'22 CA LB Niuafe Tuihalamaka (Notre Dame Signee)

IRISHbluehen

IRISHbluehen

Well-known member
Messages
963
Reaction score
1,946
Will be dependent on whether the NCAA files an appeal against the Colorado courts decision. Per On3
 
FightingIrishLover7

FightingIrishLover7

All troll, no substance
Messages
13,004
Reaction score
8,094
giphy.gif
 
stlnd01

stlnd01

Was away. Now returned.
Messages
13,649
Reaction score
10,723
The season starts in two weeks. I could see coming back to a program you know, but it feels kind of late in the game to transfer to learn a whole new system and staff. At least for serious teams.
 
Rocketman84

Rocketman84

Well-known member
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
1,541
Silentkaw said:
I’m pretty sure the reason he’s coming back is because he’s injured and can’t do fall camp stuff.
Click to expand...
Foot injury and had surgery in March, never set foot in the practice field in NO but the guy has major talent and was one of the 6 best DL in the draft.
 
IrishLax

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,888
Reaction score
30,115
Huntr said:
It is. TRO says to open the portal for a week beginning now.
Click to expand...
I literally do not understand how we got to the point as a country where judges issue "temporary" restraining orders that are de facto federal legislation. "Open the portal for a week" ... lol what? Why a week? Why not forever? Why not three days? One random guy in Louisiana just making shit up as he sees fit.

Where is the limit on the madness? What stops a judge from ruling a team must be included in the playoffs? Or that ND can sign Riley Leonard back from the Colts midseason if Carr gets hurt? And on and on. The "relief" being granted seems to have no limits.
 
IrishLax

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,888
Reaction score
30,115
I'll also add that the Sorsby situation was the "canary in the coal mine" for how far someone could actually push this. There was ZERO grounds for ruling that the NCAA couldn't enforce their rules on eligibility, and he 100% would have been able to play had Ken Paxton not threatened people and caused a multi-state issue. Texas Tech blinked rather than turn the situation into a full blown federal legal crisis, but there has been consistent rulings for a couple years now that basically amount to "the NCAA cannot enforce eligibility rules of any sort" ... and that's batshit crazy. There is no scenario where people who have signed professional contracts should be allowed to "enroll" at schools and play.
 
irishfan

irishfan

Irish Hoops Mod
Messages
7,216
Reaction score
638
IrishLax said:
I'll also add that the Sorsby situation was the "canary in the coal mine" for how far someone could actually push this. There was ZERO grounds for ruling that the NCAA couldn't enforce their rules on eligibility, and he 100% would have been able to play had Ken Paxton not threatened people and caused a multi-state issue. Texas Tech blinked rather than turn the situation into a full blown federal legal crisis, but there has been consistent rulings for a couple years now that basically amount to "the NCAA cannot enforce eligibility rules of any sort" ... and that's batshit crazy. There is no scenario where people who have signed professional contracts should be allowed to "enroll" at schools and play.
Click to expand...
This is why I hate when people do lazy argument of blaming NCAA. They’ve been neutered by the courts for years now. Without legislation, it’s essentially been decided that football can’t be thought of differently than any extracurricular when it comes to enrollment enforcing.
 
D

DomeFieldAdvantage

Well-known member
Messages
409
Reaction score
682
irishfan said:
This is why I hate when people do lazy argument of blaming NCAA. They’ve been neutered by the courts for years now. Without legislation, it’s essentially been decided that football can’t be thought of differently than any extracurricular when it comes to enrollment enforcing.
Click to expand...
The only two ways for college football to continue are federal legislation or a complete breakaway with student athlete employment and bargaining. Quite literally those are the only two things that can prevent all these lawsuits.

However, in this case, I think the NCAA messed up. It just really doesn't make sense to say that there is a new model that all student athletes can take advantage of, except for one class who are potentially still students, but must abide by the old rules. Frankly, it makes so little sense that I have seen multiple respected lawyers argue that the reason the NCAA did it was to get cases like this that causes public outcry and use that PR win to argue in support of the federal legislation being considered. NCAA statements after each of these cases would seem to support that idea.
 
IrishLax

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,888
Reaction score
30,115
DomeFieldAdvantage said:
The only two ways for college football to continue are federal legislation or a complete breakaway with student athlete employment and bargaining. Quite literally those are the only two things that can prevent all these lawsuits.

However, in this case, I think the NCAA messed up. It just really doesn't make sense to say that there is a new model that all student athletes can take advantage of, except for one class who are potentially still students, but must abide by the old rules. Frankly, it makes so little sense that I have seen multiple respected lawyers argue that the reason the NCAA did it was to get cases like this that causes public outcry and use that PR win to argue in support of the federal legislation being considered. NCAA statements after each of these cases would seem to support that idea.
Click to expand...
Correct, and I'm honestly getting to the point where I think it would be easier to collectively bargain.

