NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Five college football players at power-conference schools asked a federal judge on Monday for a preliminary injunction to play a fifth year next season.
All five have competed four seasons in four years without taking a redshirt. They are Vanderbilt linebacker Langston Patterson; kicker Nathanial Vakos, tight end Lance Mason and long snapper Nick Levy all of Wisconsin; and Nebraska long snapper Kevin Gallic.
U.S. District Judge William L. Campbell granted an injunction nearly a year ago that allowed Diego Pavia to play this season. Pavia finished as the Heisman Trophy runner-up leading Vanderbilt to a 10-2 record.
Patterson testified that he asked about taking a redshirt season as a freshman and was told he was too valuable. The team captain, who graduated with his bachelor’s degree three days ago, said he knew during Vanderbilt’s fifth game of the season on Sept. 27 that he wouldn’t be able to take a redshirt season.
These players are part of a lawsuit seeking class action status alleging the NCAA violates U.S. antitrust laws with its redshirt rule for athletes during five seasons of eligibility. The lawsuit includes seven other named plaintiffs and potentially thousands of current and former NCAA football, baseball and tennis players.
Patterson, a lead plaintiff in that lawsuit, also testified that he was asked about the status of the lawsuit during an end of year meeting with Vanderbilt’s general manager and his position coach.
Without an injunction, Patterson said Vanderbilt will turn to the transfer portal opening Jan. 2 to replace him with a linebacker with two years’ experience at a similar level to the Southeastern Conference program. Levy also testified that Wisconsin would be looking for help if no decision comes before the portal opens.
Another season gives these five players more practice and playing time with the chance to attract more NFL scouts’ attention along with pursuing graduate degrees. Mason monitored the hearing remotely.
The federal judge had pointed questions on the potential “ripple effect” if he grants this injunction. The NCAA has faced a series of lawsuits since that Pavia injunction over eligibility rules.
Attorney Ryan Downton told the judge that this injunction involves five specific players ahead of the upcoming transfer portal. Downton also said courts never rule in a vacuum.
“The Pavia ruling gave players something to point to just like the Alston ruling and the O’Bannon ruling and the House settlement, ” Downton said after the hearing. “What I said in there is that the NCAA has been found to be a serial violator of antitrust law, and whether the court grants or denies a preliminary injunction doesn’t change that.”
Attorney Taylor Askew, arguing for the NCAA, said this injunction request comes from players who knew they were playing their final season and that the lawsuit had been mentioned as early as July before being filed in September.
Askew also noted the Sherman Act only limits unreasonable restraint on competition and said the only thing that makes eligibility rules unreasonable is that it affects the players.
“If you have eligibility rules, someone won’t be eligible,” Askew told the judge.
Commissioners of the Atlantic Coast Conference, the Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern Conference filed a declaration Saturday asking the judge to uphold the NCAA’s eligibility rules, which they said are anchored in the principle that athletics are an integral part of the academic experience in college.
“Changes to these rules could impact that fundamental principle and hinder high school student-athletes from opportunities to obtain the benefits of athletic participation,” according to the commissioners’ declaration.
Comments