We don't even know how the future of the NCAA S transfer waiver rule is gonna pan out joining us on the Easter Automotive Group hotline, Brian Murphy Wral, sports, investigative reporter, uh Brian, thank you for, for taking time out of what I'm sure you are, are poking around on, on more details on this story to, to join us um a temporary restraining order against the NC A A's transfer waiver rules. What does that mean? We'll start at the, we'll start at the very, very bottom of this one. Yeah, the, the most basic thing is that this two time transfer rule, this is the rule that got Tess Walker all caught up uh is gone away at least for the next 14 days. It's gone away and that has ramifications for some local teams. Uh Both NC State and ECU have basketball players that have been waiting for, for waivers, uncertain if those guys will play in the next 14 days. But at least according to this judge in, in West Virginia and this is the lawsuit that Josh Stein, the North Carolina A G signed on to um they will be able to play in the NCAA has put out a statement saying they will not enforce the year in residency rule for transfers unclear if that means just for the next 14 days or if that means for the rest of the year, if or if it means for some time longer than that. So, so you brought up Jo Josh Stein signing on to it, like who asked for this to happen? How, how, you know, the, the judge ruling a temporary restraining order? They, I'm sure they didn't just bring that up out of, you know, thin air who asked for it. Yeah, so the attorney generals or the attorneys general in, in six states in seven states. Um Ohio, West Virginia, Colorado and North Carolina. Uh and there's a couple other ones as well. I think New York um filed a lawsuit last week. So I got a hearing very quickly and they basically said that the, the two time transfer rule, the one that requires you to sit out or to obtain a waiver, it violates antitrust law here in the United States. And the judge had a hearing this morning, I listened to most of it came back about 45 minutes later and issued this ruling and said for the next 14 days, the NCAA cannot enforce this rule. The NCAA can't punish players who play in the next 14 days and that we will have a larger hearing in 14 days on December 27th. Um And So that, that's how, that's how this all came down and, and if you read his ruling, it seems to be pretty clear that, that he's not going to, he's not, he's gonna rule against the NCAA time and time again until this case is finished. Uh, if you read the rule, he basically says this is the same as Alston, uh, just dealing with a different matter. Um, and, and as we all know the Alston case, they, they lo the NCAA lost 90 at the Supreme court, Brian Murphy Wrl sports investigative reporter connecting you with us on the Heer Automotive Group hotline. So, so is that what's on the line? 14 days from now? Is there a world where the NCAA cannot bar NCAA athletes, college athletes from transferring as many times as they want wherever they want kind of willy nilly. Yeah, so I just got some clarification from the NCAA and they said that they, they, they are not going to enforce the rule for the next 14 days. So for the next 14 days, if you're one of these two time transfers and you want to play and you play, the NCAA is not going to come back and, and punish you or punish the school if they eventually win this case to your point in 14 days, December 27th, this hearing is going to be held again. Um They'll argue the merits of the larger case. Um But if again, if you read the temporary restraining order. I mean, the judge seems to make it clear that, um, the NCAA cannot have these rules that they simply violate restraint of trade and, and other things. And so I, I don't know the way out for the NCAA. I mean, they just can't keep losing in court all the time. It seems to me, yeah, it seems to me the way out of this is collective bargain that the NFL has rules. Major league baseball has rules, the NBA has rules and those rules don't get challenged in court over and over and over again by the players because the players association has agreed to all of these rules, um, through collective bargaining. It seems to me that the only way to stop all these lawsuits is, is some form of collective bargaining. So, I, I mean, as soon as I hear collective bargaining, cbayy, your mind jumps right to, to unions. Does that mean we, we should be seeing a college athletes union being formed sometime soon? You know, I, I'm not a labor lawyer, although I probably should have been one to cover college athletics. My understanding and, and this is just for reading is that you don't have to have a union to have to collectively bargain collectively bargaining with. Well, right. That's, that becomes the question, I guess you don't have to recognize them as employees to collectively bargain because they could have some sort of union. But they wouldn't be, they wouldn't be considered employees. I mean, this is, you know, you're going to get into tons of labor law here. I would imagine the first thing the collect of bargaining, like whoever you bargain, the first thing the union's gonna ask for is we wanna be employees and then you, like, that's the sticking point like we will, we will negotiate with you. Perfect. I know what's going on the table first, right? I mean, and I think that's why Charlie Baker, the NCAA president proposed that rule. Uh You know, I think it was last week that would create this sort of super division where players would get money from a trust, but they still want to be employees. Um Basically all this is, is NCAA trying to head off these, these lawsuits. I