• College athletes suing for extra eligibility face inconsistent rulings
• Vanderbilt QB Diego Pavia won a key court battle over eligibility
• NCAA seeks limited liability from Congress amid rising lawsuits
• Legal expert predicts more cases could reach higher courts

The stream of lawsuits across the country from college athletes trying to grab another season of eligibility appears ready to fizzle out for a bit.

With fall football practice cranking up this week, players still hoping for a judge allowing them to take the field may be left waiting for a ruling that likely won’t help them compete again.

“We’re at a point in the summer where I think any athlete out there is going to know that it’s probably too late to file a case and be able to get relief on it,” said Sam Ehrlich, a professor of legal studies at Boise State studying the 2021 Alston ruling’s affect on college athletics.

Relief on a larger question surrounding eligibility may be a while coming, too: In cases from California to Wisconsin, judges have provided inconsistent results for players seeking legal help for another season and it may very well be a topic settled for good by a higher court.

Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia is perhaps the highest-profile athlete to win his court fight. The New Mexico State transfer sued the NCAA last fall, arguing that his junior college years should not count against his eligibility, citing the potential losses in earnings from name, image and likeness deals. U.S. District Judge William Campbell Jr. in Tennessee granted a preliminary injunction, ordering the NCAA to allow Pavia to play.

The NCAA is appealing Campbell’s decision but granted a blanket waiver that will allow Pavia and other athletes who played at non-NCAA Division I schools prior to enrollment an extra year of eligibility if they were going to exhaust their eligibility this year.

Pavia won. Others, such as Wisconsin cornerback Nyzier Fourqurean, have lost or are in limbo.

Practice starts July 30 for Southeastern Conference members Vanderbilt and Tennessee. Chris Bellamy and Targhee Lambson are among four football players waiting on the same federal judge who gave Pavia another season of football last December.

Some schools have helped by filing waivers. Others wait and hold a spot, letting the athlete fight the legal battle.

“They’re just kind of in limbo in the transfer portal because schools don’t really know whether they’re going to have eligibility,” Ehrlich said. “It’s a really weird situation right now.”

The NCAA would like Congress to grant limited liability protection to help address all the lawsuits over eligibility. NCAA President Charlie Baker noted in June that athletes had five years to play four seasons for about a century, a situation that changed recently. Baker told The Associated Press then that the NCAA has won more of these cases than the association lost.

“But the uncertainty it creates, the consequences of this for the next generation of young people if you play this thing out, are enormous,” Baker said. “Moving away from an academic calendar to sort of no calendar for college sports is hugely problematic.”

Duke coach Manny Diaz thought such eligibility issues would be addressed after the House settlement, which took effect July 1.

“All I have been told is once they got House out of the way they are going to be double back on a lot of these oddities and make sure eligibility is tied into a college career,” Diaz said at ACC media days. “We don’t want nine-year guys playing the sport.”

Thanks to the extra season added to careers for the coronavirus pandemic, the college eligibility calendar has been scrambled a bit. Pavia will be playing his sixth season after starting with two at New Mexico Military Institute, a junior college, then two more at New Mexico State.

Fullback Hayden Large played three NAIA seasons at Dordt before transferring to Iowa, where he will be playing his sixth season this fall after being granted another year.

Iowa coach Kirk Ferentz sees a simple solution in giving players five years to play five seasons. He’s also in favor of players who start in junior college having an extra year, even as he sees the need for a limit even if he doesn’t know what that should be.

“If a guy during his first year ends up being able to play five or six games, why not let him play?” Ferentz said. “It’s all about creating opportunity, in my mind. I’ve never understood the rationale for not doing that.”

Ehrlich is attempting to track all lawsuits against the NCAA, ranging from the House settlement ;name, image and likeness litigation; college athletes as employees; and Title IX lawsuits, along with other cases. Ehrlich has tracked more than a dozen lawsuits involving eligibility and common factors are hard to come by.

He saw three very different rulings from judges appointed by President Donald Trump. Standards of evidence for a preliminary injunction also have varied from judge to judge. Three cases have been appealed with other motions helping delay some waiver requests.

Ehrlich said there remains the chance a case lands before the U.S. Supreme Court.

“I don’t see these cases drying up anytime soon,” Ehrlich said.

___

AP National Writer Eddie Pells and AP Sports Writer Steve Reed contributed to this report.

