For years, I’ve been looking for a simple way to explain the current state of college sports to those unfamiliar.
How do you best help people understand the instability of such profitable and popular structures and systems?
advertise
“Everything looks fine. What’s going on?” they’d say.
Maybe they are right. The chaotic voices of stakeholders may just be necessary growing pains for an entity that is transitioning from amateur to professional.
Maybe this will do.
But for a brief moment Thursday afternoon, a real-time snapshot emerged that more than anything else highlighted the absurd state of the industry.
Inside a county courthouse in one of the smallest towns in the most rural part of northern Mississippi, a 23-year-old quarterback’s college eligibility — his Heisman Trophy hopes, his team’s championship aspirations, his more than $5 million in promised compensation — hinged on the decision of a seventy-something justice who happened to have a law degree from the University of Mississippi, the school that would stand to benefit most from his ruling.
advertise
This is less than ideal.
Set aside how you feel about Judge Robert Q. Whitwell’s decision to grant quarterback Trinidad Chambliss an extra year of eligibility. Remove name and school logo. Put aside your inherent biases and favoritism. Look at the whole.
Is it healthy for college sports to have athletes’ eligibility determined in courts across the United States?
In fact, as Whitwell read his order and subsequent decision in a thick Southern accent, the judge became emotional and could not contain his joy that he had given Chambliss — who everyone considered a stand-up comedian and standout football player — another year of college eligibility, another chance to chase his dreams and make millions.
advertise
This is a scene taken from a novel by John Grisham, the famous author who grew up in Mississippi.
Trinidad Chambliss will be back in an Ole Miss Rebels uniform next season following Thursday’s eligibility ruling. (Photo by CFP/Getty Images)
(CFP Getty Images)
Easily one of the most compelling stories in recent college football history: A kid who was born in Michigan, started his career in Division II, excelled in Division II (Ferris State), earned a backup spot in a major college football game in the South, and then replaced the starter midseason to lead the Ole Miss Rebels to their best season in more than 60 years.
The latest chapter took place in court Thursday as part of a lawsuit against the NCAA organization that has denied Chambliss an extra year of eligibility three times in the past two months — all claiming illnesses (lingering tonsillitis, plus mononucleosis and COVID-19) kept him from competing in 2022.
advertise
Let us not get bogged down in the facts of the case. Here are the highlights: In a five-hour hearing Thursday, Chambliss and his attorney argued before a judge that his condition was serious enough to require a medical redshirt that season; the NCAA argued he didn’t provide enough medical evidence to support that claim; and the judge sided with the quarterback.
There is something more important here.
This case is different from many other judicial decisions that have held that the NCAA violated antitrust laws. This is not an “antitrust” case. This is a “contract” case.
In fact, the case may open the door to new avenues for legal challenges to NCAA rules. Rather than suing on antitrust claims (which are harder to prove), Chambliss’ attorneys are suing the NCAA for breach of its contract with Ole Miss as a member university in which all athletes, including Chambliss, are third-party beneficiaries.
advertise
In layman’s terms, as the judge put it, the NCAA “failed” to uphold its membership agreement with Ole Miss, which states that it must be “committed to the well-being and development of its student-athletes” and enforce its rules “in good faith.”
By not granting Chambliss a sixth year of eligibility, the NCAA violated his contract and acted in bad faith, and the judge detailed the harm done to Chambliss in multiple ways, including the loss of compensation in what he described as college sports’ new “labor market”; the loss of the opportunity for an extra year of development for the NFL (a point highlighted by witness in the case, University of Mississippi assistant coach Joe Judge during his appearance); and, in an interesting twist, the judge said, the loss of college football’s fan base from witnessing one of the best players in the country.
As in many such cases, the NCAA is destined to be the bad guy here. evil. sinister.
But here’s something to remember: The NCAA is responsible for enforcing the rules and standards set by its member schools. As it turned out, a committee of school administrators — not NCAA staff — denied Chambliss’ waiver appeal.
advertise
The source of the denial goes mostly unreported, but here’s the thing: Committee members asked to see Chambliss’ practice logs from the 2022 season to determine the severity of his condition. However, as of 2022, Ferris State has switched operating systems for archiving practice logs. The records were either lost or were so difficult and costly to obtain that they were never presented to the committee.
NCAA staff initially denied the committee’s appeal and denied Chambliss an eligibility waiver in early January, prompting a lawsuit filed shortly thereafter. Then, during a hearing Thursday morning, Chambliss’ last-ditch bid for eligibility through the NCAA — “reconsideration” — was denied.
Of course, it doesn’t matter.
In court, another college athlete received additional clearance from a local judge.
advertise
Chambliss is the 11th player in 55 lawsuits to receive an extended eligibility ban since Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia successfully sued the NCAA in December 2024. In 34 of those cases, judges ruled in favor of the NCAA in preliminary rulings or the cases were voluntarily dismissed.
About a dozen cases remain pending, including one looming Friday when Tennessee quarterback Joey Aguilar and attorneys plan to argue his eighth year of eligibility before a Tennessee judge.
Of the 11 successful injunctions to extend players’ eligibility, seven were issued by local judges in state court — a new way lawyers have found to make decisions that are best for their clients rather than filing federal petitions.
advertise
On Thursday, Chambliss’ attorneys may have paved the way for another avenue to test and ultimately overturn the NCAA’s standards.
The NCAA said in a statement in response to the news that the decision illustrates the “impossible situation” created by the courts’ disparate rulings in lawsuits backed by its member schools that attack the rules they write. The statement read that these “conflicting court decisions” make “cooperation with Congress critical to providing stability” — another plea for lawmakers to pass federal legislation to regulate the industry.
At the very least, all of this provides something of personal use: I’ve found a simple way to explain the current state of college sports to those unfamiliar.
A courthouse. Congress. and unlimited billable hours.
