February 4, 2026 • 9 mins
Can a former NBA player successfully sue the NCAA so he can go back to playing in college? Can the NFL punish owners who've been mentioned in the Epstein Files? Attorney Stuart W. Penrose of Minnillo Law Group joins us every week to discuss sports and the law.
Learn more at MinnilloLawGroup.com.
Podcasts of The Mo Egger Radio Show are a service of Longnecks Sports Grill.
Listen to the show live weekday afternoons 3:00 - 6:00 on ESPN1530.
Listen Live: ESPN1530.com/listen
Get more: https://linktr.ee/MoEgger
Follow on X: @MoEgger
Instagram too: @MoEgger
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
So are we really going to have a guy who
has played in ten NBA games, not G league games
like National Basketball Association games. Is he going to be
allowed to come back and play high major Division one
men's college basketball. Well, if a guy by the name
of Amari Bailey gets his way, the answer is going
(00:22):
to be yes. He used to play at UCLA, declared
for the draft. It hasn't worked out, but he has
played in the NBA and now now he wants to
challenge the NCAA's eligibility rules, becoming the latest in a
long line of athletes who are doing this to come
back and play college hoops. So we have questions, and
when we have legal questions, we reach out to our
(00:44):
guy from Manila Law Group, Attorney Stewart W. Penrose Stewart.
It's always awesome to have you.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Good afternoon, always great to be on Well, thanks for
having me.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
I've asked you this question before, you have covered it
on this show, but I feel like we have to
ask it again. Why is the ncuba's track record in
courts so bad?
Speaker 2 (01:02):
Because they're violating anti trust regulations and law in a
lot of ways, and that's why they keep losing in court.
Players right now instead of fighting the NC double A
and in Indianapolis are filing for injunctions and their local
law in their local courts, and they tend to be winning.
This one seems like a bit of an exception here
(01:23):
though about time will tell. I mean, all it takes
is one landmark case to swing things around. But you know,
courts aren't given the NC double an uh, you know,
the traditional difference that they used to. And you know
they're they're asking them the same questions of that they
would any other business. You know, hey, are are your
rules and regulations good for competition or not? And and
(01:45):
they're losing quite a bit recently.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
So based on the track record recent and not so recent,
based on this being a different type of case than
the ones that you and I have already talked about
on this show, do you like this guy's chances of
winning the chance to come back and play college basketball?
Speaker 2 (02:03):
No? No, you never know how a court's gonna roll.
I mean, I'm not Pelsey, I'm not setting up any
event prediction market here for it. But this one feels
like the stretch. I mean, we've got the guy playing
for Alabama right now that's playing under a under a
temporary injunction who played in the in the G League.
(02:24):
We're talking a guy here who actually played NBA games.
You know, if, if the if the courts allowed us
to happen, they're essentially putting a sledgehammer to the difference
between pro and amateur athletics. And what is what? What
does that even mean anymore? What? What meaning? What relevance
does that have to the n C double A since
(02:46):
we become a feeder league, does advice versa become a
feeder league if things aren't working out in the NBA,
the NFL? What have you? This fields this feels very different, Mo.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
It does, But I can't help but wonder if if
this guy's case ends up being successful and it's I
agree with you, you know a lot more than me. You
certainly don't need me to validate your opinion. But if
he is successful, I guess I wonder what's to stop
pretty much anybody, anybody at any age, any level of experience,
(03:17):
any sport, from saying I want to play college sports
and if your rules aren't gonna let me, I'm gonna
sue and I'm gonna win.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Well, it's all a slippery slope and that's the argument.
That's why you know the coaches in college basketball are
in a huff and puff over the Alabama player playing.
But this isn't a slope. This is the cliff here, mo.
You know, if they let this kid play and open
the floodgates for professionals to come back, or does it stop.
