UGA Player's Attorney Asks Judge to Vacate Order Over NCAA ‘Bias'
Attorney Louis R. Cohan, who represents Georgia Bulldogs baseball player and graduate student Dylan Goldstein, motioned U.S. District Judge Tilman ('Tripp') E. Self III late Friday to vacate his order earlier in the day in favor of the NCAA and to recuse himself from the case.
Self denied Goldstein's motion for a preliminary injunction to allow him to play baseball for UGA beyond his NCAA eligibility. Self reasoned that Goldstein, 24, had failed to establish a viable antitrust claim, including because Goldstein couldn't persuasively establish he would lose out on NIL deals if not allowed to keep playing.
More from Sportico.com
Federal Judge Who Sides With NCAA Is a Longtime College Football Ref
NCAA Wins Again as Court Finds Georgia Outfielder Ineligible
NCAA's FY24 Revenue Sets Record, Offset by $3B in Liabilities
As Sportico detailed after the ruling, Self has a college sports background that could raise questions about his objectivity. He has moonlighted as a college football referee, mainly in the Southern Conference, and that topic was raised during his Senate Confirmation hearing in 2018. Although it does not appear the judge has worked or been paid by the NCAA, his X account identifies him as an 'NCAA Football Official.'
College referees are typically paid by conferences or schools. It is possible that at some point in Self's career he was compensated (directly or indirectly) by the NCAA, such as when he refereed the 2017 FCS national championship, but there is no known record of that occurring.
In a six-page brief, Cohan recounts Self's college sports ties and insists 'there is clear evidence of bias which reasonable minds can conclude would affect the Judge's ability herein to remain unbiased, impartial, and unimpaired in making a legal determination which impacts an association to which the Judge is directly linked and affiliated.'
Cohan notes that Self has the discretion under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to vacate Friday's ruling and recuse himself. Cohan also points out that the U.S. Code recommends that judges disqualify themselves when their 'impartiality might reasonably be questioned.'
Cohan also complains that Self 'didn't tell' the parties that he is, as Self puts it, an 'NCAA Football official,' when it is (Cohan argues) 'impossible to tease out where the Court's bias may begin and end when ruling on issues which directly impact the NCAA.'
Self will likely deny the motion since he was obviously aware of his connections to the NCAA and didn't ask to be reassigned. The judge could surmise that there is no conflict since his work as a referee for college football involved a different sport, in a different conference (UGA plays in the SEC), and refereeing a football game arguably has no relationship to whether a college baseball player should be able to play another season. Self might also assert that his self-identity as an 'NCAA Football Official' reflects not working for the NCAA but functioning as a referee in a sport governed by the NCAA.
The judge can also reason that his side gig as a college football referee is no secret and has been publicly known for years. He could wonder why Cohan didn't raise the topic during the 10 days of the proceeding and waited to ask for a recusal until after his client lost. It would be a different situation if Self had hidden ties to the NCAA.
Tom Mars, a longtime sports attorney and former member of the NCAA's complex case unit, offered a critical take of Self.
'I would have expected the federal judge to disclose his status as an NCAA official to the lawyers as soon as he was assigned the case,' Mars, whose client list has included Jim Harbaugh, Justin Fields, Houston Nutt, Bret Bielema and John Brannen, said in an interview. 'It's not the lawyers' job to look into the judge's background, and reasonable minds could question the judge's impartiality.'
Assuming Self denies the motion for recusal and to vacate the order, Cohan could raise it on an appeal to the U.S. Court for the Eleventh Circuit.
Best of Sportico.com
College Athletes as Employees: Answering 25 Key Questions
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
25 minutes ago
Athletes express concern over NCAA settlement's impact on non-revenue sports
Sydney Moore and Sabrina Ootsburg were surrounded by hundreds of college athletes at AthleteCon when news broke that the $2.8 billion NCAA settlement had been approved by a federal judge. In a room full of college athletes, they felt like the only two people who understood the gravity of the situation. 'I'm about to get paid,' Moore said a Division I football player told her. 'Yes, you are about to get paid, and a lot of your women athlete friends are about to get cut,' she responded. Moore acknowledged that her response might be a stretch, but the sprawling House settlement clears the way for college athletes to get a share of revenue directly from their schools and provides a lucky few a shot at long-term financial stability, it raises genuine concerns for others. Schools that opt int will be able to share up to $20.5 million with their athletes over the next year starting July 1. The majority is expected to be spent on high-revenue generating sports, with most projections estimating 75% of funds will go toward football. So what happens to the non-revenue-generating sports which, outside of football and basketball, is pretty much all of them? It's a query that's top of mind for Ootsburg as she enters her senior year at Belmont, where she competes on track and field team. 'My initial thought was, is this good or bad? What does this mean for me? How does this affect me? But more importantly, in the bigger picture, how does it affect athletes as a whole?' Ootsburg said. 'You look at the numbers where it says most of the revenue, up to 75% to 85%, will go toward football players. You understand it's coming from the TV deals, but then it's like, how does that affect you on the back end?' Ootsburg asked. 'Let's say 800k goes toward other athletes. Will they be able to afford other things like care, facilities, resources or even just snacks?' Moore has similar concerns. She says most female athletes aren't worried about how much – if any – money they'll receive. They fear how changes could impact the student-athlete experience. 'A lot of us would much rather know that our resources and our experience as a student-athlete is going to stay the same, or possibly get better, rather than be given 3,000 dollars, but now I have to cover my meals, I have to pay for my insurance, I have to buy ankle braces because we don't have any, and the athletic training room isn't stocked,' Moore said over the weekend as news of Friday night's settlement approval spread. One of the biggest problems, Ootsburg and Moore said, is that athletes aren't familiar with the changes. At AthleteCon in Charlotte, North Carolina, they said, perhaps the biggest change in college sports history was a push notification generally shrugged off by those directly impacted. 'Athletes do not know what's happening,' Ootsburg said. 