2 days ago
NC State Cornerback Denied Bid to Play Fifth Season After Suing NCAA
A federal judge has denied NC State cornerback Corey Coley Jr.'s attempt to play a fifth season of Division I college football, reasoning that NCAA eligibility rules aren't subject to antitrust scrutiny and that even if antitrust law applied, Coley's bid would be nixed.
In an order issued last Friday, U.S. District Judge James C. Dever III sided with the NCAA and rejected Coley's motion for a preliminary injunction.
Advertisement
More from
Coley is part of a growing group of college athletes who seek to extend their NCAA eligibility on account of NIL opportunities. This group has experienced mixed results in different courts across the country. As Sportico explained, the newly approved House settlement will make staying in school even more enticing given that some athletes will receive shares of revenue.
Coley, who played at Trinity Christian Academy in Jacksonville, Fla., began his college career in 2021 by enrolling at the University of Maryland. Coley expected to redshirt in his freshman year, which would have made him eligible to play through the 2025 season. However, injuries in the Terrapins' secondary elevated Coley on the depth chart and into the lineup.
Coley played three years at Maryland, during which he battled a knee injury. In 2023, Coley learned of the death of his uncle, who had played a 'vital role' in his life. According to Coley's complaint, the death had a profound and devastating impact on the young player. 'Being far away from home made Coley's grief from this death almost unbearable,' the complaint asserted, 'and left him feeling isolated, helpless, distracted and unmotivated, which again, affected his performance both on and off the field.'
Advertisement
Coley transferred to NC State for his senior year. However, the season didn't go as planned. Coley said he 'endured mental health struggles' and suffered a season-ending injury in his sixth game of the season.
Coley and NC State applied to the NCAA for a hardship waiver, which if granted would have made Coley eligible this fall. The application cited Coley's 'collective struggles, both mentally and physically, through his collegiate career.' In February, the NCAA denied the application. Coley, who expects to earn his degree from NC State by the end of 2025, then sued the NCAA.
Like other athletes, Coley argues that the NCAA restricting eligibility to four seasons in five years violates antitrust law. He asserts that by denying his eligibility, the NCAA will deprive him of 'substantial NIL compensation.'
Coley's case is based in part on an expansive interpretation of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston (2021). Although Alston is often linked by media to name, image and likeness, which derives from the right of publicity, NIL didn't appear once in the ruling. That's because the case concerned an altogether different topic: the compatibility of NCAA rules regarding education-related expenses with antitrust law. Alston clarified that NCAA compensation rules are subject to ordinary—and not deferential—scrutiny under antitrust law.
Advertisement
Coley, and others, argue that Alston makes NCAA eligibility rules subject to ordinary antitrust scrutiny—and that eligibility rules illegally restrain the labor market of D-I college football players. That interpretation of Alston has helped Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia and Rutgers safety Jett Elad thus far succeed in their cases against the NCAA to keep playing. But judges reviewing other eligibility cases have rejected this interpretation as construing Alston beyond its actual words.
Dever endorsed a more literal interpretation of Alston. He wrote that Alston tackled NCAA rules regarding education-related benefits, but that those rules reflect only a 'narrow subset' of compensation rules.
The judge added that the relationship between NCAA eligibility and the ability to sign NIL deals does not convert eligibility rules into compensation rules. He cited cases holding for the proposition that eligibility rules aren't subject to antitrust scrutiny, which governs commercial dealings. Eligibility rules fundamentally concern which college students can play a sport in accordance with academic and other university objectives.
Dever also suggested that if NCAA eligibility rules violated antitrust law because they restrain NIL opportunities, that would 'compel' a 'nonsensical outcome.' The judge reasoned that there are numerous NCAA rules that 'could potentially affect a player's ability to earn NIL compensation' and that could be deemed violative of antitrust law under Coley's test. Those rules concern such topics subject as:
Advertisement
Minimum academic requirements.
Prohibition of the use of illegal drugs.
Prohibition of sports wagering.
Disciplinary proceedings that could result in suspension or expulsion.
Ethical standards.
Dever also criticized the evidence presented by Coley regarding whether the eligibility rules have a sufficiently anticompetitive effect on the labor market of D-I football players to run afoul of antitrust law. The evidence presented concerned Coley's NIL earning potential but said 'nothing about a substantial anticompetitive effect on the labor market as a whole.' The judge added that 'anecdotal experiences' of college football players do not rise to the level of evidence needed.
The denial of a preliminary injunction does not end the case. However, given that litigation can take months or longer and given that Coley wants to play this fall, Dever's ruling deals a major blow to Coley's chances to be eligible for the 2025 season. The cornerback can appeal Dever's order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
In a written statement, an NCAA spokesperson said the NCAA 'appreciates that the court's ruling will allow the litigation to proceed its normal course, and we are confident that the underlying rationale for the rules and benefits to current and future student-athletes will be evident.' The spokesperson also said that, in the NCAA's view, 'the rules for years of eligibility, along with other rules, are designed to help ensure competition is safe and fair, aligning collegiate academic and athletic careers to provide high-level opportunities and benefits to current and upcoming student-athletes.'
Best of
Sign up for Sportico's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
