NCAA loses emergency bid to bench 30 players before season starts
A Kentucky judge rejected the governing body's request to block athletes from competing, citing a lack of proof for immediate financial damage.
By Aiko Brooks ·
Thirty college athletes will take the court this week despite a final push by the NCAA to halt their participation. A Kentucky Court of Appeals judge denied the governing body's request for emergency relief on Friday, allowing the players to compete while a panel of three judges reviews the case.
The decision preserves the eligibility of the 2022 high school graduating class under the NCA's new five-for-five model. This group includes Missouri basketball player Mark Mitchell and LSU's Skyy Clark. They received a temporary injunction on Oct. 16 to play while the NCAA appealed a lower court ruling.
Judge Sara Walter Combs wrote that the NCAA failed to demonstrate that the injunction caused imminent, ruinous, and incalculable injury. She added that it serves no purpose to flip-flop repeatedly as courts work through the underlying issues.
The ruling also affects football. Kentucky's Alex Afari Jr., Texas Tech quarterback Thomas Castellanos, and Louisville players Jabari Mack and Kalib Perry can continue to compete while the litigation proceeds. These athletes are part of a wider legal challenge to the NCAA's new eligibility rules.
The new model grants athletes five years of eligibility starting when they turn 19 or graduate from high school, whichever comes first. However, the implementation excluded players who began college careers in the 2022-23 season and completed four years. Those players are now suing to play a fifth season.
The Kentucky decision followed a similar ruling in Ohio. The Ohio Supreme Court kept in place an earlier order allowing two dozen players to remain available for their teams. The lead plaintiff in that case is Xavier's Filip Borovicanin, who is set to play Monday. Other players in the Ohio case include Gonzaga's Javon Bennett and Cincinnati's MJ Collins.
The NCAA expressed dissatisfaction with the Ohio outcome in a memo sent to members late Thursday. The letter described the result as deeply disappointed and argued that every minute played by an ineligible player deprives an eligible student-athlete of an opportunity. It stated that this provides a competitive advantage to schools rostering experienced players who exhausted their eligibility.
