-
Dan Wetzel
Last Saturday, Charles Bediako contributed four points and three rebounds, aiding the Motor City Cruise in their 127-103 victory over the Birmingham (Alabama) Squadron. It was quite the blowout in a G League road game.
This event was a kind of homecoming for Bediako, a former University of Alabama player from 2021 to 2023. The three-time G League veteran seemingly found the return to Alabama so enjoyable that he decided to resign from professional basketball, relocate to Tuscaloosa, and reenroll in college.
By Wednesday, the 7-footer had secured a 10-day temporary restraining order, allowing him to take the court for the Crimson Tide for the first time since the 2023 Sweet 16.
He is now set to play for Alabama on Saturday against Tennessee.
Last week, it was G League action; this week, it’s the SEC.
College basketball has entered a stage reminiscent of rejected Will Ferrell movie scripts.
The reasonable and justifiable response to the news of college teams snatching midseason pickups from G League rosters is to call this the most absurd legal ruling since McDonald’s was found liable for hot coffee spills.
And it’s absolutely valid.
but, this perspective might shift once you examine Bediako’s petition alongside the precedents established by other institutions that fueled these previous ludicrous legal decisions, leading college athletics into this preposterous situation.
It may start to add up, but honestly, nothing truly aligns.
To be explicit, NCAA regulations forbid this.
“The NCAA has not and will not grant eligibility to any prospective or returning student-athletes who have signed an NBA contract,” the organization stated.
A circuit court judge in — unsurprisingly — Tuscaloosa County, Alabama, is not swayed by the legality of that rule.
After all, Baylor recently added 2023 NBA draft pick James Nnaji to its midseason lineup. Not only was Bediako overlooked in the draft, but he also played significantly fewer professional games and minutes than Nnaji.
There exists a compelling counterpoint suggesting that Nnaji didn’t play college basketball before leaving, unlike Bediako, who departed after two years in Alabama. Historically, leaving school for the pros – especially after officially turning pro – terminated one’s college career.
But perhaps that’s changing, as each of these rulings seems to spawn increasingly outrageous ones, a cascade of absurdity rolling forward like a snowball down a slope.
What could be next? Might a complete G League starting five enroll at a single university and aim for a national title? Could an NFL quarterback spend his rookie year on a practice squad or sitting on the sidelines, only to return to the highest bidder for the College Football Playoff?
How about a jersey retirement ceremony for an all-time legend, who then reclaims the jersey from the rafters to play in a game?
What are we doing here?
We are navigating the humorous disorder that ensues from the NCAA and its various leaders – including conference commissioners, university presidents, athletic directors, and coaches – fixating solely on halting NIL payments while neglecting the imminent crisis of knowing who is eligible to compete.
This situation allows Bediako to argue that barring him from playing college basketball five semesters after he departed is a violation of trade regulations. He is likely to earn more playing for a couple of months with Alabama than he would have in the G League.
“The NCAA’s arbitrary and inconsistent enforcement of its eligibility standards is causing immediate and irreparable harm to [Bediako],” stated Darren Heitner, one of Bediako’s attorneys.
That may be accurate, but Bediako (and others’) participation is inflicting immediate and irreparable damage on the perceived legitimacy of college basketball.
Among the concerns is that Bediako doesn’t even need to win the actual case regarding his eligibility.
All he requires is for the same local judge to grant him a temporary injunction in a hearing next week. This should provide sufficient time for him to complete the remainder of the Alabama schedule, after which he could drop the case and potentially return to the Motor City Cruise, depending on how far the Tide progresses in the NCAAs.
Now that’s what you call a One Shining Moment.
This is why these legal claims are so tenuous. They don’t necessarily have to be strong arguments, just enough to buy time and collect some NIL payments.
The NCAA is essentially powerless in this scenario. It clearly requires some form of protection to establish eligibility standards that can’t be continuously undermined by astute lawyers and county judges.
College athletics has squandered millions of dollars and many years on unsuccessful legal battles and unattainable lobbying efforts, hoping Congress would enact one-sided legislation.
but, deciding who is permitted to compete, and for how long, is rooted in both common sense and universal principles. No offense to Bediako, but the majority of people are not in favor of this, nor are they enthusiastic about 27-year-old quarterbacks or ninth-year point guards, or whatever may come next.
Every league – from T-ball to the NFL – enforces rules, timelines, and procedures governing roster management. The NCAA should follow suit.
A straightforward, slim federal eligibility bill that defends against this ongoing flood of court challenges is what the NCAA should be urging Congress to adopt. Nothing more, nothing less. This is a shared and bipartisan concern.
if not, of course, you were hoping to see LeBron James in March Madness.