mean, there's, there's this lawsuit that, that Josh Stein is involved in. There's another one with Dukes Dwayne Carter. Um that basically says you got to throw out all the rules about compensation and these lawsuits are just going to continue to get filed. I don't know. I mean, the NCAA case seems decent to me, right? Like we're a member organization, all the members got together, we voted 32 to nothing or 33 to nothing for this rule. We put this rule in place, everyone agreed and now we're getting sued over it. Um and they lost and they lost pretty badly. If you read the ruling, Brian Murphy Wrl, sports investigative reporter, follow him on Twitter at Murph's turf. Um, I wanna talk about the, the, the risk here, right? Because you, you say for the next 14 days, the, the waivers, the, the transfer rules kind of won't be enforced at least the, the two time transfer rules if, if, you know, I think one example, a lot of people around here are, are paying attention to is Cam Woods at NC State if, if he plays for the next 14 days and then even as unlikely as you say, it, it seems if the NCAA wins the next hearing and he's not eligible, did he just burn a year of eligibility or is it like, is this the wild, wild west for 14 days? Anything you do the purge, I guess would be a better example where it's like anything you do in the next 14 days you will never be charged with. Well, I mean, you could still lose a year of eligibility. I mean, that that would be a red shirt rule and a number of games played and stuff. What I, what I was getting at is the NCAA is saying we're not going to enforce that rule. So if you play, you know, we can use the T Walker case or the, you know, if you play and then we end up winning this lawsuit that says you are not eligible. Um, we will not penalize you for having played in that 14 day period where you were eligible. So they're saying that they're waiving that rule for the next 14 days until the next hearing. Um, but if they eventually win this case, as unlikely as that might be, you won't be punished for what you did during that 14 day period. Now, all other rules apply. It's not quite the purge. Uh You know, if you, uh you know, if you exceed your, exceed the number of games you're allowed to play before you Red shirt or things like that. I mean, those, all those rules still apply. I think what the NCAA is saying is we won't come back after you, um, for saying they have a crazy rule. I mean, this is a crazy rule that the NCAA has. It says if, if the courts put in a temporary restraining order or some sort of injunction and ban this rule and you play, we can, and then we eventually win the case. We can come back after you and vacate wins or take away, you know, take away money, postseason money. And basically the judge was like, that rule is ridiculous. We can't, we can't have that rule and the NCAA has, has in some ways agreed and said, ok, for the next while this temporary restraining order is in place, we will not, you know, we will not hold that against you in the way that we could have in the past. But, but I guess what I want, what I want to clarify is it the two week window is not, be, cannot be used almost as uh a window to get somewhere else. And then you're like, well, we'll use, we'll use T Walker as the example, right? Because Ted Walker, he said he's going pro but let's pretend with this two week thing. He's like, actually I wanna transfer to us c now, I know I've already transferred a very well documented a bunch of times. But if I go to us C in this two week period, by the time the two week period is up, even if the NC, the NCAA wins, I'm already at us C and I, I use the window to jump there like I'm good. Yeah, that's a great question. And I don't, I don't know the exact answer to that. I would, I would imagine what the San is talking about are players who are in season right now being able to play. Uh and not, I do not think they want to open Pandora's box of saying, hey, you know, all these football players in the transfer window, like you can jump back in the transfer portal. Um I, I can certainly seek some clarification on that from the NCAA, but uh then you're gonna end up in the same T Walker situation that we were before where, hey, I transferred before this rule was actually put in place. And, and so if I uh an agent or a parent of a division one football player who had already transferred. I would say, hey, do not use this 14 day window to transfer again. Just, just wait 14 days. And it sounds like it sounds like maybe the uh, the NCAA is prepared to, to not win that one, but you can transfer again. You know, there'll be another transfer window at the end of spring ball. The, the transfer windows are a whole other thing. II, I eventually, I, I assume all of these rules are gonna be challenged, right? There's gonna be some lawsuit saying you can't have transfer windows and then it's, you're gonna be transferring everywhere, right? Yeah, I mean, that's what the NCAA says. Hey, we've got to be able to have some rules because, you know, you could transfer midea and be playing for someone else, you know, at the end of the season, then, then you really are pro pro sports. Um, I, again, if you brought everyone to a table and collectively bargained some of this stuff, you might be able to say, ok, well, you can only transfer at these times. But yeah, I mean, every, every rule, the NCAA passes from here on out, I, I would expect they expect it's going to be challenged in court. It's good time to be a lawyer, uh, billable hours for the win. There we go, Brian, we appreciate you for stopping by and, uh, we'll keep paying attention at WRL sports fan.com. All right, thanks Tim.