'Talking to my teammates, it's so new, and they see the headlines and they're like, 'Ok, cool, but is someone going to explain this?' because they can read it, but then there's so many underlying factors that go into this. This is a complex problem that you have to understand the nuances behind, and not every athlete truly does.' Some coaches, too, are still trying to understand what's coming. Mike White, coach of the national champion Texas softball team, called it 'the great unknown right now.' 'My athletic director, Chris Del Conte, said it's like sailing out on a flat world and coming off the edge; we just don't know what's going to be out there yet, especially the way the landscape is changing,' he said at the Women's College World Series in Oklahoma City. 'Who knows what it's going to be?' Jake Rimmel got a crash course on the settlement in the fall of 2024, when he said he was cut from the Virginia Tech cross-country team alongside several other walk-ons. The topic held up the House case for weeks as the judge basically forced schools to give athletes cut in anticipation of approval a chance to play — they have to earn the spot, no guarantees — without counting against roster limits. Rimmel packed up and moved back to his parents' house in Purcellville, Virginia. For the past six months, he's held on to a glimmer of hope that maybe he could return. 'The past six months have been very tough," he said. "I've felt so alone through this, even though I wasn't. I just felt like the whole world was out there – I would see teammates of mine and other people I knew just doing all of these things and still being part of a team. I felt like I was sidelined and on pause, while they're continuing to do all these things.' News that the settlement had been approved sent Rimmel looking for details. 'I didn't see much about roster limits," he said. 'Everyone wants to talk about NIL and the revenue-sharing and I mean, that's definitely a big piece of it, but I just didn't see anything about the roster limits, and that's obviously my biggest concern.' The answer only presents more questions for Rimmel. 'We were hoping for more of a forced decision with the grandfathering, which now it's only voluntary, so I'm a little skeptical of things because I have zero clue how schools are going to react to that," Rimmel told The Associated Press. Rimmel is still deciding what's best for him, but echoed Moore and Ootsburg in saying that answers are not obvious: 'I'm just hoping the schools can make the right decisions with things and have the best interest of the people who were cut.'
Washington Post
35 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Athletes express concern over NCAA settlement's impact on non-revenue sports
Sydney Moore and Sabrina Ootsburg were surrounded by hundreds of college athletes at AthleteCon when news broke that the $2.8 billion NCAA settlement had been approved by a federal judge. In a room full of college athletes, they felt like the only two people who understood the gravity of the situation.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump to meet with key college sports decision-makers in golf outing where they'll discuss industry's future
WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump is scheduled to host two of college sports' most influential leaders Sunday at his golf course in New Jersey. Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua and SEC commissioner Greg Sankey are planning to golf with the president at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster in an invitation extended to them by the White House. The three men are expected to discuss the future of college athletics as Trump explores his involvement in the rapidly changing industry. Advertisement Multiple sources spoke to Yahoo Sports about the planned event on the condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to speak on the matter. The significance of the meeting cannot be overstated. It comes two days after a California judge granted approval of a landmark legal settlement (House) that further evolves major college athletics into a more professionalized entity where schools will directly compensate athletes. The two men attending the Trump meeting hold significant decision-making power. Bevacqua presides over one of the country's most influential and valuable athletic departments — a school that's become a national leader during college sports' evolution. Trump holds a longtime relationship with Bevacqua, dating back to his days working as an executive at PGA of America. Sankey is described by many to be the most influential leader in the industry as he manages a conference that, with the Big Ten, is the most valuable and successful in the country. Donald Trump has some history with Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, left, who is seen here in 2015, when Bevacqua was the CEO of PGA of America. (Jeffrey MacMillan for The Washington Post via Getty Images) (The Washington Post via Getty Images) The three men are expected to spend extended time together beyond their round of golf as NCAA leaders seek Congressional and White House assistance for a federal standard to stabilize and regulate what's become an unruly structure. Trump has grown interested in the issues, even deeply exploring the possibility of issuing an executive order and creating a commission to study the many developments — such as player movement in the transfer portal, booster-backed compensation to athletes, and the impact on women and Olympic sports. Advertisement Such a meeting Sunday could trigger action from the White House, or possibly expedite Congressional negotiations over college sports legislation. Five U.S. senators — three Democrats and two Republicans — have held regular meetings over a federal college sports bill for the last several months. However, those discussions have been slowed recently by arising hurdles with bill concepts as well as global and domestic issues unrelated to college athletics. Trump's involvement in college sports is serious enough that he began the creation of a presidential commission and even selected a chair of the group, Texas businessman Cody Campbell. However, partially in an effort to not impact Senate negotiations, the commission work was paused two weeks ago. Advertisement For more than five years now, college leaders have spent millions of dollars in a lobbying effort on Capitol Hill as they seek legislation that deems athletes students, not employees; preempts state NIL laws; and provides protection for the NCAA and power leagues to enforce rules without legal challenges. Next week, the 13th Congressional hearing related to college sports will unfold — this one from members of a subgroup of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. A new House bill is expected to be introduced next week as well. The Trump golf outing Sunday comes at a divided time, not just within Congress but in college athletics. Disagreements linger between power conference administrators over an assortment of issues — the transfer portal, the College Football Playoff and even the concept of collective bargaining with athletes. Many athlete advocacy groups, college sports attorneys and those within the sport itself believe that the House settlement will leave many unresolved issues, will elicit dozens of legal challenges on its own and needs to cede to bargaining with athletes, much like pro sports.