The landscape of collegiate athletics continues to evolve following the landmark settlement in the House v. NCAA case. After federal Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement in the case, it opened up the ability for programs to pay college athletes directly.

The settlement states that programs will have access to a revenue-sharing pool of $20.5 million for payments to players, which is projected to increase during the 10-year contract.

The settlement also mandated that the NCAA pay $2.8 billion in back pay over the next decade to former athletes who competed from 2016 to the present.

The revenue-sharing program began on July 1 for the 2025 season.

As programs continue to navigate the new rules, name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals will still be in place, but will be more heavily scrutinized with penalties for programs that do not follow the regulations and exceed the limits.

If the rules weren’t clear enough already, President Trump decided to muddy the waters even further by signing an executive order that gives the NCAA some of the items it has been lobbying for.

In the executive order titled “President Donald J. Trump Saves College Sports,” Trump put future NIL deals in question by eliminating third-party, pay-for-play payments to college athletes.

The order prohibits third-party pay-for-play payments to athletes, but “does not apply to legitimate, fair-market-value compensation that a third-party provides to an athlete, such as for brand endorsement.”

NCAA President Charlie Baker thanked Trump in a statement, noting that there are still threats to college sports that federal legislation can effectively address.

The executive order did not address who would be in charge of enforcing the prohibition of pay-for-play, third-party payments to athletes.

Iowa’s newly Iowa’s newly-created “Flight Funds” program and the “Swarm Collective” could be effective by Trump’s new executive order.

More Hawkeyes News:

When reports surfaced that Tyran Stokes, the No. 1 recruit in the class of 2026, is expected to take an official visit to Gonzaga, the college basketball world took notice. Since the recent House settlement and the legalization of direct revenue sharing, schools without football programs (and without sprawling athletic departments) are newly positioned to compete for elite talent that had in the last five years or so been reserved for schools with a large enough donor base to pay for their services. The revenue-sharing model directs more institutional support to athletes across all sports, giving basketball-first programs like Gonzaga the financial firepower to recruit top-tier players without competing against football for resources.

This is a program that has landed five-stars, developed lottery picks, and earned No. 1 seeds in the past. But the economics of the NIL made it increasingly difficult of late for basketball-first schools to operate in the same recruiting tier as revenue-heavy powerhouses. Stokes’ interest (and that of other top recruits currently being courted by the Zags) suggests that Gonzaga’s development model now has the economic allure to attract players previously boxed out and earmarked for Power-5 schools.

Advertisement

So, How Good Is He Really?

Well, he’s the top recruit in the country for very good reason. Physically, he’s built like a tank, six-foot-eight, somewhere between 235-245 lbs., seven-foot wingspan, and an explosive vertical leap. He certainly doesn’t look it, but the dude must be built out of cannonballs and moon rocks. Imagine if Michael Ajayi somehow put on 20 lbs of muscle. That’s Stokes. Offensively, he’s a downhill playmaker who finishes through contact, rebounds aggressively, and finds teammates in space. He averaged 21 points, 9.3 rebounds, and nearly 4 assists last season for Notre Dame High School in California. He then followed that up with a starring role for Team USA, where he became the first player in U19 history to record a triple-double and averaged 12.2 points in just 18 minutes per game. His EYBL numbers back it up too—20 points, 8.3 boards, and top-ten scoring across the entire circuit. Every level he touches, he produces.

Defensively, Stokes is versatile, handsy, and aggressive. He moves well laterally for his size, can wall up against slashers, and switches comfortably across positions. His energy rarely drops, and his rebounding is elite for a wing. If you’re a coach, you can plug him into almost any system. If you’re a scout, you’re watching the jumper. That’s the one real question left. He shot just over 30% from three last season, and his free-throw numbers (mid-60s) suggest the touch isn’t all the way there. But the mechanics are clean, the volume is increasing, and the upside as a league-average shooter is very real.

Still, what makes this visit to Spokane so significant isn’t just the talent on tape. It’s who’s calling. Besides Gonzaga, Stokes has already been courted by Kansas, Kentucky, Oregon, USC, and Louisville (his hometown). He’s seen Allen Fieldhouse. He’s visited Rupp. He’s played for Tommy Lloyd on Team USA (and if you like playing for Tommy, wait til you play for his mentor and all-time great basketball mind Mark Few).

