Connect with us

Published

on

The NCAA returns to a federal courtroom Wednesday to continue its fight against one of the many current challenges to its amateurism-based business model.

If this slow march toward something more akin to professional sports is starting to feel to you like the equivalent of an 18-play, 14-minute drive engineered by a triple-option offense, you’re not alone. The legal battles that have occupied the past several college football offseasons are tedious, repetitive and filled with a head-spinning menu of overlapping threats. It’s still unclear which threat among the current options has the best chance of breaking through, but the NCAA enters this offseason looking increasingly like a defense spread thin and on its heels, hoping for some unexpected help to get a stop.

Wednesday’s hearing in front of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia is the next step in the Johnson v. NCAA case, in which several former college athletes argue they should have been paid an hourly wage like other student workers on their campuses. The NCAA contends that its business is unique and that the normal rules that determine whether someone fits the definition of an employee don’t make sense for college athletes. The appellate judges will eventually decide whether the standard tests for employee status should be applied to college athletes and their schools.

“This particular case is flying under the radar compared to some of the others we hear about much more frequently, but it’s important,” said Sarah Wake, who advises universities on athletic compliance issues in her role as an attorney at McGuireWoods.

Wake said the Johnson case is further along in its legal process than many of the other threats facing the NCAA. Although it’s tough to predict which one is most likely to deliver a major blow to amateurism in college sports, each new threat increases the odds that some challenger will find a sympathetic ear with the power to force significant change.

“One of these things is going to stick,” Wake said. “It’s only a matter of time before something goes in favor of the student-athletes.”

By 2024, the College Football Playoff will triple in size and the two most powerful football conferences in the country will officially welcome four of the sport’s biggest brand names (Texas and Oklahoma will play their first season in the SEC that year, and USC and UCLA are scheduled to arrive in the Big Ten). Those changes were sparked and accelerated by the exchange of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Where will college athletes stand in this multibillion-dollar industry by then? Here’s what you need to know about how the Johnson case could provide an answer and where it fits among the looming legal forces reshaping college sports:

What is the Johnson case?

Filed by former Villanova football player Trey Johnson, this case argues that college athletes fit the definition of an employee and have been denied rights that are protected in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Those rights include making a minimum hourly wage and overtime pay.

Plaintiff’s attorney Paul McDonald said his goal is to give athletes the same kind of rights that fellow students who take tickets or sell concessions to their games have when they are working for the university.

“All these years they’ve said you can’t be both students and employees, but we’ve always had kids working on campus, working in dining halls, libraries and offices, working at the games themselves,” McDonald said. “They’re trying to disadvantage athletes vis-à-vis other kids on campus. It seems fundamentally unfair to do that.”

The NCAA and its lawyers have argued in court documents that playing a sport in college is not work done in exchange for compensation. They say that it is instead part of the educational experience for athletes on campus. To make athletes employees of their school, some members have argued, is not affordable for most college athletic departments. NCAA members say they’re open to “modernizing” their rules but have drawn a hard line at calling their athletes school employees.

What’s happening this week?

This week’s hearing is part of an interlocutory appeal — an appeal filed on a specific issue in the middle of a case before a verdict is reached. The NCAA asked U.S. District Judge John Padova to dismiss the lawsuit on the basis that other circuit courts have already determined that playing a college sport doesn’t count as work. Padova declined that request, and now the NCAA is appealing his decision in an effort to prevent the case from moving forward.

The appellate court won’t make a ruling Wednesday (that will likely take several weeks or months), but the questions asked might provide some insight into how the judges are viewing the NCAA’s request. For example, late last month the judges asked lawyers from both sides to be prepared to discuss the impact that making athletes into employees could have on Title IX obligations for the schools — an indication that the court is considering the broader implications of its decision.

If other courts have already ruled in favor of the NCAA, what’s different now?

The 9th Circuit and 7th Circuit courts have both ruled that college athletes are not employees protected by FLSA law. Those cases (Dawson v. NCAA and Berger v. NCAA) concluded in 2019 and 2016, respectively. The idea of viewing college athletes as employees is less jarring now than it was even a few years ago, thanks in large part to changes in name, image and likeness rules. Other courts have also shown less deference in the past few years to the NCAA’s argument that it’s not like other industries — most notably the U.S. Supreme Court when it ruled unanimously that the organization was violating antitrust law in the June 2021 Alston v. NCAA case.