Do you have Lebron jameson and up on Ohio State
when he retired from the NBA. You know, who knows,
(03:49):
but it's gonna be interesting. You never know how a
court's gonna go. But this one feels different. The nc
double if still is allowed to have rules and regulations,
this one's games seems pretty clear cut. You know, you went,
you played in the NBA, there's your amateur status. At
that point, they can still uh, you know, forced players
to go to class. They can still have a you know,
(04:11):
exhausted player's eligibility. You know it has to end at
some point, and you know, maybe this guy gets a
short temporary injunction. Who knows, but it would be I
would be very surprised if he were to win this
case in the merits and this were to be a
long term floodgate that so opens up here and effectively
(04:33):
kills the amateur the amateur model you and I whenever
it's left at least, yeah, and.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
There's not much of a left. You and I talked
last week about the Alabama case Charles Bettiaco, who is
playing for the Crimson Tide, and one of the things
I asked you about was the the the judge being
an apparent Alabama booster. He was, He was asked to
accuse himself by the attorney representing the player. I don't
(04:59):
think I have that right. He was asked to recuse
himself by the n C double A. I think that's
that's how I should have put that anyway, So he has.
The judge has since recused himself. What might that mean
for this case moving forward, Well, we.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Go to a different judge with the net court system,
and that's why it would still be in the local
court system there. They haven't asked for to be moved
to federal court at this At this point, it simply
goes to a different judge. Whether that's judge has alabamatized
as an Alabama booster.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Who knows?
Speaker 2 (05:30):
They could be back at square one for probably know,
but a lot of these players are filing in these
local courts mode. You've got the Tennessee player that's sued
in a local court in Tennessee shamblets from old myths
suit in Mississippi courts. Uh, you know over his eligibility,
you would think, I mean, those are gonna be more
favorable than local player. Quite frankly, you know the optics,
(05:52):
you know your your senses aren't deceiving you there.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
Stuart Attorney Stuart W. Penrose from the Manila Law Group.
You can learn Morello Lawgroup dot com. Here's something I
never thought we would be discussing on this show. The
Epstein Files. So a whole treasure trove of files have
been released by the Justice Department, and among those connected
to Jeffrey Epstein are a couple of NFL owners Steve
(06:16):
Tish who's the Giants co owner and chairman, Josh Harris
who owns the Washington Commanders, And so many are wondering
like could the league hold these men accountable? And what
would that look like? Could it involve making them sell
their teams? Could it involve making them step down from
active roles? Could it involve suspension, fines, punishment? Would the
(06:41):
league have a legal leg to stand on if they
wanted to punish people who were connected to Jeffrey Epstein, Well,
there's a.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Yes, But the NFL has punished owners in the past
for various things. You've had owners punished for getting a
dui or for other types of misconduct. Snyder was published
or punished by the NFL uh for at a period
of time. And you know es since he was kind
of pushed out the door. Uh, you ad the NBA,
you know, forced Donald Sterling to eventually sell the equippers
(07:11):
uh for years of racist allegations. Uh, those were all
done with what was some level of investigation? You know,
can can they punish someone for a time to ft? Yes,
but there's got to be more there. Just being in
somebody's uh, you know, phone book or sharing emails with
them does not necessarily mean that they did anything wrong
or unethical, much less if there was any criminal conduct.
(07:35):
There doesn't need to be criminal conduct, but there's got
to be some sort of accusations or allegations or corroboration,
uh to even trigger an investigation here to see, if
you know, to see if something went on. There's a
lot of people that have been named in these Epstein
files and you know, some of what I'm sure you
know they have done some very bad things and some
of what I'm sure we're just you know, you know
(07:55):
Plum in contact with him and in none nefarious ways,
And you know, was there that here or not? You know,
we don't know, but you know there's got to be allegations.
There's something to trigger investigation there before you go from
zero to one hundred. Yeah, could they punish if there's that, absolutely,
but there's got to be something, and just being in
a phone lag or an email is not in and
(08:17):
of itself enough. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
And you know, I think of sports leagues and I
think of owners, and I think how there are times
accused and rightfully so, of protecting their own and so
I don't know, I wonder how much that might be
in play here. Perhaps that's not so much of a
legal question, but maybe more of a moral one. Awesome
(08:40):
stuff as always, Well, we'll talk next week.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Thanks both.
Speaker 1 (08:44):
That's our legal expert, attorney Stuart W. Penrose from the
Manilo Law Group. You can learn more at Manilolawgroup dot com.
