G Zakai Zeigler denied fifth season at Tennessee
A Tennessee federal judge rejected Tennessee guard Zakai Zeigler's request for a preliminary injunction on Thursday after he sued the NCAA last month for a fifth year of eligibility.
The injunction could have let Zeigler, the Volunteers' all-time assist and steals leader, take the court while his lawsuit unfolded in court.
Zeigler sued the NCAA for a fifth year, claiming he could lose up to $4 million in NIL money if he isn't allowed to play in 2025-26. The lawsuit argued he will suffer irreparable harm without immediate relief, with schools finalizing rosters and settling NIL deals.
"Plaintiff has failed to present sufficient evidence that the Four-Seasons Rule produces substantial anticompetitive effects in the market for student-athlete services and NIL compensation in Division I basketball," judge Katherine Crytzer wrote in her decision.
Zeigler filed his suit in the Eastern District of Tennessee. In it, he claimed he could make between $2 million and $4 million in name, image and likeness money in 2025-26 after making $500,000 in 2024-25.
"We are disappointed the Court declined to grant a preliminary injunction on the basis that the NCAA does not directly control NIL compensation, just days after the House settlement confirmed they would do exactly that," Litson PLLC and Garza Law Firm, Zeigler's representation, said in a statement. "This ruling is just the first chapter of what we believe will ultimately be a successful challenge."
Zeigler, who led the Volunteers to two Elite Eight appearances, set the school career records for assists (747) and steals (251). The three-time All-SEC pick and two-time league defensive player of the year averaged 11.3 points, 5.4 assists and 2.6 rebounds in 138 career games (83 starts).
He graduated this month from Tennessee and plans to pursue a graduate degree.
--Field Level Media
Field Level Media 2023 - All Rights Reserved
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why female athletes are challenging the NCAA's $2.8bn settlement
The NCAA settlement has given rise to worries that schools will cut so-called 'non-revenue' sports, including lacrosse, swimming or gymnastics, to fund revenue-sharing with top athletes. The NCAA settlement has given rise to worries that schools will cut so-called 'non-revenue' sports, including lacrosse, swimming or gymnastics, to fund revenue-sharing with top athletes. Photograph: C Morgan Engel/College athletes spent decades fighting for the right to make money from their name, image and likeness (NIL). In 2021, they won. Now, a $2.8bn NCAA settlement is set to compensate hundreds of thousands of current and former athletes who missed out on those earnings. But not everyone thinks the deal is fair. Eight female athletes filed an appeal this week, arguing the agreement violates Title IX, the US law banning sex-based discrimination in education. They say the way the money is divided, largely favoring football and men's basketball players, shortchanges women by more than $1bn. Advertisement Their appeal has paused all back payments, potentially delaying them for more than a year. However, the NCAA's new plan to allow schools to pay current players directly starting 1 July will still go ahead. So what does this all mean for athletes as well as the future of college sports? Here's what's going on … What is the NCAA settlement about? The NCAA agreed to pay $2.8bn to compensate athletes who were previously barred from earning income off their name, image, and likeness (NIL), including things like video game appearances, jersey sales, or social media sponsorships. The settlement covers athletes going back to 2016. Advertisement It also clears the way for a major change: beginning 1 July 2025, colleges will be allowed to directly share revenue with current players, up to $20.5 million per school per year. It's a major shift from the NCAA's traditional amateurism model, which argued that athletes should only be compensated with scholarships, not salaries or endorsement income. Who's appealing the deal and why? Eight female athletes who competed in soccer, volleyball, and track have filed an appeal. Their names include Kacie Breeding (Vanderbilt) and Kate Johnson (Virginia), along with six athletes from the College of Charleston. Advertisement They argue the deal violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. Specifically, they say the settlement gives up to 90% of the money to men in football and basketball, depriving women of $1.1bn in rightful compensation. What is Title IX and how does it apply here? Title IX is a 1972 US law requiring equal access and treatment for men and women in federally funded education programs, including athletics. Colleges must offer comparable resources, scholarships and participation opportunities across men's and women's sports. The female athletes argue that since NIL bans affected both genders equally, compensation for those bans must also be equitable, and that using historical TV revenue (which favors men's sports) ignores systemic barriers women have faced in marketing and media exposure. What did the judge say about the Title IX argument? US district judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week and rejected Title IX-based objections, saying they fell outside the scope of the antitrust case. The female athletes disagree and are now asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene. What happens to the money in the meantime? Because of the appeal, no back pay will be distributed until the court rules. That delay could last several months or longer. According to the NCAA's lead attorney, the organization will continue funding the settlement pool, but the money will sit untouched until the case is resolved. Why is most of the money going to men's football and basketball players? The current payout formula is based on historical media revenue and licensing data. Because football and men's basketball generated the majority of money for schools – especially through TV contracts – those athletes stand to receive the most compensation. Advertisement Critics say that approach bakes in decades of inequality, because women were denied the same marketing exposure and investment in the first place. What are the broader concerns about this settlement? Some worry that schools will cut so-called 'non-revenue' sports – like wrestling, swimming or gymnastics – to fund revenue-sharing with top athletes. Others fear this pushes college sports closer to a professional minor league system, undermining education and competitive balance. Still others say that without clear Title IX guidance, women may continue to be marginalized even in a post-amateurism era. What happens next? The Ninth Circuit will now review the appeal. Briefs are due by 3 October, and while both sides say they'll push for speed, appeals in this court have been known to take 12 to 18 months. Until the case is resolved, no back payments will be made to athletes who played between 2016 and 2021. But the revenue-sharing era is coming, whether or not the NCAA is ready for it.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Judge approves NCAA House Settlement allowing schools to pay players
