OT: NCAA Revokes Final Year of Eligibility of Baylor WR

[Knight Shift]

How does this fly after Diego Pavia and Jett Eland rulings? At least Rutgers won their case. This one is a head scratcher.

After completing his senior season in 2024, Hawkins practiced with the team throughout the spring, passing up his opportunity to enter his name into the NFL Draft, and was originally approved for a sixth year of eligibility thanks to the court case surrounding Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia. Pavia was granted an extra year of eligibility after winning his lawsuit against the NCAA, which granted a waiver to all Division I athletes who attended a non-NCAA school for at least one season.

Hawkins likely signed an updated revenue share agreement once he decided to stay in Waco, a contract that is now in question as his collegiate career is in question. This late news also affected Baylor, which expected Hawkins to be part of the 2025 team.

Before transferring to Baylor last offseason, Hawkins starred at Texas State for three seasons and played at Cisco Community College in 2020.

Baylor Releases Statement on Situation of Wide Receiver Ashtyn Hawkins

Baylor wide receiver Ashtyn Hawkins did not receive the extra year of eligibility he was expected to get this offseason.

sicem365.com

 

[RU at the shore]

Please.

Threaten lawsuit.
If that doesn't work, file lawsuit.
If that doesn't work , win lawsuit.

Mr. Hawkins will be on the field for Baylor or some other school of his choosing come September.

 

[iReC89]

so because he had already exhausted 4 years of eligibility at the end of this season, he was not granted the extra year. I guess I can see this. If the extra year was granted to make 2020 not count, Hawkins never really lost a year since he played the next 4 seasons in D1. Pavia only played 3 years at D1, and challenged being denied the opportunity for 4 years of NIL. Sucks that the NCAA went back and forth, but them's the breaks.

 

[newell138]

RU has been screwed with decisions that don't make sense but thats the NCAA for you.

 

[HeavenUniv.]

Tennessee baseball player denied —Rutgers mention

Alberto Osuna files new motion in pursuit of NCAA eligibility with Tennessee baseball

Alberto Osuna is trying again to gain eligibility with Tennessee baseball after Rutgers football player Jett Elad won another year of NCAA eligibility

www.knoxnews.com

 

[MrsScrew]

I'm pretty sure the NCAA uses a magic 8 ball to make these decisions..............

 

[yesrutgers01]

so because he had already exhausted 4 years of eligibility at the end of this season, he was not granted the extra year. I guess I can see this. If the extra year was granted to make 2020 not count, Hawkins never really lost a year since he played the next 4 seasons in D1. Pavia only played 3 years at D1, and challenged being denied the opportunity for 4 years of NIL. Sucks that the NCAA went back and forth, but them's the breaks.

Did they originally approve his request and then change it after? That is where NCAA would be completely wrong if they did that.

The story is a little confusing. At first, they mention that Baylor and Hawkins "expected"

On Tuesday evening, news broke that Baylor wide receiver Ashtyn Hawkins would not receive his extra season of eligibility from the NCAA as originally expected

And again: They story says the following but now has me confused if NCAA officially approved him or he he and Baylor made an assumption based on this ruling:

After completing his senior season in 2024, Hawkins practiced with the team throughout the spring, passing up his opportunity to enter his name into the NFL Draft, and was originally approved for a sixth year of eligibility thanks to the court case surrounding Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia. Pavia was granted an extra year of eligibility after winning his lawsuit against the NCAA, which granted a waiver to all Division I athletes who attended a non-NCAA school for at least one season.

But then...to your point. It seems that Hawkins did play 4 years of Div 1. And a 5th year at a CC. And since that was the COVID year, they sort of wash each other out. His case does not mirror the Pavia ruling, Even though Hawkins did play 1 year at a non NCAA school- he still used up his NCAA eligibility.

But, if they granted him eligibility directly for 2025 and then changed it's own ruling, then Hawkins has a hell of a case.

 

[Knight Shift]

Did they originally approve his request and then change it after? That is where NCAA would be completely wrong if they did that.

The story is a little confusing. At first, they mention that Baylor and Hawkins "expected"

On Tuesday evening, news broke that Baylor wide receiver Ashtyn Hawkins would not receive his extra season of eligibility from the NCAA as originally expected

And again: They story says the following but now has me confused if NCAA officially approved him or he he and Baylor made an assumption based on this ruling:

After completing his senior season in 2024, Hawkins practiced with the team throughout the spring, passing up his opportunity to enter his name into the NFL Draft, and was originally approved for a sixth year of eligibility thanks to the court case surrounding Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia. Pavia was granted an extra year of eligibility after winning his lawsuit against the NCAA, which granted a waiver to all Division I athletes who attended a non-NCAA school for at least one season.

But then...to your point. It seems that Hawkins did play 4 years of Div 1. And a 5th year at a CC. And since that was the COVID year, they sort of wash each other out. His case does not mirror the Pavia ruling, Even though Hawkins did play 1 year at a non NCAA school- he still used up his NCAA eligibility.

But, if they granted him eligibility directly for 2025 and then changed it's own ruling, then Hawkins has a hell of a case.

Think he is in the same boat at Jett Eland (or a similar boat). If he was at Minnesota, he could Row the Boat, but I digress.

The Waco District Court used to be known as the "rocket docket" for patent litigation because cases moved so quickly. Not sure if the same would apply in his case, but know there are two opinions in separate district courts (Eland in NJ and Pavia in wherever he filed). Would think an emergency motion would be granted quite quickly based on the outcome of the other two decisions, and the NCAA would be wise to just roll over and not contest the filing and let him play.

 

[yesrutgers01]

Think he is in the same boat at Jett Eland (or a similar boat). If he was at Minnesota, he could Row the Boat, but I digress.

The Waco District Court used to be known as the "rocket docket" for patent litigation because cases moved so quickly. Not sure if the same would apply in his case, but know there are two opinions in separate district courts (Eland in NJ and Pavia in wherever he filed). Would think an emergency motion would be granted quite quickly based on the outcome of the other two decisions, and the NCAA would be wise to just roll over and not contest the filing and let him play.

But isnt the difference being plying 3 years or less of NCAA football? Howard did CC and 4 years of NCAA that did not include Covid year.

The ruling of played 1 year of non NCAA is the term that causes the issue. As would, if, they granted him eligibility only to revoke it at a time that would be easily proven to cost him money

 

[LotusAggressor]

The last fart of a dying mule.