It's fourteen minutes away from five o'clock five one, three, seven,
four nine, fifteen thirty it is and will continue to
be my sincere hope that on this show, which is
(09:05):
one hundred percent about fun and games, we never have
to talk about the Epstein Files. I'll let my friends
down the hall either talk about that or go out
of their way to not talk about that,
So are we really going to have a guy who
has played in ten NBA games, not G league games
like National Basketball Association games. Is he going to be
allowed to come back and play high major Division one
men's college basketball. Well, if a guy by the name
of Amari Bailey gets his way, the answer is going
(00:22):
to be yes. He used to play at UCLA, declared
for the draft. It hasn't worked out, but he has
played in the NBA and now now he wants to
challenge the NCAA's eligibility rules, becoming the latest in a
long line of athletes who are doing this to come
back and play college hoops. So we have questions, and
when we have legal questions, we reach out to our
(00:44):
guy from Manila Law Group, Attorney Stewart W. Penrose Stewart.
It's always awesome to have you.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Good afternoon, always great to be on Well, thanks for
having me.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
I've asked you this question before, you have covered it
on this show, but I feel like we have to
ask it again. Why is the ncuba's track record in
courts so bad?
Speaker 2 (01:02):
Because they're violating anti trust regulations and law in a
lot of ways, and that's why they keep losing in court.
Players right now instead of fighting the NC double A
and in Indianapolis are filing for injunctions and their local
law in their local courts, and they tend to be winning.
This one seems like a bit of an exception here
(01:23):
though about time will tell. I mean, all it takes
is one landmark case to swing things around. But you know,
courts aren't given the NC double an uh, you know,
the traditional difference that they used to. And you know
they're they're asking them the same questions of that they
would any other business. You know, hey, are are your
rules and regulations good for competition or not? And and
(01:45):
they're losing quite a bit recently.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
So based on the track record recent and not so recent,
based on this being a different type of case than
the ones that you and I have already talked about
on this show, do you like this guy's chances of
winning the chance to come back and play college basketball?
Speaker 2 (02:03):
No? No, you never know how a court's gonna roll.
I mean, I'm not Pelsey, I'm not setting up any
event prediction market here for it. But this one feels
like the stretch. I mean, we've got the guy playing
for Alabama right now that's playing under a under a
temporary injunction who played in the in the G League.
(02:24):
We're talking a guy here who actually played NBA games.
You know, if, if the if the courts allowed us
to happen, they're essentially putting a sledgehammer to the difference
between pro and amateur athletics. And what is what? What
does that even mean anymore? What? What meaning? What relevance
does that have to the n C double A since
(02:46):
we become a feeder league, does advice versa become a
feeder league if things aren't working out in the NBA,
the NFL? What have you? This fields this feels very different, Mo.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
It does, But I can't help but wonder if if
this guy's case ends up being successful and it's I
agree with you, you know a lot more than me. You
certainly don't need me to validate your opinion. But if
he is successful, I guess I wonder what's to stop
pretty much anybody, anybody at any age, any level of experience,
(03:17):
any sport, from saying I want to play college sports
and if your rules aren't gonna let me, I'm gonna
sue and I'm gonna win.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Well, it's all a slippery slope and that's the argument.
That's why you know the coaches in college basketball are
in a huff and puff over the Alabama player playing.
But this isn't a slope. This is the cliff here, mo.
You know, if they let this kid play and open
the floodgates for professionals to come back, or does it stop.
Do you have Lebron jameson and up on Ohio State
when he retired from the NBA. You know, who knows,
(03:49):
but it's gonna be interesting. You never know how a
court's gonna go. But this one feels different. The nc
double if still is allowed to have rules and regulations,
this one's games seems pretty clear cut. You know, you went,
you played in the NBA, there's your amateur status. At
that point, they can still uh, you know, forced players
to go to class. They can still have a you know,
(04:11):
exhausted player's eligibility. You know it has to end at
some point, and you know, maybe this guy gets a
short temporary injunction. Who knows, but it would be I
would be very surprised if he were to win this
case in the merits and this were to be a
long term floodgate that so opens up here and effectively
(04:33):
kills the amateur the amateur model you and I whenever
it's left at least, yeah, and.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
There's not much of a left. You and I talked
last week about the Alabama case Charles Bettiaco, who is
playing for the Crimson Tide, and one of the things
I asked you about was the the the judge being
an apparent Alabama booster. He was, He was asked to
accuse himself by the attorney representing the player. I don't
(04:59):
think I have that right. He was asked to recuse
himself by the n C double A. I think that's
that's how I should have put that anyway, So he has.