And I also agree with you that the timing of NCAA changing their rules was loony, but I have major issues with courts superseding the "you can't be an amateur if you've played as a pro" rule that has existed forever. I have no issue with people who didn't play/sign in the NFL returning to college for this last year. The guys who literally been on NFL teams playing in NFL games getting a "one week transfer portal" we can all agree is insane, right? Like what stops a judge from entering a TRO to let players hop from one college to another mid-season? It's all fungible.
 
greyhammer90

greyhammer90

the drunk piano player
Messages
17,422
Reaction score
17,834
IrishLax said:
Correct, and I'm honestly getting to the point where I think it would be easier to collectively bargain.

And I also agree with you that the timing of NCAA changing their rules was loony, but I have major issues with courts superseding the "you can't be an amateur if you've played as a pro" rule that has existed forever. I have no issue with people who didn't play/sign in the NFL returning to college for this last year. The guys who literally been on NFL teams playing in NFL games getting a "one week transfer portal" we can all agree is insane, right? Like what stops a judge from entering a TRO to let players hop from one college to another mid-season? It's all fungible.
Click to expand...

I can sort of see the argument in this instance though. This group of guys would not have "gone pro" if not for the NCAA rules saying they couldn't stay. The NCAA suddenly and seemingly arbitrarily changed those rules, and those guys had been put in a spot where they had accidentally made themselves ineligible through no real fault of their own. That's distinct from the NCAA enforcing a rule that has existed forever. The real question is why on Earth would the NCAA set themselves up for this headache. Just give a blanket waiver to the fairly small number of guys this negatively affected, and move on.
 
N

NotKoon

Well-known member
Messages
406
Reaction score
883
irishfan said:
This is why I hate when people do lazy argument of blaming NCAA. They’ve been neutered by the courts for years now. Without legislation, it’s essentially been decided that football can’t be thought of differently than any extracurricular when it comes to enrollment enforcing.
Click to expand...
I disagree, I actually think this is all the NCAA’s fault. The current was clearly moving a certain way post Ed O’Bannion. They could have made concessions at the time, EA actually said they wanted to play the players to keep CFB alive back in 2014. Instead, the NCAA held on for dear life to the old ways instead of adapting. That’s what led to the Wild West and power being completely stripped from them.
I truly believe if they introduced actual NIL back in 2014 a lot of the things we shake our head at would not have happened
 
Crazy Balki

Crazy Balki

Site Assigned Optimist
Messages
8,024
Reaction score
4,660
irishfan said:
This is why I hate when people do lazy argument of blaming NCAA. They’ve been neutered by the courts for years now. Without legislation, it’s essentially been decided that football can’t be thought of differently than any extracurricular when it comes to enrollment enforcing.
Click to expand...
It's not a lazy argument, the NCAA fucked up royally. What the fuck did they expect?

You sit on your fat, incompetent asses for months and then decide to make a ruling that gives players 5 years to play 5....going into JULY!!! and you didn't expect some players to be insanely pissed off about it?

All they had to do was make the ruling back in December or January, and this wouldn't be an issue. The players now filing TRO's would be eligible and in camp already.

I've been on the NCAA's side for a lot of these rulings. This isn't one of them. They have no one to blame but themselves.
 
402puck

402puck

Dee Snutzs
Messages
1,366
Reaction score
2,750
Crazy Balki said:
It's not a lazy argument, the NCAA fucked up royally. What the fuck did they expect?

You sit on your fat, incompetent asses for months and then decide to make a ruling that gives players 5 years to play 5....going into JULY!!! and you didn't expect some players to be insanely pissed off about it?

All they had to do was make the ruling back in December or January, and this wouldn't be an issue. The players now filing TRO's would be eligible and in camp already.

I've been on the NCAA's side for a lot of these rulings. This isn't one of them. They have no one to blame but themselves.
Click to expand...
Yep. 2022 was the first class of guys since what, 2017?, to not get an "extra year". They dragged their feet and dragged their feet on passing 5 for 5, which EVERYONE agreed was the best way to go. All these kids who went pro and are trying to come back had their hands forced from the NCAA's incompetence and inefficiency. It is not at all the same situation as what Alabama basketball tried doing last year, in my opinion. These kids that were in NFL camps this summer and are trying to come back to college football for one more year, would have already made that decision this spring if they were allowed to, as they should have been from the jump
 
N

NDFAN2008

Well-known member
Messages
7,717
Reaction score
5,930
I would take him in a heartbeat but at the same time if we are blowing out teams I'd rather snaps be going to the younger guys because with the 5 for 5 no need to redshirt anyone. If we are beating teams by 30 in the 3rd guys like Reiff, Sulfsted, Hulak, Dunham and Ewetade should all be getting snaps.
 
RudyVerse

RudyVerse

Well-known member
Messages
1,024
Reaction score
1,861
This ruling allowing them to transfer vs return to their school probably impact the odds he's back quite a bit. Unless he just loves ND, there's much more playing time out there. Would love to have him back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top