Advertisement

These are destination programs that usually close on players like Stokes. So why is Gonzaga still on the list?

The answer starts with fit. And it ends with what the program has quietly become: a landing spot for elite players who see Spokane as the most direct pathway to the NBA. And with the program’s pending move to the Pac-12 and a rapidly shifting NIL structure post–House settlement, the gap between Spokane and the so-called Blue Bloods is closing faster than anyone expected.

Why Stokes Fits Gonzaga

Few prospects in recent memory would arrive to Gonzaga with the physical readiness, big game experience, and upside that Stokes already possesses. In terms of size he’s just fine pounds and a couple inches shy of Graham Ike, but he’s lethal in transition and facilitates floor spacing from the wing. His unique blend of force and feel would instantly thrive within Gonzaga’s high-IQ, movement-based offense, especially with a veteran floor-marshal like Braeden Smith running point.

Advertisement

In terms of development opportunities for Stokes, Gonzaga gets players to the pros, yes, but more importantly, it equips them with the coachability, versatility, and physical tools necessary to keep them around in the league. It’s why NBA GMs now view Gonzaga in the same light as Kentucky and Duke–a professional finishing school that develops character, professionalism, and a team-first mindset in tandem with athletic performance.

For a player with Stokes’ ceiling—and the national attention that comes with it—Gonzaga offers something rare: a grounded, basketball-first community that treats their players as more than their market value. It’s a place where the pressure to succeed is met with support, where expectations are matched by belief, and where becoming a pro begins with becoming the kind of person who can handle it.

Why Gonzaga Can Now Compete for Stokes

Under the new revenue-sharing model, Division I schools can allocate up to $20.5 million per year to athletes. At football-first schools, that sum gets carved up across sprawling rosters, athletic departments, and compliance operations. But Gonzaga operates with single-sport precision. That gives Gonzaga the ability to direct a larger share of available revenue toward a smaller number of players, with fewer trade-offs and no internal competition for resources.

Advertisement

In practical terms, that means a player like Tyran Stokes could command more direct, structured compensation at Gonzaga than at any other school currently recruiting him. His visits have included Louisville, Kansas, Kentucky, Oregon, and USC—all high-major programs with football obligations that absorb a meaningful share of institutional funding. Gonzaga stands alone in that group: the only school without a football program, and therefore the only one capable of consolidating its revenue-sharing resources entirely around men’s basketball. That distinction is vital in an era where compensation is legal and expected, Stokes’s potential commitment to Gonzaga would quite literally be proof of concept that the new revenue-sharing model can preserve parity across conferences in the NIL era.

Final Thoughts

Tyran Stokes is a program-shaping talent—physically imposing, instinctually polished, and already equipped with the poise and processing speed that translate to the next level. His recruitment reflects that. But Gonzaga offers more than opportunity. With no football program, a unified donor base, and a basketball identity that has produced durable, high-character professionals, the program now occupies a rare position in the post-House era: fully resourced, culturally grounded, and built around player development in its fullest sense. Somehow, Gonzaga can not only compete for players like Stokes, it might have the strongest pitch for his eventual commitment. Stokes would be Gonzaga’s second No. 1 overall recruit, joining a short lineage that begins and ends with Chet Holmgren—and we’ve already seen how well that trajectory holds up in the league. Gonzaga can give Stokes the platform to rise, the community to stay grounded, and the space to grow into everything his future already promises.

Although Kentucky seems to be gaining ground as the frontrunner for Stokes’ commitment, the stink of the Calipari era still clings to Rupp like cheap cologne: loud, sweaty, and impossible to ignore. Mark Pope has done his best to exorcise the place, but no amount of holy water or leadership-summit charisma can scrub out a decade of ego, turnover, and early tournament flameouts. For most college hoops fans, the Wildcats still play the villain, and his potential commitment to Kentucky could feel to Louisville fans in his own hometown like seeing the pride of their city held up as proof that the University of Kentucky still runs the state.

Advertisement

Under the House settlement, Kentucky and Louisville’s NIL revenue will be divided across every varsity sport. That includes massive football programs with constant overhead and endless booster expectations. At Gonzaga, the entire athletic department is built around the long-standing success of its basketball program alone. The money should be substantial, the exposure is guaranteed, and the NBA outcomes are proven. For a player like Stokes, the choice should be a clear one.

More from slipperstillfits.com: