“The new rules make eligibility easier to administer and more predictable for student-athletes, families, coaches, compliance staff and schools,” noted the NCAA in its Eligibility 101 release.
Problems have arisen because this applies to student-athletes who began college in 2023 or after. It does not recognize those student-athletes who began in 2022 and completed four years of eligibility earlier this year. In an era of name, image and likeness (NIL) and potentially big payouts these rules can be financially devastating for some individuals.
“That is what spawned huge litigation all over the United States,” said Kenneth A. Jacobsen, Practice Professor of Law and Director of the Sports Law Program at Temple University Beasley School of Law. “College football season is here and college basketball season is not far behind, and the athletes in the high school class of 2022 who were denied eligibility for that fifth year were running to court in order to get that eligibility.”
Suits were initially filed in federal court under an anti-trust theory. Jacobsen noted that courts have not been consistent on anti-trust matters. Then lawyers for the student-athlete pivoted to state courts, instead filing breach of contract cases.
“The bylaws of the NCAA and the member schools are a contract,” explained Jacobsen. “The schools agree to abide by those contracts, and the NCAA has to abide by those contracts, and the athletes, when they sign on to play sports, they agree to abide by those bylaws as well. So, the argument from the athletes is ‘We have a contractual relationship with the NCAA.’”
In a contract, it is implied that both sides are going to operate in good faith and honor the terms of the contract. The student-athletes from 2022 say the NCAA has not acted in good faith. “That is a theory more easy to explain; it’s more easy to prove than a complicated anti-trust case,” Jacobsen said.
