Hey, look, someone operated without bias in a decision!
Per ESPN:
In Monday’s ruling, Pruet said Bediako did not meet the criteria for a preliminary injunction that would have allowed him to play the rest of the 2025-26 season because he had “failed to establish that he would suffer irreparable harm,” had “failed to establish that he has no adequate remedy at law without the issuance of the injunction” and had “failed to demonstrate that he has at least a reasonable chance of success on the ultimate merits of those claims” that the NCAA had violated antitrust laws in his case.
The judge also said the case is “not about whether the Plaintiff can be paid to play basketball, but for whom,” citing the money he made at the professional level, after Bediako claimed he would miss out on revenue-sharing opportunities if he wasn’t given a chance to return to college basketball.
The judge also ruled that Bediako is subject to NCAA rules.
“To obtain the benefits promised to him for participation in NCAA basketball, the Plaintiff must be eligible to participate in NCAA basketball,” the judge said. “Eligibility to participate in the NCAA is controlled by the Defendant’s application of the eligibility rules legislated by the NCAA membership.”
The ruling is a significant victory for the NCAA.
Wow. So you mean the governing body has rules, and people have to abide by them? Hey, maybe we’re turning a corner or something! What’s next, transfer limits? If the NCAA decides they have some teeth again, it’ll be interesting to see what they take a bite out of next.
Now the interesting part…Alabama went 3-2 with Bediako in the lineup, including a win against Texas A&M, who would be 8-2 if the Alabama win gets vacated and tied with Florida atop the SEC…which is what needs to be considered next. Alabama would likewise be 3-4 and underneath Auburn in the SEC standings, which would be another slap on the face.
Ultimately, he’s ineligible, so if a team completed a season and used ineligible players, their wins are vacated, yes? I mean, it’s not like Alabama hasn’t been there before, amirite?
Nate Oates wanted a circuit court judge at the preliminary injunction stage to invalidate the NCAA eligibility rules. The judge wisely didn’t take the bait.
If a local judge could validly do that then Texas could ask a Travis County, Texas judge to issue a preliminary injunction prohibiting Badiako from being eligible to play in Texas when Alabama goes on the road there.
The application of the law in this manner can’t be good for Trinidad Chambliss and Tom Mars. This would definitely mean the NCAA can apply their eligibility rules as they see fit. Am I missing something?
The total “cluster” that is college athletics right now.
I always thought that one of the main eligibility rules for an athlete to compete in an NCAA sport was that athlete cannot have played that sport previously at the professional level. The G League is minor league but it is still professional. I don’t understand how Bediako’s case has gotten as far as it has.
Remember for everything you hate about where college football is going, the World Wide Leader is profiting off the scumbags that sell their hustles to the non-fans for eyeballs…
Even I (who said on here many times that the TRO should be dissolved and the TI should be denied), am a little shocked by this. As I also said several times though, the NCAA and SEC should lay the hammer down on Bama if they are serious about deterring schools from shopping kids like this….
One for the “ Good Guys”. Glory, Glory!!
Glad to see that. Circuit judges are generally very well qualified and honest. I am not surprised by this.
Hmmmm…so the lawyers may ultimately fix or ruin this. An appeal here, class action there and we may end up in front of SCOTUS again ruling what the NCAA can or cannot do. That could also give Congress something more narrow to define in legislation that can be tacked on to a larger Bill the President wants to sign. Stay tuned I guess.
Any appeal would have to go through the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals and Alabama Supreme Court, before it got to the US Supreme Court. In any event, I doubt the *denial* of a temporary injunction is directly appealable, although I know nothing about Alabama appellate procedure.
The only real course of action at this point is to continue the case and seek a PI from the Circuit Court, but the fact that his TI was denied and the facts really aren’t in dispute and unlikely to change, is not a good sign for him to say the least, so this cake is almost assuredly baked….
I’m referring to subsequent and multiple lawsuits surely to be filed challenging the NCAA to get at the money.