“The general sentiment has shifted in a lot of minds,” sports attorney Mit Winter said. “In the past it was hard to even think about college athletes as employees.”

The Supreme Court’s decision in the Alston case — especially Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion — opened the door to viewing the NCAA in the same light as other entertainment industry groups rather than an academic-focused institution, which makes every legal challenge the organization has faced since then a larger potential threat.

What are the other legal battles the NCAA is fighting?

Two other groups are fighting for employee status for college athletes using a different legal lever — the National Labor Relations Board. Success for the claimants in either of those cases could potentially lead to the ability for college athletes to form unions and bargain collectively. One of those efforts took a significant step forward in December, but it is also still likely at least a year from reaching a conclusion.

Antitrust lawsuits also remain a large, looming threat for the NCAA. While the Alston decision affirmed it was illegal for the NCAA to limit what kind of academic-related benefits a school could provide to its athletes, others are already looking to expand that list of benefits. Another antitrust lawsuit (House v. NCAA) making its way through the courts could take away the NCAA’s power to enforce any restrictions on endorsements for college athletes and put the association on the hook to pay a potentially crippling financial settlement to past athletes who were prevented from making endorsement money while in college. That case isn’t slated to reach a trial until September 2024.

Outside the courtroom, NCAA leaders are increasingly wary of state lawmakers creating legislation that either grants employees’ rights to college athletes or would force schools to share significant portions of their revenue with teams that turn a profit. It was, after all, state legislators who forced the NIL rule changes into existence after years of unsuccessful legal attempts. They could prove to be a similar catalyst in the next frontier of professionalizing college sports.

What is the NCAA’s argument in the Johnson case?

The NCAA’s lawyers have presented the court with other examples of industries in which the normal tests of employee status don’t effectively capture the “economic reality” of the relationship between parties. They have successfully argued that the athlete-to-school relationship deserves special consideration in the Berger and Dawson cases mentioned above.

McDonald says the root source of legal precedent for their argument is a case called Vanskike v. Peters. A judge in that case ruled that inmates who do work while they are incarcerated don’t qualify as employees of the prison. The judge justified the ruling by citing the 13th Amendment, which says that slavery is illegal except as punishment for a crime.

Are they really comparing college athletes to prison inmates?

No, not really. The NCAA’s lawyers use the Vanskike case to argue that the court system recognizes there are some circumstances when the normal test for employee status doesn’t work. Although they say both college sports and imprisonment are examples of special circumstances, they aren’t arguing that the circumstances are the same.

Despite the noteworthy nuance in its argument, the NCAA is still building its legal argument on a case that tethers back to the slavery loophole of the 13th Amendment. McDonald, the plaintiff’s attorney, said the implication is, at best, racially insensitive given the high percentage of Black athletes in the NCAA’s most profitable sports.

The NCAA and its lawyers were certainly aware of the comparisons they might be inviting by mentioning college sports and a prison labor case in the same legal filings. Legal analysts say that, if nothing else, the use of the Vanskike case at least illustrates the limited options the NCAA has to make its best case.

“There is nuance in the argument, but it just looks bad. It’s tone-deaf,” Winter said. “The people who work in the NCAA are smart people. They had to have known and considered the PR aspect of it. They probably just determined: This is the argument we have to make to put forth our best arguments.”

What happens if the appellate court rules against the NCAA?

The NCAA could appeal the 3rd Circuit’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court immediately, or it might wait to see how the case concludes in the district court. In either event, if the plaintiffs are going to succeed in making athletes into employees, it won’t happen before the NCAA asks the Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue.

The country’s highest court declines the overwhelming majority of requests it receives for appeal, but there’s reason to believe this case could have better odds than most of piquing the justices’ interest. If the 3rd Circuit judge rules in favor of the plaintiffs in this case, that will be disagreeing with previous rulings in other federal circuits on a high-profile subject. Those types of inconsistencies are often what garners interest from the Supreme Court.

What else is the NCAA doing to maintain its current rules?

