​Former Dayton Flyers guard Javon Bennett and former Belmont High School center Shawn Phillips Jr. could be eligible for a fifth year of playing time after a ruling on Thursday, July 9, by a judge in Hamilton County. Bennett and Phillips were among 15 college basketball players who began their college careers in 2022 and have completed four seasons, all of whom filed a lawsuit in June seeking an injunction against the NCAA’s age-based eligibility framework. The new rule would permit athletes to compete for up to five seasons within five years, but it would exclude players who had already exhausted their eligibility under the old rules in 2026.
Hamilton County Judge Christopher Wagner granted a preliminary injunction on Thursday, siding with the players. A case management conference is scheduled for August 4 to determine the next steps. In his ruling, Wagner wrote: “Sport is the most important of the least important things,” and offered two initial observations. First, he noted that while the NCAA claims it is a voluntary association, it operates more like a highly lucrative professional sports league. Second, he emphasized that the parties’ interests seem largely detached from academics; with the exception of one player, no attorney, coach, player, or even the defendant themselves focused on academic considerations. The plaintiffs are seeking equitable relief.
MJ Collins, one of the players involved in the lawsuit, committed to Cincinnati soon after news of the injunction became public. Collins had played for Jerrod Calhoun last season at Utah State, and Calhoun is now Cincinnati’s head coach. Bennett spent three of his last four seasons at Dayton, after beginning his college career at Merrimack. Phillips, a Dayton native who spent two years at Belmont, also played for LSU and Arizona State before finishing his collegiate career at Missouri.
The judge’s decision followed testimony from three college coaches on July 1: Jerrod Calhoun of Cincinnati, Richard Pitino of Xavier, and Dustin Ford of Akron. Wagner noted that the NCAA and its supporters argued that granting the injunction could harm players who are already eligible. However, he highlighted that these plaintiffs are not guaranteed roster spots and that the coaches who testified indicated they have open spots on their rosters and would consider the plaintiffs for those openings. The plaintiffs are not seeking to steal a roster spot or to create an extra one; rather, they want the chance to compete for an already available slot. The defendants had suggested that prior statements and expectations implied the plaintiffs would receive another year of eligibility.
The NCAA indicated it would pursue all available avenues to overturn the injunction, including requesting a stay on the court’s order pending appeal. This case marks a notable challenge to the NCAA’s revised age-based eligibility policy, with the legal process continuing toward a potential appellate review. The next step in the litigation is a case management conference set for August 4, during which the court will outline the procedural path forward.