Does anyone feel comfortable making a guess at the odds Woolfolk is wearing red and white for another year?
Didn’t make any headlines because why would it, but Jackson Pav from Ohio was on the Indiana suit, so he is currently eligible from the ruling today, whereas Woolfolk is not because Woolfolk sued in Ohio, not Indiana. I believe Woolfolk could have sued in Indiana as that is where NCAA HQ is, so anyone could have been on that suit.
Lawyers, does filing in Ohio preclude him from piggy-backing onto Indiana? Would suck if we can’t play Antwone and Ohio can play Pav because he got bad advice on which suit to jump on.
At one time, forum shopping was looked down upon.
Now? Lol.
(I don’t think anything would preclude Antwone from filing in Indiana before the final judgment in the Ohio suit. The NCAA would ask for it to be dismissed given the pending Ohio claim, but if the last few years of rulings in these eligibility cases have taught us anything, it’s ‘who the f knows what would happen’ then).
Big loss this morning for Antwone. It’s not over but looking bleak anything will get done before the season. Sucks we don’t get him back but OU gets Pav back in the same situation because Antwone filed in the wrong state of Ohio rather than Indiana.
https://x.com/paulfritschner/status/2106011157827916019?s=46&t=w-nIiS118tVX66bsXJJN3A
What a joke
F AWEENY BUTT HOLE
SWEENY
I’ve spent a bit discussing this with the finest artificial legal minds at Anthophic and OpenAI, and they both seem to think at this point, the best course of action for Woolfolk is probably to voluntarily drop without prejudice from the Ohio suit and try to amend on to the Indiana suit.
The Ohio case is going back to trial court now and without an injunction, seems unlikely anything gets resolved before November (or even March).
If Antwone can get on the Indiana suit, his fate would at least be tied to the 100+ other athletes on that suit (including most relevant to the MAC: Jackson Paveletzke). Indiana isn’t a sure thing either, that injunction could be reversed just like Ohio, but its at least still live and seems a better horse than Ohio right now.
1 Like
Could one school (or a group) make the claim that another school had an unfair economic advantage over them because of all this? And by extension create a scenario where they counter sue? I ask because I know nothing about law but the implications of this going to a state by state level are expansive. And likely expensive. My head hurts
New ruling out of New York this morning, and this appears to mirror the strategy I’ve been pointing to for Antwone. Keyshawn was originally on the same Ohio suit as Woolfolk but withdrew and filed a new case in New York when the Ohio rulings started going against the players. Since the NCAA is HQ’d in Indiana, Woolfolk should have standing to move to Indiana. Keyshawn plays at St. Johns so I assume that was his standing to get out of Ohio to try New York.
Stay tuned in this case. It is very much not over yet.
1 Like
Paul, appreciate your coverage on this stuff as always. My understanding is that this will now go back to the trial court in Ohio, and unless the players somehow can provide new evidence and get a new injunction (which seems unlikely as this is the same judge who stayed the injunction), their path to relief would involve having to win a judgment at trial. Given discovery and such, seems no way that could get done in time for the season. All these cases hinge on keeping an injunction active through the season as trials just take too much time.
There’s definitely still legal wrangling to do in Ohio, but the timeline is becoming very unfavorable especially for November.
I think the best path for these Ohio players now is either: A) The Wisne case in Colorado gets its nationwide class injunction restored. That is currently at the Tenth Circuit for appeal and a decision should come back this month or B) Get out of the Ohio case and move to a state that seems to be friendlier to maintaining the injunction. Indiana should be open to everyone (if the court continues to allow amendments to add players which they have approved at least one of those so far). Other states probably going to depend on school or residency.
Part of me still hopes the NCAA wouldn’t move forward with several states allowing 5 for 5s back and other states not and would allow everyone back if a large case like Indiana still has an injunction come season start. It becomes a competitive integrity issue. But the NCAA is being very bullheaded about this specific issue that at this point only effects a single class of players.
1 Like
To my understanding, both of those options could be on the table. Getting out of Ohio was already successful for Keyshawn Hall of St. John’s. I think you could also see an appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court.
But the one thing I have been told repeatedly is that this is not over.
3 Likes
My background is in English, not law, so please explain this to me- Why does it matter what state you file in? Woolfolk and Pav both play(ed) in Ohio. How might one be eligible and another not? And if simply filing the suit in Indiana is all it takes, is Antwone getting bad advice, or does this show that he really doesn’t care if he gets a 5th year?
Very favorable ruling yesterday in Indiana for athletes. It is why I have been recommending Indiana as venue for these cases.
https://x.com/WinterSportsLaw/status/2107200692515651636?s=20
These are state court cases. Ohio and Indiana have different state laws, but more importantly, judges who get to interpret that law. You can’t just file a case wherever you want, you have to have standing (a reason) to file in that state.
The NCAA is headquartered in Indiana, so basically anyone can file in Indiana since the NCAA is the defendant. Woolfolk chose to file in Ohio, as an Ohio resident.
I don’t think he got bad advice necessarily. No one knew how individual judges in each jurisdiction would rule. Right now though, it looks like Indiana is making more player friendly rulings than Ohio. Indiana is procedurally behind Ohio though, so we’ll see. The next big hurdle in Indiana is the appeals court. If they let the current injunction stand, then good chance those players stay eligible through the season.
Ohio still can go to the Ohio Supreme Court, which it sounds like they will try. If they fail there, then all those players will need to look elsewhere as they don’t have time for a trial.
There’s over 100 players on the Indiana case. I find it really hard to believe that if that ruling is still in place come season start, the NCAA would let just those players return and tell everyone else to kick dirt. That seems like a complete competitive snaffu, but I guess nothing is beyond the NCAA.
I think Antwone is likely being told lets wait and see what the Ohio Supreme Court does before withdrawing. If they don’t help, he still has options. He can try to get on the Indiana case if its still providing eligibility (or hope the NCAA just lets everyone come back since that case is so large). He can hope the federal Colorado Wisne case provides eligibility (oral arguments are next week there and they will rule before season starts).
At some point you’d think the conferences would, at least behind the scenes, start to lobby the NCAA just to let them all be eligible. The Pav/Antwone example dynamic is playing out in multiple conferences currently, and you’d think the conferences would not want potential competitive imbalance as some have mentioned, based solely upon different judges’ rulings on this set of facts.
If Ohio gets Pav back, along with Simmons still being on the roster, does that make them favorites in the MAC? How does the rest of their roster look?