The post Judge approves NCAA House Settlement allowing schools to pay players appeared first on ClutchPoints. The landscape of college sports has been in constant change over the last few years, and now a major development has taken place that will ensure it is never the same again. On Friday night, Judge Claudia Wilken approved the House settlement in the House vs. NCAA lawsuit. Advertisement The biggest point in the settlement is that it now allows schools to pay their own athletes, instead of all payment having to go through NIL collectives. This ruling doesn't end the controversy about whether athletes are considered employees of the universities that they play for, but schools being able to pay them is a massive development in the ongoing debate. Schools will be able to pay athletes $20.5 million over the course of the year, with a decided split in which sports get how much money, according to Pete Nakos of On3 Sports. 'Beginning July 1, schools will be able to share $20.5 million with athletes, with football expected to receive 75%, followed by men's basketball (15%), women's basketball (5%) and the remainder of sports (5%),' Nakos wrote. 'The amount shared in revenue will increase annually.' That means that football programs will have about $15 million, give or take, to spend on their rosters. Advertisement The settlement will also introduce roster limits, which was a big sticking point between the two sides over the course of the last few months. Those roster limits will be grandfathered in, a stipulation that Wilkin required in order to go through with the approval of the settlement. On Friday night, NCAA president Charlie Baker released a letter titled 'A new beginning for Division I student-athletes and the NCAA.' 'Approving the agreement reached by the NCAA, the defendant conferences and student-athletes in the settlement opens a pathway to begin stabilizing college sports,' part of the letter read. 'This new framework that enables schools to provide direct financial benefits to student-athletes and establishes clear and specific rules to regulate third-party NIL agreements marks a huge step forward for college sports.' How this settlement affects the teams on the field and the court in 2025-26 remains to be seen, but there is no question that this massive change will impact the way that college sports work forever. Related: Former NCAA athletes to be paid $2.8 billion for lost NIL earnings Related: Former MLB exec to be new head of College Sports Commission
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
John Calipari gets 100% real on ‘expectation' that comes with lucrative NIL numbers
The post John Calipari gets 100% real on 'expectation' that comes with lucrative NIL numbers appeared first on ClutchPoints. The NIL era has accelerated recruiting into becoming a bidding war on what schools offer the most money in NIL. The numbers circulating in college basketball recently have been massive, and one of the game's best recruiters, Arkansas' John Calipari, recently spoke up about how that shapes the expectations for transfers and recruits who come into their new schools. Advertisement As one of the best recruiters in college basketball and potentially all college sports, Calipari has firsthand experience with NIL. While NIL has not changed Calipari's status as an elite recruiter, it has emboldened him even more, bringing in top recruits at Kentucky and Arkansas. However, big-time players come with big-time money, and Calipari admitted that he and his staff tread lightly even more now due to that aspect of recruiting. Calipari was on an episode of Golic & Golic on FanDuel Sports Network this week and elaborated on how they navigate this new landscape. 'Did you see the interview with the Kansas State player (Coleman Hawkins) after last year's season, where he cried? Cried. 'They paid me $2 million and I couldn't live up to it.' There's one thing about being the star on any team,' Calipari said. 'You guys did it, that star makes the most and, wow, but the most is expected from them. So, some guys in college basketball this year are making between $ 3 million and $5 million. Teams are spending 20 million on rosters. Now there's an expectation. You better win a national title, or you better be a guy, Calipari said. 'If one of you paid a college player four million, would you expect that $4 million player to drag us to the Final Four?' Advertisement In some cases, the risk might not outweigh the reward when programs like Arkansas basketball offer millions of dollars to recruits. Calipari continued to elaborate on how this is impacting the current recruiting landscape. 'That's different than a seasoned professional dealing with it. So, trying to keep that away from what we do, but social media brings it right back,' Calipari said. 'This guy's making $3 million, and this is the best he is. So, you know, it's — I think we gotta protect our kids, but some of it, you can't. You want to be paid a lot. You're now a professional. You need to perform.' Thanks to the House settlement being approved, some NIL numbers should be curbed, and at least the field in college sports should be leveled. However, this new era of recruiting is a bidding war, and Calipari and other coaches need to adapt to navigating the potential expectations that come with that. Related: Fans debate possible NBA-like change in college hoops Related: LSU's Flau'jae Johnson gets brutally honest on Angel Reese relationship: 'We're not friends'
