years in junior college -- which is governed by a separate organization -- against his eligibility.
"We're not saying the NCAA can't have eligibility requirements," said Ryan Downton, Pavia's attorney. "But a junior college season shouldn't be the equivalent of an NCAA season when the junior college season has no meaningful opportunities to earn NIL, no television exposure. They take other athletes [who are playing somewhere outside of high school] and don't hold those seasons against them."
Downton cited junior hockey leagues and post-graduate prep school leagues where athletes compete after finishing high school without losing any of their eligibility.
The judge's ruling Wednesday specifically addresses the NCAA bylaw that deals with junior college players. It does not restrict the NCAA from enforcing the rest of the restrictions it has in place on the number of years athletes can play a sport in college, but the limited injunction could signal that the court system sees the NCAA's eligibility requirements as an illegal restraint. Campbell is the third judge in the past year to issue an injunction on NCAA rules due to concerns that they limit the athletes' ability to maximize their earning potential.
NCAA lawyers argued in their response to Pavia's lawsuit that a ruling in favor of the quarterback could have far-reaching implications.
"A mandatory injunction changing the status quo is not just about plaintiff, but rather stands to adversely disrupt the collegiate experiences and opportunities for tens of thousands of prospective and current student-athletes just as the next college football transfer window is opening," the lawyers wrote.
In a statement Wednesday night, the NCAA said it was "disappointed" in the ruling and made an appeal to Congress.
"Altering the enforcement of rules overwhelmingly supported by NCAA member schools makes a shifting environment even more unsettled," the statement read in part. "The NCAA is making changes to deliver more benefits to student-athletes, but a patchwork of state laws and court opinions make clear that partnering with Congress is essential to provide stability for the future of all college athletes."
Before Wednesday's ruling, Downton, Pavia's attorney, told ESPN the quarterback tried all possible options to gain an NCAA waiver that would extend his eligibility before deciding to sue the association.
https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
LSU coach Brian Kelly and his wife, Paqui, will personally match up to $1 million in contributions to the Tigers' name, image and likeness collective with a gift to the Tiger Athletic Foundation's Excellence Fund. The initiative, dubbed the "Kelly Family Million Dollar Match Challenge," is set to run from Dec. 13 to Feb. 5, 2025.
"LSU has a long and proud tradition of being one of the elite programs in college football," Kelly said in a statement. "In order to remain among the nation's elite in this new world of college athletics, we have to be competitive in all areas of our program. I am committed to doing all that we can to win championships at LSU.
"While we are not permitted to financially support our NIL efforts directly, Paqui and I can certainly match this tremendous fanbase's generosity by investing in the future of LSU Athletics through the Tiger Athletic Foundation."
This is the second time that Kelly has made a significant financial contribution to the university. In 2022, shortly after he was hired from Notre Dame, Kelly pledged $1 million to support the construction of new facilities for the football program. Both $1 million investments are the largest from a sitting head coach in university history.
The Tiger Athletic Foundation -- which will receive Kelly's donation -- is a non-profit organization that supports every athletic program at LSU. It, notably, provides private funding for scholarships and facility upgrades across the campus.
https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
|
 |
24651 Detroit Road, Westlake , OH 44145
|
|
|
|
https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
John is an experienced college sports attorney focusing on counseling institutions and affiliated entities on collegiate sports matters. As a former NCAA compliance officer, he understands the complexities of NCAA compliance and is well-versed in handling NCAA infractions; name, image and likeness (NIL) issues; and Title IX compliance and defense.
John has conducted investigations and appeared before NCAA committees on behalf of his clients. John represents institutions in matters before the NCAA Committee on Infractions, Infractions Appeals Committee and NCAA Committee on Academics. Additionally, he is deeply experienced in providing advice and counsel to institutions and affiliates regarding legislative relief waivers, student-athlete reinstatement, the NCAA Academic Performance Program, Gender Equity concerns and in conducting compliance internal reviews.
https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
This story was updated to add additional information about Monday's ruling.
The University of Kentucky is in compliance with Title IX and does not need to add any women's teams, a federal judge ruled Monday.
The decision comes in a lawsuit that alleged the university was violating the federal gender-equity law and should be required to add a women's team in lacrosse, field hockey and/or equestrian.
In a 31-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Karen Caldwell, of the Eastern District of Kentucky, found the university did not meet two parts of the three-part test of the participation-opportunities aspects of Title IX, according to a 1979 interpretation of the law.
