- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 1,267,877
- Reaction score
- 59
Mark Mitchell has joined a lawsuit in Kentucky seeking injunctive relief against the NCAA to play another year of college basketball, and this case comes with a caveat.
If Mitchell and the other plaintiffs in the case filed Wednesday are granted the temporary restraining order, they will seemingly be eligible to enter the transfer portal and communicate with any school they want.
That’s a major distinction from the recent Wisne v. NCAA lawsuit in Colorado, where Judge Charlotte Sweeney granted immediate injunctive relief for all Class of 2022 athletes, making thousands of athletes suddenly re-eligible. The catch: Sweeney clarified that the NCAA could still enforce other existing rules, like the ghost transfer rule and roster limits.
More: How all former Missouri basketball players fared at NBA Summer League
That means athletes who weren’t already in the transfer portal this past spring — like Mitchell — were not allowed to enter it after Sweeney’s ruling.
A separate ruling would allow Mitchell to enter the transfer portal and be recruited by other programs.
Without a separate ruling, Mitchell is still eligible to return to college, but he would only have one option: Missouri.
Mitchell’s hearing is set for 10:30 a.m. Thursday in Louisville. The news that Mitchell was part of a lawsuit in Kentucky was first reported by Matt Jones at Kentucky Sports Radio.
“(Mitchell) is not sure where he will play if granted another year,” a passage from the lawsuit states, “and is having difficulty with his decision because NCAA rules currently prohibit him from speaking with any coaches other than his previous school even though he has graduated and been declared eligible.”
Of course, it seems significant that Mitchell — who has no other apparent ties to Kentucky as a Kansas City, Kansas, native, Mizzou grad and former Duke commit — has joined a lawsuit in that state.
Several reports in the leadup to Mitchell’s lawsuit being filed indicated that the Kentucky Wildcats are interested in recruiting the forward. But, without a separate injunction, Mitchell is unable to enter the transfer portal and talk to any program that is not his alma mater, which is Missouri.
Mizzou would almost certainly take Mitchell back, but there are two sticking points.
First: the Tigers have 15 players on their roster already, which is the maximum under current roster limits. Mizzou would need to remove a player from the team to make room for Mitchell.
Second, and a big one: if Mitchell is granted a temporary restraining order against the NCAA, the market for the forward’s services is going to be expensive. In the current college basketball landscape, Mitchell will comfortably attract million-plus dollar offers. Mizzou already has spent big this offseason. Is there money left over to bring Mitchell back?
That’s why it’s seemingly relevant that Mitchell has filed this case in Kentucky. Injunctive relief would allow him to talk to other programs, including the Wildcats.
And Kentucky currently has an open roster spot, having only filled 14 places.
And it’s Big Blue Nation. It’s not unreasonable to assume that the Wildcats will find the money to put a more-than-competitive offer in front of a player of Mitchell’s caliber.
Mitchell led Mizzou in scoring, rebounding and assists last season. He helped the Tigers to back-to-back NCAA Tournament berths and earned all-conference honors both times in the process. In 66 games after transferring from Duke, he scored 1,064 points.
The forward signed an Exhibit 10 deal with the Denver Nuggets after going unselected in the NBA Draft this past June. He appeared in four games at NBA Summer League. Neither an Exhibit 10 contract nor appearing in Summer League games makes Mitchell specifically ineligible to return to college.
Mitchell was already in the clear to come back to college.
If he is granted injunctive relief against the NCAA, he has a choice to make.
This article originally appeared on Columbia Daily Tribune: Mizzou’s Mark Mitchell joins lawsuit vs NCAA in Kentucky. Here’s what that means
Continue reading...
If Mitchell and the other plaintiffs in the case filed Wednesday are granted the temporary restraining order, they will seemingly be eligible to enter the transfer portal and communicate with any school they want.
That’s a major distinction from the recent Wisne v. NCAA lawsuit in Colorado, where Judge Charlotte Sweeney granted immediate injunctive relief for all Class of 2022 athletes, making thousands of athletes suddenly re-eligible. The catch: Sweeney clarified that the NCAA could still enforce other existing rules, like the ghost transfer rule and roster limits.
More: How all former Missouri basketball players fared at NBA Summer League
That means athletes who weren’t already in the transfer portal this past spring — like Mitchell — were not allowed to enter it after Sweeney’s ruling.
A separate ruling would allow Mitchell to enter the transfer portal and be recruited by other programs.
Without a separate ruling, Mitchell is still eligible to return to college, but he would only have one option: Missouri.
Mitchell’s hearing is set for 10:30 a.m. Thursday in Louisville. The news that Mitchell was part of a lawsuit in Kentucky was first reported by Matt Jones at Kentucky Sports Radio.
“(Mitchell) is not sure where he will play if granted another year,” a passage from the lawsuit states, “and is having difficulty with his decision because NCAA rules currently prohibit him from speaking with any coaches other than his previous school even though he has graduated and been declared eligible.”
Of course, it seems significant that Mitchell — who has no other apparent ties to Kentucky as a Kansas City, Kansas, native, Mizzou grad and former Duke commit — has joined a lawsuit in that state.
Several reports in the leadup to Mitchell’s lawsuit being filed indicated that the Kentucky Wildcats are interested in recruiting the forward. But, without a separate injunction, Mitchell is unable to enter the transfer portal and talk to any program that is not his alma mater, which is Missouri.
Mizzou would almost certainly take Mitchell back, but there are two sticking points.
First: the Tigers have 15 players on their roster already, which is the maximum under current roster limits. Mizzou would need to remove a player from the team to make room for Mitchell.
Second, and a big one: if Mitchell is granted a temporary restraining order against the NCAA, the market for the forward’s services is going to be expensive. In the current college basketball landscape, Mitchell will comfortably attract million-plus dollar offers. Mizzou already has spent big this offseason. Is there money left over to bring Mitchell back?
That’s why it’s seemingly relevant that Mitchell has filed this case in Kentucky. Injunctive relief would allow him to talk to other programs, including the Wildcats.
And Kentucky currently has an open roster spot, having only filled 14 places.
And it’s Big Blue Nation. It’s not unreasonable to assume that the Wildcats will find the money to put a more-than-competitive offer in front of a player of Mitchell’s caliber.
You must be registered for see images attach
Mitchell led Mizzou in scoring, rebounding and assists last season. He helped the Tigers to back-to-back NCAA Tournament berths and earned all-conference honors both times in the process. In 66 games after transferring from Duke, he scored 1,064 points.
The forward signed an Exhibit 10 deal with the Denver Nuggets after going unselected in the NBA Draft this past June. He appeared in four games at NBA Summer League. Neither an Exhibit 10 contract nor appearing in Summer League games makes Mitchell specifically ineligible to return to college.
Mitchell was already in the clear to come back to college.
If he is granted injunctive relief against the NCAA, he has a choice to make.
This article originally appeared on Columbia Daily Tribune: Mizzou’s Mark Mitchell joins lawsuit vs NCAA in Kentucky. Here’s what that means
Continue reading...
