SEC commish Greg Sankey files legal brief against granting Alabama's Charles Bediako college eligibility

A conference commissioner is urging a state judge to uphold NCAA eligibility rules and deny extended eligibility to a player in his own league.

In an affidavit filed Thursday in the Circuit Court of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey argues against granting Alabama basketball player Charles Bediako collegiate eligibility — a somewhat groundbreaking and stunning filing a day ahead of a hearing Friday over whether the Crimson Tide can continue playing Bediako.

“I respectfully ask the Court to uphold the NCAA eligibility rules challenged in this case, which are essential to the integrity of college sports, to the educational mission they serve, and to the opportunities they provide for current and future student-athletes,” Sankey wrote in the four-page affidavit.

Bediako, a 7-foot center, returned to the Alabama basketball team last month despite leaving school three years ago and after signing multiple professional contracts — a violation of NCAA eligibility rules. He is playing under a temporary restraining order granted on Jan. 21 by an Alabama judge and alum who, in light of conflicts, recused himself from the case last month.

At a hearing at 10:30 a.m. CT Friday, new judge Daniel Pruet will hear arguments and determine if Bediako can continue to play for Alabama through a preliminary injunction that bars the NCAA from enforcing its eligibility rules.

Bediako’s situation stands as a potential precedent-setting case in the NCAA’s rapidly mounting eligibility filings as players — with support from the schools that originally created the very rules — seek additional seasons of play well beyond the NCAA standard of four seasons over five calendar years.

However, the Bediako case targets another long-standing eligibility policy: Basketball players who sign professional contracts forfeit their collegiate eligibility in perpetuity.

Sankey highlights the policy in his affidavit, describing the rule as “grounded in the principle that college athletics are reserved for current college athletes who are actively pursuing a degree while also participating in college sports and for future college athletes who seek to benefit from the unique educational, athletic, and leadership opportunities provided through college sports.”

Granting Bediako eligibility may “open the door to undermining fundamental principles” of college athletics, Sankey writes, and may even lead to former professional athletes returning to college, creating a “competitive disadvantage and fundamental unfairness” to college athletes while also eliminating spots meant for high school players.

“These rules, enacted through the NCAA membership's legislative process, reflect the informed judgment of hundreds of educational institutions to protect the distinctive character of collegiate athletics and the opportunities it provides for current and future college athletes,” Sankey writes. “Inconsistent application of the NCAA eligibility rules challenged in this case, through court rulings or otherwise, fuels disruption in college sports.”

Alabama (15-7) is 2-2 in games in which Bediako has played. The Tide travel to play rival Auburn on Saturday.

Bediako and his representatives argue that the NCAA granting eligibility waivers to those players who signed European pro basketball contracts is no different than signing an NBA or G League deal. The association’s waiver process and decisions have been described even by Sankey himself as inconsistent and frustrating.

However, the NCAA sternly stands by its decisions, in particular those related to pro basketball. A player who begins in college cannot leave, play pro sports and return.

The eligibility cases escalated in December of 2024, when a Tennessee judge granted an extra year of eligibility to Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia — a decision that resulted in the NCAA granting a blanket waiver to similarly situated athletes. The move has sparked 55 lawsuits filed by athletes who have had their eligibility waivers denied.

While the NCAA has won more than half of those 55 lawsuits in which a judge has issued a preliminary ruling, several of the cases are expected to go to a trial and several more (like Alabama’s case) have paved a path for success in state courts with local friendly judges.

In fact, within Sankey’s league, two more schools are supporting players who are seeking additional eligibility through legal challenges in their states, including starting quarterbacks at Ole Miss (Trinidad Chambliss) and Tennessee (Joey Aguilar). Chambliss is requesting a sixth year of eligibility for medical reasons while Aguilar is requesting an eighth seasonby arguing that his junior college seasons should be exempt.

NCAA president Charlie Baker says that 95% of schools “play by the rules,” as in most schools don't support a player whose eligibility has expired. Others meanwhile file supportive briefs with the court and hold a roster spot for players such as Bediako, Chambliss and Aguilar. 

In an interview with Yahoo Sports in January, Sankey bemoaned the NCAA’s waiver process related to eligibility, saying that “the frustration level is building” within his conference.

“Dating back to the fall with decisions about basketball eligibility through last week, the phone rings incessantly and aggressively with commentary about what’s going on,” said Sankey, who acknowledged in a story last month that some in his league want to consider a conference-only governance model in the absence of national enforcement.

“Coaches just want to know who is eligible for recruitment and we’ll all compete. When they are surprised, you push the boundaries,” Sankey said.

“When they are told here’s the structure, my experience is coaches are going to push the boundaries and then you need oversight and accountability to bring the boundaries back. I don’t think this is frustration. This is the reality,” he continued. “Wait a second, these boundaries keep shifting. You’ve seen coach after coach go to the microphone and ask ‘What are we doing?’ All of them have thought about pushing boundaries but when you have so many leaders of programs asking what are we doing, there’s a communication problem, policy problem or an understanding problem or all three.”

Baker empathizes with frustrated coaches: “The phone calls I get from coaches and ADs are pretty consistent: ‘I don’t like it when what judge ends up in front of and what state they’re in determines whether somebody gets to play another year; that’s not fair!’ I have a hard time arguing with that.”