At the NCAA convention last month, board of governors chair Linda Livingstone told reporters that the NCAA wanted federal legislators to create a new law that would codify their argument that college athletes aren’t employees and give them some protection against the antitrust lawsuits they are facing. Livingstone said she felt a sense of urgency to get a new law because “Congress is really the only entity that can affirm student-athletes’ unique status.”

NCAA members are hoping that the arrival of the organization’s new president — former Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker — will help them make some friends on Capitol Hill when he starts his tenure March 1. Lobbying efforts under outgoing president Mark Emmert failed to gain any real momentum in Washington. Even if they are able to gain more of a foothold with legislators moving forward, Livingstone and others realize they are fighting against time to try to get a new law signed before one of the ongoing legal efforts deems athletes to be employees. Wednesday’s hearing could provide a good indication of how short their window might be.

Continue Reading

Sports

New rules for EBUGs? 84 games? What to know about the NHL’s new CBA

Published

on

By

New rules for EBUGs? 84 games? What to know about the NHL's new CBA

The NHL’s board of governors and the NHLPA’s membership have ratified a new collective bargaining agreement. The current CBA runs through the end of the 2025-26 season, with the new one carrying through the end of the 2029-30 season.

While the continuation of labor peace is the most important development for a league that has endured multiple work stoppages this millennium, there are a number of wrinkles that are noteworthy to fans.

ESPN reporters Ryan S. Clark, Kristen Shilton and Greg Wyshynski break it all down for you here:

Draft recap: All 224 picks
Grades for all 32 teams
Winners and losers

When does this new CBA take effect?

The new NHL CBA is set to begin on Sept. 16, 2026 and runs through Sept. 15, 2030. Including the coming season, that gives the NHL five years of labor peace, and would make the fastest both sides have reached an extension in Gary Bettman’s tenure as NHL commissioner.

It’s also the first major negotiation for NHLPA head Marty Walsh, who stepped into the executive director role in 2023 — Shilton

What are the big differences in the new CBA compared to the current one?

There are a few major headlines from the new CBA.

First are the schedule changes: the league will move to an 84-game regular season, with a shortened preseason (a maximum of four games), so each team is still able to play every opponent while divisional rivals have four games against one another every other season.

There will also be alterations to contract lengths, going to a maximum seven-year deal instead of the current eight-year mark; right now, a player can re-sign for eight years with his own team or seven with another in free agency, while the new CBA stipulates it’ll be seven or six years, respectively.

Deferred salaries will also be on the way out. And there will be a new position established for a team’s full-time emergency backup goaltender — or EBUG — where that player can practice and travel with the team.

The CBA also contains updated language on long-term injured reserve and how it can be used, particularly when it comes to adding players from LTIR to the roster for the postseason — Shilton

What’s the motivation for an 84-game season?

The new CBA expands the regular season to 84 games and reduces the exhibition season to four games per team. Players with 100 games played in their NHL careers can play in a maximum of two exhibition games. Players who competed in at least 50 games in the previous season will have a maximum of 13 days of training camp.

The NHL had an 84-game season from 1992 to 1994, when the league and NHLPA agreed to add two neutral-site games to every team’s schedule. But since 1995-96, every full NHL regular season has been 82 games.

For at least the past four years, the league has had internal discussions about adding two games to the schedule while decreasing the preseason. The current CBA restricted teams from playing more than 82 games, so expansion of the regular season required collective bargaining.

There was a functional motivation behind the increase in games: Currently, each team plays either three or four games against divisional opponents, for a total of 26 games; they play three games against non-divisional teams within their own conference, for a total of 24 games; and they play two games, home and away, against opponents from the other conference for a total of 32 games. Adding two games would allow teams to even out their divisional schedule, while swapping in two regular-season games — with regular-season crowd sizes and prices — for two exhibition games.

The reduction of the preseason would also give the NHL the chance to start the regular season earlier, perhaps in the last week of September. Obviously, given the grind of the current regular season and the playoffs, there’s concern about wear and tear on the players with two additional games. But the reduction of training camp and the exhibition season was appealing to players, and they signed off on the 84-game season in the new CBA. — Wyshynski

play

1:49

Why Mitch Marner is a great fit for Vegas

Greg Wyshynski reports on Mitch Marner getting traded from the Maple Leafs to the Golden Knights.

How do the new long-term injured reserve rules work?

