The NCAA enjoyed a victory on Friday as the Tenth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled 2022 players, previously protected by a Colorado district judge’s preliminary injunction, ineligible for the upcoming season.
Arizona Wildcats football players Max Harris and Ismail Mahdi, each seemingly eligible for a fifth year under the Colorado injunction, are now in question as the school answers this latest development. In theory, these two players could pursue cases of their own in Arizona ahead of the team’s home opener with Northern Arizona on Sept. 5 in Tucson. The Arizona Daily Star reported on Friday that both players will remain with the team in practice and are considered eligible.
Lawsuits are expected to spring out all over the place, as only those cases not involved with the Colorado case are considered “eligible,” should they have an injunction from a state judge. The NCAA publicly stated its commitment to pursuing its desired result in similar cases around the country, as 2022 players seek a fifth year of eligibility via the association’s 5-for-5 ruling.
“The Association will separately continue to defend other similar putative class action lawsuits and the state court cases that have been filed by former student-athletes seeking additional eligibility and expeditiously appeal any cases where former student-athletes have, or will, be granted additional eligibility through separate state court rulings,” the NCAA said in a statement. ”We are encouraged by the Ohio Court of Appeals’ decision to stay the first of those injunctions pending our appeal.”
THE HEART OF THE ISSUE
In a nutshell, the NCAA is establishing the cutoff for its new 5-for-5 rule, which, beginning with this season, establishes up to five years of eligibility for any active student athlete. Those 2022 players, which were seniors last season, are ineligible, according to the association’s new eligibility policy. Numerous players have filed their own lawsuits in an attempt to earn that fifth year.
It’s a tough scenario for the NCAA, which previously granted a “COVID-19 year,” essentially one open year of extra eligibility to those student athletes affected by pandemic-shortened seasons. The difference here is there isn’t a global health crisis, and these are players that are seeking another year of college eligibility despite many either pursuing professional options, minicamps, etc.
Safe to bet this issue won’t be solved before the first college football games kick off, and possibly well after the National Championship game is played, as the NCAA continues battling its neverending legal battles on the daily.
