Two thoughts:
1) To those of you who are saying this is a "procedural argument" and not about basketball, what exactly is the procedural question? Whether a court of law has the authority to intervene in policy decisions made by a state entity? Can you imagine if the Supreme Court adopted this argument-- that a state entities interpretation of policy should be left to the entity and should not be subject to judicial oversight?
The case of Grutter v. Bollinger and Regents of the University of Calfiornia v. Bakke are good examples, although I will conceed they certainly have more due process/equal protection implications than Bubu's case. The question in these cases is whether a university admissions department could use race as a factor in admissions decisions, and whether having a specific "quota" of a specific race was constitutional. Can you imagine if the ruling was-- well I don't see any reason why we should get involved in admissions departments decisions? There are times where universities make arbitrary decisions that infringe on individual rights, and of course a court of law can provide review. Again, I conceed that with this being a race case equal protection was at issue, but my point remains the same--it is not as though it is unprecedented for a Court of law to become involved in university policy decisions.
Also, from what I know Bubu was granted an injunction. An injunction is a remedy available to someone who would suffer irrepairable harm if action was not taken by a Court during the appeal process. Thus, the issue is not necessarily whether the BOR was right or wrong, as that is an appellate decision, but whether there is reason to believe the decision could be reversed, and whether Bubu would suffer irrepairable harm if action wasn't taken immediately. Essentially, if Bubu won his appeal and it was after the basketball season he would have no remedy, and the ALJ found that there was merit to his appeal and decided to avoid that irrepairable harm.
2) I don't think anyone is saying this event will be the direct cause of Fred going to the NBA, but you are shortsighted if you don't think it will at least be involved in his decision making process if a job is available. With all jobs, you consider the pros and cons of a new job. This event would have to be a huge "con" towards staying. Essentially, what has happened is the administration has singled out of his players who is by all accounts well liked on the team and has decided to make a bias and unjustifiable decision, given the lack of action taken on members of other sports. It has placed Fred right in the middle of the debate, with JP making a ridiculous and unnecessary statement condeming the decision, but placing Fred in the position of deciding if he plays or not. If Fred does go to the NBA I definitely think this is an event you can look back on as one of the reasons, but certainly not the only reason.