The practice of teams using long-term injured reserve (LTIR) to create late-season salary cap space — only to have the injured player return for the first game of the playoffs after sitting out game No. 82 of the regular season — tracks back to 2015. That’s when the Chicago Blackhawks used an injured Patrick Kane‘s salary cap space to add players at the trade deadline. Kane returned for the start of the first round, and eventually won the Conn Smythe as playoff MVP in their Stanley Cup win.

Since then, the NHL has seen teams such as the Tampa Bay Lightning (Nikita Kucherov 2020-21), Vegas Golden Knights (Mark Stone, 2023), Florida Panthers (Matthew Tkachuk, 2024) also use LTIR to their advantage en route to Stanley Cup wins.

The NHL has investigated each occurrence of teams using LTIR and then having players return for the playoffs, finding nothing actionable — although the league is currently investigating the Edmonton Oilers use of LTIR for Evander Kane, who sat out the regular season and returned in the first round of the most recent postseason.

Last year, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said that if “the majority” of general managers wanted a change to this practice, the NHL would consider it. Some players weren’t happy about the salary cap loophole.

Ron Hainsey, NHLPA assistant executive director, said during the Stanley Cup Final that players have expressed concern at different times “either public or privately” about misuse of long-term injured reserve. He said that the NHL made closing that loophole “a priority for them” in labor talks.

Under the new CBA, the total salary and bonuses for “a player or players” that have replaced a player on LTIR may not exceed the amount of total salary and bonuses of the player they are replacing. For example: In 2024, the Golden Knights put winger Stone and his $9.5 million salary on LTIR, given that he was out because of a lacerated spleen. The Golden Knights added $10.8 million in salary to their cap before the trade deadline in defenseman Noah Hanifin and forwards Tomas Hertl and Anthony Mantha.

But the bigger tweak to the LTIR rule states that “the average amounts of such replacement player(s) may not exceed the prior season’s average league salary.” According to PuckPedia, the average player salary last season was $3,817,293, for example.

The CBA does allow an exception to these LTIR rules, with NHL and NHLPA approval, based on how much time the injured player is likely to miss. Teams can exceed these “average amounts,” but the injured player would be ineligible to return that season or in the postseason.

But the NHL and NHLPA doubled-down on discouraging teams from abusing LTIR to go over the salary cap in the Stanley Cup playoffs by establishing “playoff cap counting” for the first time. — Wyshynski

What is ‘playoff cap counting’ and how will it affect the postseason?

In 2021, the Carolina Hurricanes lost to Tampa Bay in the Eastern Conference playoffs. That’s when defenseman Dougie Hamilton famously lamented that his team fell to a Lightning squad “that’s $18 million over the cap or whatever they are,” as Tampa Bay used Kucherov’s LTIR space in the regular season before he returned for the playoffs.

Even more famously, Kucherov wore a T-shirt that read “$18M OVER THE CAP” during their Stanley Cup championship celebration.

The NHL and NHLPA have attempted to put an end to this creative accounting — in combination with the new LTIR rules in the regular season — through a new CBA provision called “playoff cap counting.”

By 3 p.m. local time or five hours before a playoff game — whatever is earlier — teams will submit a roster of 18 players and two goaltenders to NHL Central Registry. There will be a “playoff playing roster averaged club salary” calculated for that roster that must be under the “upper limit” of the salary cap for that team. The “averaged club salary” is the sum of the face value averaged amounts of the player salary and bonuses for that season for each player on the roster, and all amounts charged to the team’s salary cap.

Teams can make changes to their rosters after that day’s deadline, provided they’ve cleared it with NHL Central Registry.

play

1:54

How Aaron Ekblad, Panthers benefit from staying together

Greg Wyshynski reports on Aaron Ekblad signing a new deal that keeps him with the Panthers for eight more years.

The “upper limit” for an individual team is the leaguewide salary cap ceiling minus any cap penalties for contract buyouts; 35-plus players or players with one-way contracts demoted to the minor leagues; retained salary in trades; cap recapture penalties; or contract grievance settlements.

The cap compliance is only for the players participating in a given postseason game. As one NHL player agent told ESPN: “You can have $130 million in salaries on your total roster once the playoffs start, but the 18 players and two goalies that are on the ice must be cap-compliant.”

