Per Ross Dellenger Vandy player leads lawsuit for 5 years eligibility no RS
necessary. You just just play 5 years. This is long overdue IMHO, Frank (Beamer) lobbied for this years ago. I’m surprised it has taken this long to go after it. Vandy went after the Junior College years not counting, and now this, they must have a forward thinking Attorney on staff or something. Bring back Ferrum Junior College and their 4 National Championships. They fed Virginia Tech, UVA and Clemson etc. for many years in the 60’s and 70’s. Hank Norton was the Bear Bryant of Junior College Football back then. However, I literally digress, here is the lawsuit, you get to play 5 in 5. If it goes through, expect to know less players with the transfer portal, but I have always thought this was the right thing. Kids like Tyrod losing eligibility because they had to burn their shirt year, I always thought was wrong, but maybe that’s just me.
** Edited by Stech at 9/3/2025, 7:28:37 AM
26 Replies
11mo
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
everything. None of this 5 for 4, but you can play 4 games BS.
(In response to this post by Stech)
I
I85Hokie
11mo
You could see a star player making more money than he would in the pros by playing his entire career for the University of Texas.
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
rules. Just mirror it after baseball. College 🏈 could be AAA, AA and A level teams. With the transfer portal, kids are getting brought up so to speak all the time.
The only question is, do they have to take so many hours to be eligible. The smartest ones will get their Masters and PhD’s. We have already seen our basketball players getting their Masters degrees.
(In response to this post by I85Hokie)
11mo
You can go to college as many years as you want, why shouldn't you be able to play on the football team as long as you're enrolled?? Then they will come for enrollment, and the entire idea of being a student. Why even require enrollment, and working towards a degree?? Eligibility and enrollment requirements do nothing but limit these guys' ability to make the maximum amount of money in return for their valuable professional services - they're illegal restraints on trade!!!! That's un-American!!!!!
There should be no doubt in anyone's mind - that's where all this is ultimately going. Pandora's Box has already been opened.
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
There is no way that the schools and conferences can maintain the non-profit status if they remove the educational component.
Well, I suppose if they donate enough money to the right politicians then anything can happen. But on paper, I think this is a key topic that they are trying to avoid for as long as possible.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
11mo
players benefit from a degree than playing in the NFL. I believe the average NFL player is broke after 5 years.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
11mo
I look forward to the days when 30-year-old dudes play "college" football. 🙄
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
11mo
And married Mandy Pepperidge.
** Edited by PadrosWindup at 9/3/2025, 11:52:47 AM
** Edited by PadrosWindup at 9/3/2025, 11:54:12 AM
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
11mo
so I agree, someone is going to sue for that too.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
11mo
there will be legislation and anti trust in out future. The education component is what will be the catalyst for the politicians to get something done.
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
done. At least the political wind seems to be blowing in the direction to suggest enough politicians may believe the federal government should not be involved in education and/or the responsibility should be transferred to the states. If Congress decides to take a laissez faire approach to this topic, then how do see things playing out?
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
11mo
have their pro college football, and the rest will keep amateur sports. Where that line will be is anyone's guess. Who will be "included" and who will drop out is again, anyone's guess.
Personally, I hope they separate football only. It never should have been included with title 9, which BTW, is another reason we may see legislation.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
11mo
politicians to debate over.
Personally, I don't think it should have been excluded because the schools know the "price" if it wants to sponsor the sport. Plus, an argument could be made that a football team truly doesn't "need" all those players on the roster. Instead, the school made a conscious "choice" that it "wanted" to have a large roster size for football. Also, the schools have been given plenty of opportunities to expand the roster size of existing women's sports so those sports total roster size equals the size they "want" for football and for various reasons they decided to not pursue that course of action. The schools made their beds and now they can lay in them.
Given the way things are going now, it would not shock me if some day Congress repealed Title IX or the education laws that include Title IX. I could even see SCOTUS rule that Title IX or the application of it to sports at all levels is now unconstitutional.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
11mo
and some kind of governing structure.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
11mo
one pubic hair away (to paraphrase Junior Soprano) from being pro ball and no pro sports league on the planet runs this way.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
11mo
The Draft not only makes it so the last place teams pick first, but also you can’t just get the 10 best players, there is a built in rotation as to when you pick.
(In response to this post by mancunian)
11mo
At least I believe both leagues have rules in place to prevent teams from pulling a "Rachel Phelps" (Major League reference) during the regular season to ensure the team gets to pick #1 in next year's draft. Both the Wizards and Nats have been screwed out of the #1 draft pick in recent years because of their respective league rules. I'm not sure about the NHL, but I suspect the league has some sort of rule in place to discourage teams from tanking during the regular season even if it doesn't impact the draft position.
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
11mo
The young guys can get some playing experience if they want it without worrying about a redshirt year. And coaches could play the young guys as much as they wanted.
If they really wanted to go crazy then a player could play a maximum number of college games in their career with no limit on the number of years. Maybe 60 games (which is equivalent to 12 games a year over 5 years).
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
There qb sued over junior college eligibility and now another Vandy sues for this action.
Seems like a very activist players group...
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
are pushing the envelope every way possible to change the rules so they can better compete. Honestly, it looks like it is working so far, good for them
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)