NCAA Hoops Called Shots

The NCAA's reply in support of its motion for a stay pending appeal in Wisne v. NCAA, No. 26-1309 (10th Cir.), will not identify a single Division I athlete who has lost a roster spot to a member of the certified class.

Grant Lombard

Was due Aug 24, 2026. Still ungraded: the desk has not been able to get The reply brief itself from the Tenth Circuit docket in No. 26-1309, via PACER or a copy posted by an outlet covering the case

This is the piece's argument in falsifiable form. The NCAA has now made the displacement argument three times, in the district court twice and in the Tenth Circuit on August 10, and Judge Sweeney has twice reported finding no evidentiary support attached to it. The evidence for me is that the association has had five weeks and has instead filed a range spanning an order of magnitude, tens of thousands on page 21 of its emergency motion and thousands on page 23. The evidence against me is that the NCAA is the one party in the case with membership rosters and compliance filings, this is the last brief it gets before the panel rules, and a single named displaced freshman would be the most useful page in the whole appeal. Loses cleanly if that page exists. Scoreable by a stranger with the brief and twenty minutes.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation will order the eligibility cases in MDL No. 3198 centralized in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee before Chief Judge William L. Campbell Jr.

Grant Lombard

Resolves by Oct 31, 2026

This is the piece's argument in falsifiable form. The NCAA moved on August 1, 2026 to centralize eight actions across five districts under 28 U.S.C. section 1407, and the Panel set the motion for oral argument on September 24, 2026 in Chicago. The evidence for me is that the strongest ground the Panel recognizes is the risk of inconsistent or overlapping class determinations, and the NCAA's brief establishes that the putative Transition Exclusion Class in Patterson (M.D. Tenn.) and the Wisne class (D. Colo.) are coextensive; that three of the eight cases and a majority of named plaintiffs are already in the Middle District of Tennessee; and that Boyd, Pavia and Patterson are already coordinating discovery informally there, so the Panel is being asked to formalize an arrangement rather than build one. The live argument against, which the Wisne plaintiffs have not yet filed and which is genuinely strong, is that Colorado holds the only certified class and the only injunction, and that the Panel's own hearing notice pushes parties toward informal coordination and section 1404 transfer before centralization. Resolution is the Panel's transfer order or its order denying transfer, which ordinarily issues within a few weeks of the hearing session. This take is about the transferee district as well as centralization: an order centralizing the cases anywhere other than the Middle District of Tennessee resolves it against me, as does an order denying transfer.

Whatever Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney does with the plaintiffs' emergency motion to enforce the preliminary injunction in Wisne v. NCAA, she will not order the NCAA to open a transfer portal window for the certified class.

Grant Lombard

Resolves by Nov 3, 2026

She has now written twice, in a clarification order the NCAA itself moved for, that her injunction does not enjoin the operation of the transfer rules, and that order is currently on appeal in the Tenth Circuit as No. 26-1309. Reversing herself on that point while the same order is in front of an appellate court is a much bigger step than the 'or any NCAA Bylaw' language invites, and a district judge who has already been accused of judicial micromanagement has an obvious reason not to take it. The evidence against me is real and I am not hiding from it: her August 10 order is openly hostile to the NCAA's position, she said in footnote two that an order on this motion is forthcoming, and Chancellor Myles in Nashville proved on July 31 that a court will order a window when it wants to. Loses cleanly if Sweeney reads her own four words the way the plaintiffs do.

On December 1, 2026, at least five of the nineteen plaintiffs named in the July 31 Myles injunction are not listed on the published roster of any Division I men's or women's basketball program.

Grant Lombard

Resolves by Dec 1, 2026

This is the piece's thesis in falsifiable form. The order itself says it cannot require any institution to recruit, admit, fund or roster any plaintiff, so the question is whether a seven-day August window produces placements or just standing. Two of the nineteen (Weaver to Houston, Washington to Tennessee) were placed on the first day, which is the evidence against me. Rosters were finalized in the spring and scholarship math with them. Scoreable by a stranger with nineteen roster pages and an afternoon. Loses if the market absorbed nearly all of them, which would mean I read August scarcity wrong.

Seth Trimble appears in a Division I regular-season game for Louisville on or before December 31, 2026.

Grant Lombard

Resolves by Dec 31, 2026

His eligibility rests entirely on the preliminary injunction in Wisne v. NCAA, which the NCAA has asked the Tenth Circuit to stay and then reverse, with its reply brief due August 17. The evidence for me is that the district court has already refused once to pause its own order, on August 10, and the Tenth Circuit set a briefing schedule rather than entering an administrative stay. The evidence against me is that an appellate court can stay an injunction at any point before November and put a whole class back to ineligible between a commitment and an opener. Loses if the injunction is stayed or reversed in time to keep him off the floor, and equally if he is eligible and simply never gets into a game, since the claim is about appearing rather than about winning the appeal.