These rules will be in effect for the first two seasons of the new CBA (2026-28). After that, either the NHL or the NHLPA can reopen this section of the CBA for “good faith discussions about the concerns that led to the election to reopen and whether these rules could be modified in a manner that would effectively address such concerns.”

If there’s no resolution of those concerns, the “playoff cap counting” will remain in place for the 2028-29 season. — Wyshynski

Did the NHL CBA make neck guards mandatory?

Professional leagues around the world have adjusted their player equipment protection standards since Adam Johnson’s death in October 2023. Johnson, 29, was playing for the Nottingham Panthers of England’s Elite Ice Hockey League when he suffered a neck laceration from an opponent’s skate blade.

The AHL mandated cut-resistant neck protection for players and officials for the 2024-25 season. The IIHF did the same for international tournaments, while USA Hockey required all players under the age of 18 to wear them.

Now, the NHL and NHLPA have adjusted their standards for neck protection in the new CBA.

Beginning with the 2026-27 season, players who have zero games of NHL experience will be required to wear “cut-resistant protection on the neck area with a minimum cut level protection score of A5.” The ANSI/ISEA 105-2016 Standard rates neck guards on a scale from A1 to A9, and players are encouraged to seek out neck protection that’s better than the minimal requirement.

Players with NHL experience prior to the 2026-27 season will not be required to wear neck protection. — Wyshynski

What’s the new player dress code?

The NHL and NHLPA agreed that teams will no longer be permitted “to propose any rules concerning player dress code.”

Under the previous CBA, the NHL was the only North American major men’s pro sports league with a dress code specified through collective bargaining. Exhibit 14, Rule 5 read: “Players are required to wear jackets, ties and dress pants to all Club games and while traveling to and from such games unless otherwise specified by the Head Coach or General Manager.”

That rule was deleted in the new CBA.

The only requirement now for players is that they “dress in a manner that is consistent with contemporary fashion norms.”

Sorry, boys: No toga parties on game days. — Wyshynski

Does the new CBA cover the Olympics beyond 2026?

Yes. The NHL and NHLPA have committed to participate in the 2030 Winter Olympics, scheduled to be held in the French Alps. As usual, the commitment is ” subject to negotiation of terms acceptable to each of the NHL, NHLPA, IIHF and/or IOC.”

And as we saw with the 2022 Beijing Games, having a commitment in the CBA doesn’t guarantee NHL players on Olympic ice. — Wyshynski

Did the NHL end three-team salary retention trades?

It has become an NHL trade deadline tradition. One team retains salary on a player so he can fit under another team’s salary cap. But to make the trade happen, those teams invite a third team to the table to retain even more of that salary to make it work.

Like when the Lightning acquired old friend Yanni Gourde from the Seattle Kraken last season. Gourde made $5,166,667 against the cap. Seattle traded him to Detroit for defenseman Kyle Aucoin, and the Kraken retained $2,583,334 in salary. The Red Wings then retained $1,291,667 of Gourde’s salary in sending him to Tampa Bay for a fourth-round pick, allowing the Lightning to fit him under their cap.

Though the NHL will still allow retained salary transactions, there’s now a mandatory waiting period until that player’s salary can be retained in a second transaction. A second retained salary transaction may not occur within 75 regular-season days of the first retained salary transaction.

Days outside of the regular-season schedule do not count toward the required 75 regular-season days, and therefore the restriction might span multiple seasons, according to the CBA. — Wyshynski

Can players now endorse alcoholic beverages?

Yes. The previous CBA banned players from any endorsement or sponsorship of alcoholic beverages. That has been taken out of the new CBA. If only Bob Beers were still playing …

While players remain prohibited from any endorsement or sponsorship of tobacco products, a carryover from the previous CBA, they’re also banned from endorsement or sponsorship of “cannabis (including CBD) products.” — Wyshynski

What are the new parameters for Emergency Goaltender Replacement?

The NHL is making things official with the emergency backup goaltender (EBUG) position.

In the past, that third goalie spot went to someone hanging out in the arena during a game, ready to jump in for either team if both of their own goaltenders were injured or fell ill during the course of play. Basically, it was a guy in street clothes holding onto the dream of holding down an NHL crease.