However, Caldwell wrote that the plaintiffs also had to prove that there are enough female students at, or admitted to, the university who are "actually able to compete at a varsity level in a sport and that there are enough of them to form a team." She ruled that the plaintiffs could not show this to be the case in any of the three sports at issue.
Among other arguments, the plaintiffs had cited the number of female students on lacrosse, field hockey and equestrian club teams.
Caldwell wrote: "These numbers may prove an interest in various sports, but they are not evidence of the numbers of female students at UK who can play at the varsity level or even have the interest in doing so. Not all members of a club team have the ability for or interest in varsity competition."
The named plaintiffs in the suit, which had been granted class-action status, are former university students Ala Hassan and Lisa Niblock. In addition to the creation of a new team or teams, they sought a mandate for UK to undergo a Title IX compliance review — presided over by a neutral third party — in addition to the development of a gender equity compliance plan overseen by the court to ensure its implementation for the next five years.
The two sides argued their case in a bench trial last year at the U.S. District Court building in Lexington. The plaintiff's lawyers, as well as UK's counsel, continued to plead their cases in various written arguments submitted to Caldwell in subsequent months prior to Monday's ruling.
UK spokesperson Jay Blanton released a statement, via email, on the university's behalf.
"With 23 sports, UK has the broadest based athletics program in the Southeastern Conference. The current sports offerings fully accommodate the interests and abilities of our undergraduate students. We are pleased that the Court recognized this and ruled in the university's favor today," Blanton wrote.
Lori Bullock, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday's ruling.
The plaintiffs can appeal the ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, which is in Cincinnati. This court reviews appeals from cases adjudicated in the federal trial courts of Kentucky, Tennessee, Michigan and Ohio.
The suit was filed in September 2019, but it has roots that reach back more than 10 years and to an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights that found the school was not offering enough participation opportunities to women. The finding resulted in an agreement under which Kentucky said it would assess female students' athletic interests and abilities to determine whether it already was meeting their needs — and if not, it would add the sports those women wanted. The agency was to monitor UK's progress.
During the course of the case, including the trial and post-trial filings, the matter took on national significance. Citing a variety of legal arguments, Kentucky contended that the judge should not apply the three-part test, which has formed a significant basis of Title IX enforcement for decades.
Under the test, a school can be in compliance with the participation aspects of law in any one of these ways:
— Participation opportunities for men and women is substantially proportionate to their respective enrollments.
— The institution has a history and continuing practice of expanding participation opportunities responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.
— The institution is fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.
Caldwell rejected Kentucky's argument in advance of the trial. But in July — nearly a year after the trial and months after post-trial briefs had been filed — Kentucky sought reconsideration of that decision. The university cited a Supreme Court ruling in June that overturned a 40-year-old precedent that has guided how federal agencies administer various laws. Again, this raised the prospect of Caldwell setting aside the three-part test.
In Monday's ruling she again declined to do so.
That resulted in Caldwell applying the three-part test.
She found that the plaintiffs had proved that UK "does not provide females (sic) students with intercollegiate varsity participation opportunities in numbers substantially proportionate to their respective enrollment." In the 2022-23 academic year, women comprised just under 58% of UK's enrollment. She wrote that the parties had agreed that even including spots in cheer, dance and junior varsity soccer, UK would need to offer 59 additional opportunities for women. And she rejected UK's argument that those sports should be counted. So the gap was 116 opportunities.
Caldwell also found that UK did not prove "either a history or a continuing practice of program expansion that is demonstrably responsive to the developing interests and abilities of its female students." In addition to the issues with cheer, dance and JV soccer, she wrote that Kentucky's procedures for determining whether to add teams were problematic in terms of methodology inconsistency. She noted that since 2017, when it established its Sports Review Committee, Kentucky has added just one sport for women: STUNT. And she wrote that before adding the team, UK surveyed its students and did other research, including attending a national championship, speaking with STUNT's national governing body and reviewing the sport's status among colleges and high schools nationally and with the Kentucky High School Athletic Association.
At the same time, she wrote, UK "does not present evidence of a plan of program expansion pursuant to which the committee regularly reviews multiple measures of developing interest and ability, like those reviewed for [STUNT], to expand its varsity participation opportunities for females."
However, Caldwell ruled the plaintiffs could not make their case regarding Kentucky's alleged failure to address unmet student interest and ability in women's lacrosse, field hockey and/or equestrian. She wrote that in surveys from 2019 to 2023, "not nearly enough students who indicated an interest and ability in equestrian, field hockey, or lacrosse provided contact information to field a team in any of those sports."
She also wrote that "neither the club lacrosse nor field hockey club teams has won any championships or otherwise obtained recognition for the skill level of the team or its individual players." And while the equestrian team has won accolades at the club level, most of the club's team members "fall below the skill level required for a varsity team."
Caldwell did, however, add: "The accomplishments of the club equestrian team and the survey numbers indicating significant interest and self-reported ability to compete at the varsity level in the sport should motivate the (Sports Review Committee) to research the viability of a varsity hunt seat equestrian team … and should include measures of interest and ability beyond the survey."
USA TODAY contributed to this report.
Reach Kentucky men's basketball and football reporter Ryan Black at rblack@gannett.com and follow him on X at @RyanABlack.
This story was updated to add additional information about Monday's ruling.
The University of Kentucky is in compliance with Title IX and does not need to add any women's teams, a federal judge ruled Monday.
The decision comes in a lawsuit that alleged the university was violating the federal gender-equity law and should be required to add a women's team in lacrosse, field hockey and/or equestrian.
In a 31-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Karen Caldwell, of the Eastern District of Kentucky, found the university did not meet two parts of the three-part test of the participation-opportunities aspects of Title IX, according to a 1979 interpretation of the law.
However, Caldwell wrote that the plaintiffs also had to prove that there are enough female students at, or admitted to, the university who are "actually able to compete at a varsity level in a sport and that there are enough of them to form a team." She ruled that the plaintiffs could not show this to be the case in any of the three sports at issue.
Among other arguments, the plaintiffs had cited the number of female students on lacrosse, field hockey and equestrian club teams.
Caldwell wrote: "These numbers may prove an interest in various sports, but they are not evidence of the numbers of female students at UK who can play at the varsity level or even have the interest in doing so. Not all members of a club team have the ability for or interest in varsity competition."
The named plaintiffs in the suit, which had been granted class-action status, are former university students Ala Hassan and Lisa Niblock. In addition to the creation of a new team or teams, they sought a mandate for UK to undergo a Title IX compliance review — presided over by a neutral third party — in addition to the development of a gender equity compliance plan overseen by the court to ensure its implementation for the next five years.
The two sides argued their case in a bench trial last year at the U.S. District Court building in Lexington. The plaintiff's lawyers, as well as UK's counsel, continued to plead their cases in various written arguments submitted to Caldwell in subsequent months prior to Monday's ruling.
UK spokesperson Jay Blanton released a statement, via email, on the university's behalf.
"With 23 sports, UK has the broadest based athletics program in the Southeastern Conference. The current sports offerings fully accommodate the interests and abilities of our undergraduate students. We are pleased that the Court recognized this and ruled in the university's favor today," Blanton wrote.
Lori Bullock, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday's ruling.
The plaintiffs can appeal the ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, which is in Cincinnati. This court reviews appeals from cases adjudicated in the federal trial courts of Kentucky, Tennessee, Michigan and Ohio.
The suit was filed in September 2019, but it has roots that reach back more than 10 years and to an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights that found the school was not offering enough participation opportunities to women. The finding resulted in an agreement under which Kentucky said it would assess female students' athletic interests and abilities to determine whether it already was meeting their needs — and if not, it would add the sports those women wanted. The agency was to monitor UK's progress.
During the course of the case, including the trial and post-trial filings, the matter took on national significance. Citing a variety of legal arguments, Kentucky contended that the judge should not apply the three-part test, which has formed a significant basis of Title IX enforcement for decades.
Under the test, a school can be in compliance with the participation aspects of law in any one of these ways:
— Participation opportunities for men and women is substantially proportionate to their respective enrollments.
— The institution has a history and continuing practice of expanding participation opportunities responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.
— The institution is fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.
Caldwell rejected Kentucky's argument in advance of the trial. But in July — nearly a year after the trial and months after post-trial briefs had been filed — Kentucky sought reconsideration of that decision. The university cited a Supreme Court ruling in June that overturned a 40-year-old precedent that has guided how federal agencies administer various laws. Again, this raised the prospect of Caldwell setting aside the three-part test.
In Monday's ruling she again declined to do so.
That resulted in Caldwell applying the three-part test.
She found that the plaintiffs had proved that UK "does not provide females (sic) students with intercollegiate varsity participation opportunities in numbers substantially proportionate to their respective enrollment." In the 2022-23 academic year, women comprised just under 58% of UK's enrollment. She wrote that the parties had agreed that even including spots in cheer, dance and junior varsity soccer, UK would need to offer 59 additional opportunities for women. And she rejected UK's argument that those sports should be counted. So the gap was 116 opportunities.
Caldwell also found that UK did not prove "either a history or a continuing practice of program expansion that is demonstrably responsive to the developing interests and abilities of its female students." In addition to the issues with cheer, dance and JV soccer, she wrote that Kentucky's procedures for determining whether to add teams were problematic in terms of methodology inconsistency. She noted that since 2017, when it established its Sports Review Committee, Kentucky has added just one sport for women: STUNT. And she wrote that before adding the team, UK surveyed its students and did other research, including attending a national championship, speaking with STUNT's national governing body and reviewing the sport's status among colleges and high schools nationally and with the Kentucky High School Athletic Association.
At the same time, she wrote, UK "does not present evidence of a plan of program expansion pursuant to which the committee regularly reviews multiple measures of developing interest and ability, like those reviewed for [STUNT], to expand its varsity participation opportunities for females."
However, Caldwell ruled the plaintiffs could not make their case regarding Kentucky's alleged failure to address unmet student interest and ability in women's lacrosse, field hockey and/or equestrian. She wrote that in surveys from 2019 to 2023, "not nearly enough students who indicated an interest and ability in equestrian, field hockey, or lacrosse provided contact information to field a team in any of those sports."
She also wrote that "neither the club lacrosse nor field hockey club teams has won any championships or otherwise obtained recognition for the skill level of the team or its individual players." And while the equestrian team has won accolades at the club level, most of the club's team members "fall below the skill level required for a varsity team."
Caldwell did, however, add: "The accomplishments of the club equestrian team and the survey numbers indicating significant interest and self-reported ability to compete at the varsity level in the sport should motivate the (Sports Review Committee) to research the viability of a varsity hunt seat equestrian team … and should include measures of interest and ability beyond the survey."
USA TODAY contributed to this report.
Reach Kentucky men's basketball and football reporter Ryan Black at rblack@gannett.com and follow him on X at @RyanABlack.
https://ncaad2rules.blogspot.com/
"Experience is what you get, when you don't get what you wanted"
Randy Pausch CMU Last Lecture
The Big 12 has circulated an NIL template to its schools in recent weeks that would effectively spell out, among others, the terms, services, payments and timing of payments to athletes.Getty Images
Sources told SBJ the document is currently rather unwieldy at around 20 pages and staffers are working to parse down the information to be more digestible.
"It's not going to be short, even if we pare it down," one Big 12 source told SBJ. "You're just going to have to be like a real estate agent — 'This means this. This means this, and this is what you're interested in.'"
The Big 12's circulating of this potential template comes after Judge Claudia Wilken granted preliminary approval of the House settlement last month. The proposed settlement would grant schools the ability to share revenue directly with athletes, along with creating a system that would provide the NCAA and a third-party entity with some level of oversight over the payment of players.
Schools around the country are largely planning for a world in which athletes may well sign multiple agreements with each institution. Those contracts could entail but aren't limited to agreements related to House payments, scholarships and NIL that would be based on fair market value.
"Are you going to commingle the scholarship agreement with the House payment? Are you going to keep those two separate?," posited a second Big 12 source. "I don't think you're going to see institutions all do it one way or the other."
The larger hope among administrators is the settlement will show enough progress to Congress that it might step in to create some kind of wider national NIL standard that would circumvent the patchwork of state laws that currently govern the matter.
College sports leaders also desire congressional help in creating an antitrust carve out that would allow athletes to collectively bargain without being deemed employees (federal law does not allow non-employees to collectively bargain).
Opponents of the settlement, however, argue its implementation would functionally create a collective bargaining agreement without the input of the athletes.
"We oppose the settlement, and the conferences and the schools have done a masterful job of throwing out breadcrumbs for the media long before the settlement was actually made public and analyzed," said Ramogi Huma, executive director of the National College Players Association. "There's a lot of cheerleading around [it] right now, but the reality is that this would be terrible for athletes."
The Big 12, for its efforts, is working to get ahead of the curve.
