emu steve Wrote:Quote:

"FWIW, I still think the NCAA is going to have to make a ruling on his eligibility next year because he's already played this semester, thus I think throwing into question whether or not he has technically sat out this first semester. If it rules he hasn't, it won't count towards his one year. "

I'm not in favor of litigation every time some doesn't please some one, but I'd think that if he loses a year elig and has to sit out '08, that a court challenge would not be unreasonable.

NCAA needs to be a little more flexible on these FB transfers (hoops works better with mid-year transfers of a kid transferring to JUCO and then doesn't need a sitout year).

The rule is actually vague and it doesn't really address whether or not playing in that same academic semester voids the sitting out period during the same semester at another school.

Also, because the NCAA makes the rules, I don't think a court case would hold up very well. Look at the schools that tried to legally force the NCAA to back off their hostile and abusive mascot stance, and to no avail. Being eligible to play a particular semester of NCAA athletics isn't an inherent right. It's really no different, to a large extent, than a kid being declared academically ineligible. I'm not sure what rights would have been infringed upon by the NCAA if that's what they decide to do.

I don't know what the NCAA will rule, I just think there is a chance they MAY take issue with him having already played this semester. I do think it throws into question whether or not he really sat out the first semester, regardless of where he's attending school.

I fully admit that the NCAA could look at it, not care and just follow the 12-day thing. I'm just thinking out loud, because that's how I interpreted part of the transfer rules.