More language from the judge in Alex Steen’s 5 in 5 case. “No reasonable association, having announced that five seasons are ‘what is best for student-athletes,’ would then exclude the one class of student-athletes that has been most disadvantaged by the prior system….”

No clue what the NCAA’s legal strategy is at this point with respect to the 5 in 5 cases. But it’s clear that its current refusal to let class of 2022 athletes play is what’s now creating the claimed “chaos.” Many preliminary injunctions will be in place all season.

I’ve seen a number of people comment that the Ohio 5 in 5 EO may violate the Commerce Clause. Could be accurate legally, but the NCAA would need to challenge it which would be very messy. This is no different than when states passed laws and governors issued EOs on NIL issues.

Ohio universities are prohibited from adhering to NCAA rules that would prevent class of 2022 athletes who are still within their 5 year window & have not played professionally from playing in 2026-27. Don’t be surprised to now see executive order like this in other states.

Another temporary injunction granted in a 5 in 5 case against the NCAA. Courts continue to find the new eligibility rule doesn’t exclude the class of 2022. It’s also good to see courts continue to call out the NCAA for its actions and above the law attitude.

The Kentucky 5 in 5 order was dissolved by the appellate court because it found the lower court entered a temporary injunction, not a TRO. And a temporary injunction requires an evidentiary hearing. That hearing will likely happen next week. So an injunction may be back then.