Now, the league has given permanent status to the EBUG role. That player will travel with and practice for only one club. But there are rules involved in their employment.

This CBA designates that to serve as a team’s emergency goaltender replacement, the individual cannot have played an NHL game under an NHL contract, appeared in more than 80 professional hockey games, have been in professional hockey within the previous three seasons, have a contractual obligation that would prevent them from fulfilling their role as the EBUG or be on the reserve or restricted free agent list of an NHL club.

Teams must submit one designated EBUG 48 hours before the NHL regular season starts. During the season, teams can declare that player 24 hours before a game. — Shilton

What’s the deal with eliminating deferred salaries?

The new CBA will prohibit teams from brokering deferred salary arrangements, meaning players will be paid in full during the contract term lengths. This is meant to save players from financial uncertainty and makes for simplified contract structures with the club.

There are examples of players who had enormous signing bonuses paid up front or had structured their deals to include significant payouts when they ended. Both tactics could serve to lower an individual’s cap hit over the life of a deal. Now that won’t be an option for teams or players to use in negotiations. — Shilton

What’s different about contract lengths?

Starting under the new CBA, the maximum length of a player contract will go from eight years to seven years if he’s re-signing with the same club, and down to just six years (from the current seven) if he signs with a new team.

So, for example, a player coming off his three-year, entry-level contract could re-sign only with that same team for up to seven years, and he’ll become an unrestricted free agent sooner than the current agreement would allow.

This could benefit teams that have signed players to long-term contracts that didn’t age well (for whatever reason) as they won’t be tied as long to that decision. And for players, it can help preserve some of their prime years if they want to move on following a potential 10 (rather than 11) maximum seasons with one club. — Shilton

What does the new league minimum salary look like? How does it compare to the other men’s professional leagues?

Under the new CBA, the minimum salary for an NHL player will rise from $775,000 to $1 million by the end of the four-year agreement. Although gradual, it is a significant rise for a league in which the salary cap presents more challenges compared to its counterparts.

For example, the NHL will see its salary cap rise to $95.5 million in 2025-26, compared to that of the NFL in which Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott’s highest three-year average is $61.6 million.

So how does the new NHL minimum salary upon the CBA’s completion compare to its counterparts in the Big 4?

The NBA league minimum for the 2025-26 season is $1.4 million for a rookie, while players with more than 10 years can earn beyond $3.997 million in a league that has a maximum of 15 roster spots

The NFL, which has a 53-player roster, has a league minimum of $840,000 for rookies in 2025, while a veteran with more than seven years will earn $1.255 million.

MLB’s CBA, which expires after the 2026 season, has the minimum salary for the 2025 season set at $760,000, and that figure increases to $780,000 next season. — Clark

Is this Gary Bettman’s final CBA as commissioner?

Possibly. The Athletic reported in January that the board of governors had begun planning for Bettman’s eventual retirement “in a couple of years,” while starting the process to find his successor.

Bettman became the NHL’s first commissioner in 1993, and has the distinction of being the longest-serving commissioner among the four major men’s professional leagues in North America. He is also the oldest. Bettman turned 73 in June, while contemporaries Roger Goodell, Rob Manfred and Adam Silver are all in their early- to mid-60s.

That’s not to suggest he couldn’t remain in place. There is a precedent of commissioners across those leagues who remained in those respective roles into their 70s. Ford Frick, who served as the third commissioner of MLB, was 71 when he stepped down in 1965. There are more recent examples than Frick, as former NBA commissioner David Stern stepping down in 2014 when he was 71, and former MLB commissioner Bud Selig stepped down in 2015 at age 80. — Clark

Continue Reading

Sports

QB Retzlaff announces his withdrawal from BYU

Published

on

By

QB Retzlaff announces his withdrawal from BYU

Jake Retzlaff announced on Friday that he’s withdrawing from BYU, formally initiating his transfer process from the school.

Retzlaff, BYU’s starting quarterback last year, said in an Instagram post that he made the “difficult decision” to withdraw and that he plans to “step away” from the BYU program. The post makes public what had been expected, as Retzlaff began informing his teammates and coaches in late June of his intent to transfer.

