TjgtAg08 said:

---

You keep ignoring the fact that the definition of a "professional basketball player" in Europe/international circles is about a mile wide and includes MANY different levels, ages, opportunities and access, while in the US it's NBA and G League, that's it.

Some 16yo in France doesn't have the chance to play "amateur" AAU basketball, all he has is the pro farm system and the team he's on pays him like $200 a week and he barely makes enough to afford a place to live.

That's nothing like making the decision to forego or leave college for the NBA, not make the money you want, and then want to go back to school.

---

I would buy this argument if we were talking about 18-19 year old European players playing in lower leagues. We're not though, these are 23 year old men with experience in the top Euro leagues coming here and being granted multiple years of eligibility. The coaches are taking these players because they are getting highly experienced grown men for their rosters.

And the NCAA is trumpeting the cause of high school athletes access to scholarships. It rings super hollow to me.

As Bobinator said, maybe some sort of rule that equates each Euro pro year as a college year makes sense and makes it so we don't have 24 year olds playing college ball.

Divining Rod said:

---

Some people DO NOT UNDERSTAND what an injunction is.

He was NEVER ruled elgible. The injunction only prohibited the NCAA from acting until a court could rule on the merits of the case.

The NCAA position has always been that he was inelgible. Now they also have a court ruling backing up their rules.

NO REASON they should not forfeit those games.

---

This

Eff Nate Oates

All these people, saying Alabama should have to forfeit all these games Bediako played in, I think would have a very different opinion if a court decides next week that Agee can't continue to play for A&M.

My post makes perfect sense. Sorry you can't follow

MarcAg said:

---

My post makes perfect sense. Sorry you can't follow

---

I followed Mark, but it's different when it happens to them and not us.

But yes both guys were ruled ineligible by the NCAA. Both got a temporary injunction to play. People here would not be saying, "Well we deserve to forfeit all these games now" if the injunction was lifted.

MarcAg said:

---

My post makes perfect sense. Sorry you can't follow

---

Tons of comments equating the Charles Bediako situation to Rashaun Agee. If you want to get annoyed about a seventh-year player being eligible, fine. But his circumstances were nothing like Bediako’s. Not even close. https://t.co/PHRTojDner

— Carter Karels (@CarterKarels) February 11, 2026

chap said:

---

There is literally nothing similar between the Bediako case and the Agee case.

---

What do you mean nothing was similar?
Why they are illegible is different, but the why doesn't really matter much as illegible is ineligible

• NCAA said both could no longer play college basketball
• Both took the case to the courts
• Both got a temporary injunction

For the record I don't think Bediako should be eligible to play. I think its ridiculous he played. I'm just saying if you think Alabama should have to forfeit games he played during the injunction then you should also think A&M would have to forfeit games if the judge changed the ruling on Agee. Again they already said they aren't going to look at revisiting the injunction for Agee and the next step would be a trial, but we know it's not going to trial as by that time it will be pointless.

MarcAg said:

---

chap said:

---

There is literally nothing similar between the Bediako case and the Agee case.

---

What do you mean nothing was similar?
Why they are illegible is different, but the why doesn't really matter much as illegible is ineligible

• NCAA said both could no longer play college basketball
• Both took the case to the courts
• Both got a temporary injunction

---

Sanity and reason are not allowed. (I'm agreeing with you)

Bobinator,
No need to refer to me as "this guy".

And I get that you didn't want to talk about the legal side of things but that is where we are now.

And Marcag, Bediako just lost his case for a temporary injunction. They both had TROs. Agee won his case for a temporary injunction and Bediako lost his case for a temporary injunction.

As to the cases, I'll say it again. As have many others here. Agee's case about the NCAA not applying their rules to him consistently and correctly. There have been many situations similar related to redshirts, medical redshirts and juco years.

Bediako's case was just based on the fact that they didn't like the NCAA rules. Even his own attorney admitted that the NCAA had never granted eligibility for that rule. There have been several cases similar to Agee where they have. Which is why the judges in the respective cases ruled the way that they did.

And since you edited your post I will say I agree with that part. I do not think Alabama should forfeit any games and have never argued for that.

My point is that there is a huge difference between "the NCAA didn't apply their rules correctly" and "I don't like the NCAA rules". Which is what Carters tweet is saying that Capcity posted.

I'm just talking about forfeiting games. I don't think Alabama should have to forfeit and I wouldn't think A&M should forfeit games if the court changed their ruling on the temporary injunction.

I totally agree with you on that.

I honestly think almost everyone is being dishonest with their opinions on the subject of eligibility right now.

It's super easy to pile on Bama with Bediako and Baylor with Nnaji because they are not us, but the whole system is messed up right now.

Agee's situation is indeed very similar in that we are playing him despite the NCAA ruling that he was ineligible.

The NCAA really screwed the pooch here by not being more proactive in adapting to the new environment in collegiate sports and taking the lead in making sure to offer a clear vision of what eligibility should look like going forward.

I think we can all agree (taking off maroon tinted glasses) that 25 year old Americans and 23 year old former Euro pros shouldn't really be playing college basketball. My point in continuing to post on this subject is that it's ridiculous the vitriol being spewed towards Bediako when we have Illinois playing with 3 Euro pros. Bediako is a problem, but he's just a small part of it. It's clear that having older mature players is a bit of an advantage, and this Euro carve out is letting teams bring in guys that are not only older, but who have tons of game reps against top competition.

If a euro kid really wants to play NCAA basketball, they should have to enroll before their 20th birthday.

I actually think you could make a good case as to why Agee should have an exemption from the NCAA and be eligible, but it's not for the reasons that the court actually granted the injunction.

bobinator said:

---

I actually think you could make a good case as to why Agee should have an exemption from the NCAA and be eligible, but it's not for the reasons that the court actually granted the injunction.

---

I agree that a case can be made, but I will never think that 25 year olds should play college basketball.

When jokes from Tommy Boy can now be applied to college basketball, we have an issue.

My only original point was this "nothing is similar" thing when all you mean is that the cases themselves aren't similar. Which is fine, I'm not arguing that.

But like Marc said there are still some broad similarities so it's natural for people to bring up. Like the fact that in both cases it was a local judge who graduated from the school in question making the decision. Not saying it's a right or wrong decision, just that if you were doing an article of "players who played college sports this year because they sued the NCAA after being initially ruled ineligible but a local alum judge granted them an injunction" both of these cases would be on that list. Though Bediako's chapter is short lived.

I would still like to see a similar case to Agee's where the NCAA did grant eligibility if the argument is that they have before and thus their rules are inconsistent. Was there one mentioned in the Agee case?

If it were happening all the time yeah, but I think you could make a case that Agee should have one more season because of the Covid season.

The Marksman said:

---

Just a reminder that Oats is a terrible human being

---

Also water is wet.

At some point it's just time for these kids to move on. Agee has a college degree, if he wants to keep balling, his game would translate great overseas.

But from his court filings, we know we are paying him 1.2 million dollars which is more than he'd make overseas. So this isn't about anything more than money IMO for Agee. I'd feel different perhaps if Agee was some lifelong Aggie and this is his last chance to play for the maroon and white. But that's not his story, he's here as a mercenary that has already played for multiple schools in the past.

MarcAg said:

---

....He was legally illegible at that time....

.

---

Yeah, I looked right into his eyes and for the life of me, i just couldn't read him.