Zakai Zeigler filed a lawsuit against the NCAA regarding his eligibility back in May, pushing to play in 2025-26 after alleging that the rule permitting just four seasons of competition in a five-year window is “in an unlawful restraint of trade under federal and state antitrust laws.” In the same lawsuit, he alleges his NIL valuation for the upcoming season would fall between $2 million and $4 million based on his value as an “upperclassman with a proven performance record and high visibility, especially in a high-profile conference like the SEC.”
The NCAA’s response? Get a job — one that doesn’t include playing basketball for the Tennessee Volunteers (or anywhere in the collegiate ranks, for that matter). They denied Zeigler’s motion on Monday, making it clear the lawsuit only hurts future student-athletes, particularly incoming freshmen in need of those roster spots the post-graduate players out of eligibility are trying to take.
Though Zeigler says a fifth year of eligibility would allow him to cash out on one final lucrative NIL deal in college while developing as a potential pro, the NCAA said if the Tennessee star “had a viable path to the NBA, given his resume, he would already be a viable prospect. After all, NBA scouts would have seen him play in 138 collegiate contests. … There is no evidence that one more season of participation in college basketball is necessary (for Zeigler to play professionally)” considering he’s already met the age and experience requirements to enter the draft, but passed multiple times in favor of a degree.
“While Plaintiff focuses only on what that means for himself, he does so to the detriment of the entering student-athletes who dream of being the next Zakai Zeigler,” the NCAA said. “… College athletics is a means to a better end for student-athletes — not the end itself.”
Ouch.
It’s not just the NCAA defending itself in the lawsuit, either, which will be heard by a U.S. District Judge on Friday. The U.S. Department of Justice has also decided to voice its opinion on Zeigler’s lawsuit — a first in eligibility cases. Though it didn’t explicitly take a side, the DOJ did ask the court to apply a “flexible rule-of-reason approach” when hearing the case while considering the NCAA v. Alston ruling in 2021 regarding the violation of antitrust laws.
In short, the court can decide how it chooses to decide, but the eligibility rules help maintain fairness and academic standards and following those rules can prevent schools from gaining unfair athletic advantages. It’s a rule that preserves academic integrity and distinguishes them from professional sports.
“Eligibility rules — like the scholarship rules upheld in the Alston litigation — not only can enhance consumer demand—potentially leading to greater compensation—but also can enhance quality in the labor market by preserving ‘the distinction between college sports and professional sports,’” the DOJ wrote. “… We ask this Court to take into account the legal principles laid out above in applying the rule of reason. Whether and to what extent specific anticompetitive effects and procompetitive benefits arise from the Four Seasons Rule in the student-athlete labor market are factual questions to be answered based on the record at the upcoming hearing, and the United States takes no position on those facts.
“We urge the court, however, to consider how the rule may benefit competition in the relevant labor market, including by potentially enhancing the quality of the student-athlete experience.”
In other words, you are not special, Zakai Zeigler. You played in 138 games across four seasons, averaging 29.3 minutes per contest en route to all-time status at Tennessee. Owning the school record for assists (747) and steals (251) while sitting in fifth among games and minutes played, No. 18 in scoring at 1,556 career points, it’s time to move on.
Get a job. It’s time. The NCAA already thought so, and now, the U.S. Department of Justice agrees.
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.