According to ESPN sources, Retzlaff’s path to transfer to a new school is not expected to come from the NCAA transfer portal. With Retzlaff just short of graduating, which would make the transfer process more traditional, he plans to simply leave BYU and then enroll at a new school.

That path is not a common one, but there’s precedent. That includes former Wisconsin defensive back Xavier Lucas leaving school this winter and enrolling at the University of Miami.

Retzlaff expressed his gratitude for his time at BYU, saying “it has meant more to me than just football.” He added that he’s “excited to turn the page and embrace the next chapter.”

BYU officials generally avoided the topic of Retzlaff at Big 12 media days this week, deferring to him to make a statement on his next move.

In a statement on Friday, BYU athletics said: “We are grateful for the time Jake Retzlaff has spent at BYU. As he moves forward, BYU Athletics understands and respects Jake’s decision to withdraw from BYU, and we wish him all the best as he enters the next phase of his career.”

Retzlaff’s departure comes in the wake of BYU’s planned seven-game suspension of him for violating the school’s honor code.

That suspension arose after he was accused in a lawsuit of raping a woman in 2023. The lawsuit ended up being dismissed on June 30, with the parties jointly agreeing to dismiss with prejudice, but Retzlaff’s response included an admission of premarital sex, which is a violation of the BYU honor code.

Retzlaff went 11-2 as BYU’s starting quarterback in 2024, throwing for 2,947 yards and 20 touchdowns. His departure leaves BYU with a three-way quarterback race this summer to replace him, with no clear favorite.

Continue Reading

Sports

Five-star tight end Prothro commits to Georgia

Published

on

By

Five-star tight end Prothro commits to Georgia

Georgia beat Florida and Texas to its second five-star pledge in the 2026 class on Saturday with a commitment from tight end Kaiden Prothro, the No. 19 overall prospect in the 2026 ESPN 300.

Prothro, a 6-foot-7, 210-pound recruit from Bowdon, Georgia, is ESPN’s No. 2 overall tight end and viewed as one of the top pass catchers at any position in the current class. A priority in-state target for coach Kirby Smart, Prothro took official visits to Auburn, Alabama, Georgia, Florida and Texas before narrowing his recruitment to the Bulldogs, Gators and Longhorns last month.

He announced his commitment to Georgia in a ceremony at Bowdon High School, where Prothro has hauled in 89 passes for 2,034 yards and 35 touchdowns over the past two seasons.

Prothro arrives as the Bulldogs’ 17th ESPN 300 pledge in an incoming recruiting class that sits at No. 2 in ESPN’s latest class rankings for the cycle, joining quarterback Jared Curtis (No. 6 overall) as the program’s second five-star commit in 2026. He now stands as the top-ranked member of a growing Georgia pass-catcher class that also includes four-star wide receivers Brady Marchese (No. 62) and Ryan Mosley (No. 120) and three-star Craig Dandridge.

The Bulldogs, who produced six NFL draft picks at tight ends from 2019-24, have forged a reputation for developing top tight end talent under Smart and assistant coach Todd Hartley. Georgia signed ESPN’s top two tight end prospects — Elyiss Williams and Ethan Barbour — in the 2025 class, and Prothro now follows four-stars Brayden Fogle (No. 142 overall) and Lincoln Keyes (No. 238) as the program’s third tight end pledge in 2026.

Those arrivals, along with eligibility beyond 2025 for current Georgia tight ends Lawson Luckie and Jaden Reddell, could make for a crowded tight end room when Prothro steps on campus next year.

However, Prothro is expected to distinguish himself at the college level as a versatile downfield option capable of creating mismatches with a unique blend of size, speed and physicality in the mold of former two-time All-America Georgia tight end Brock Bowers. His father Clarence told ESPN that Georgia intends to utilize Prothro across roles, including flex tight end and jumbo receiver, and said scheme fit was a key driving factor in his son’s decision.

A three-time state football champion, Prothro caught 33 passes for 831 yards and 13 touchdowns as a sophomore in 2023. He eclipsed 1,200-yards in his junior campaign last fall, closing 2024 with 56 receptions (21.4 yards per catch) and 22 receiving touchdowns en route to a 13-2 finish and a third consecutive state championship. Prothro is also an All-Region baseball player and was credited with 20.7 points and 16.5 rebounds per game in his junior basketball season.

Continue Reading

Trending