The judge has since recused himself. What might that mean
for this case moving forward, Well, we.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Go to a different judge with the net court system,
and that's why it would still be in the local
court system there. They haven't asked for to be moved
to federal court at this At this point, it simply
goes to a different judge. Whether that's judge has alabamatized
as an Alabama booster.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Who knows?
Speaker 2 (05:30):
They could be back at square one for probably know,
but a lot of these players are filing in these
local courts mode. You've got the Tennessee player that's sued
in a local court in Tennessee shamblets from old myths
suit in Mississippi courts. Uh, you know over his eligibility,
you would think, I mean, those are gonna be more
favorable than local player. Quite frankly, you know the optics,
(05:52):
you know your your senses aren't deceiving you there.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
Stuart Attorney Stuart W. Penrose from the Manila Law Group.
You can learn Morello Lawgroup dot com. Here's something I
never thought we would be discussing on this show. The
Epstein Files. So a whole treasure trove of files have
been released by the Justice Department, and among those connected
to Jeffrey Epstein are a couple of NFL owners Steve
(06:16):
Tish who's the Giants co owner and chairman, Josh Harris
who owns the Washington Commanders, And so many are wondering
like could the league hold these men accountable? And what
would that look like? Could it involve making them sell
their teams? Could it involve making them step down from
active roles? Could it involve suspension, fines, punishment? Would the
(06:41):
league have a legal leg to stand on if they
wanted to punish people who were connected to Jeffrey Epstein, Well,
there's a.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Yes, But the NFL has punished owners in the past
for various things. You've had owners punished for getting a
dui or for other types of misconduct. Snyder was published
or punished by the NFL uh for at a period
of time. And you know es since he was kind
of pushed out the door. Uh, you ad the NBA,
you know, forced Donald Sterling to eventually sell the equippers
(07:11):
uh for years of racist allegations. Uh, those were all
done with what was some level of investigation? You know,
can can they punish someone for a time to ft? Yes,
but there's got to be more there. Just being in
somebody's uh, you know, phone book or sharing emails with
them does not necessarily mean that they did anything wrong
or unethical, much less if there was any criminal conduct.
(07:35):
There doesn't need to be criminal conduct, but there's got
to be some sort of accusations or allegations or corroboration,
uh to even trigger an investigation here to see, if
you know, to see if something went on. There's a
lot of people that have been named in these Epstein
files and you know, some of what I'm sure you
know they have done some very bad things and some
of what I'm sure we're just you know, you know
(07:55):
Plum in contact with him and in none nefarious ways,
And you know, was there that here or not? You know,
we don't know, but you know there's got to be allegations.
There's something to trigger investigation there before you go from
zero to one hundred. Yeah, could they punish if there's that, absolutely,
but there's got to be something, and just being in
a phone lag or an email is not in and
(08:17):
of itself enough. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
And you know, I think of sports leagues and I
think of owners, and I think how there are times
accused and rightfully so, of protecting their own and so
I don't know, I wonder how much that might be
in play here. Perhaps that's not so much of a
legal question, but maybe more of a moral one. Awesome
(08:40):
stuff as always, Well, we'll talk next week.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Thanks both.
Speaker 1 (08:44):
That's our legal expert, attorney Stuart W. Penrose from the
Manilo Law Group. You can learn more at Manilolawgroup dot com.
It's fourteen minutes away from five o'clock five one, three, seven,
four nine, fifteen thirty it is and will continue to
be my sincere hope that on this show, which is
(09:05):
one hundred percent about fun and games, we never have
to talk about the Epstein Files. I'll let my friends
down the hall either talk about that or go out
of their way to not talk about that,
Mo Egger News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Season 5
Saskia Inwood woke up one morning, knowing her life would never be the same. The night before, she learned the unimaginable – that the husband she knew in the light of day was a different person after dark. This season unpacks Saskia’s discovery of her husband’s secret life and her fight to bring him to justice. Along the way, we expose a crime that is just coming to light. This is also a story about the myth of the “perfect victim:” who gets believed, who gets doubted, and why. We follow Saskia as she works to reclaim her body, her voice, and her life. If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com. Follow us on Instagram @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.