Story by
Why judge hasn’t decided Joey Aguilar’s eligibility for Tennessee vs NCAA
- Story by
- Why judge hasn’t decided Joey Aguilar’s eligibility for Tennessee vs NCAA
A Knox County judge must weigh antitrust law, accusations that he's a biased Tennessee football fan and the possibility of opening Pandora's box in the Joey Aguilar eligibility case .
That's why there's been no ruling as of Feb. 17 in Aguilar's request for a preliminary injunction against the NCAA's eligibility rules for former junior college players.
Advertisement
It's a complex case with high stakes, which Chancellor Chris Heagerty acknowledged in his final words at the injunction hearing at Knox County Chancey Court on Feb. 13.
"These issues are far-reaching. I know this is a Tennessee court, but it's my court. So I'm not going to get it wrong," Heagerty said. "… It's going to take a while, but it's not going to take too long. You should have my opinion in very short order."
The court was closed for a three-day weekend, capped by Presidents Day on Feb. 16. There's no indication when a ruling will come. But considering the potential impact of the decision and the hundreds of pages of court filings submitted, it could take a few more days or a week.
Heagerty extended Aguilar's temporary restraining order until an injunction decision, so the quarterback is currently eligible and awaiting his long-term fate.
Advertisement
This case is complicated with countless legal points to argue. But let's boil it down to three key issues that Heagerty must consider.
Would Joey Aguilar eligibility open Pandora's box?
At the heart of the case is a basic argument over what should constitute NCAA eligibility. The 24-year-old Aguilar has spent almost seven years in college football, but only the past three at NCAA schools.
The NCAA allows players to compete for four seasons within five years. And it counts junior college seasons toward that total and time period even though junior colleges are not part of the NCAA. Aguilar argues that junior college competition shouldn't count because junior colleges are not part of the NCAA.
Advertisement
Aguilar's side argues that this case is narrow. It applies to Aguilar's particular situation as a lowly junior college player who previously didn't get NIL money but now has the potential to earn millions as a valuable SEC quarterback if he plays one more season at Tennessee.
Indeed, very few junior college players ascend that sharply.
Aguilar's attorney, Cam Norris , also reminded Heagerty that under Tennessee antitrust law, Aguilar's case can't be turned into a class action lawsuit.
"So the relief that your honor enters, the only relief that we've asked for, is for Mr. Aguilar to be able to play in 2026," Norris told the court. "That does not harm the NCAA to have one player more to play football."
Advertisement
But the NCAA says this case is very broad with the potential to upend its longstanding eligibility rules. That side argues that if Aguilar succeeds in regaining his eligibility, countless other junior college players will flood the courts to extend their playing careers, and then Division II, Division III and NAIA college players will follow.
Other players undoubtedly are watching this case closely in hopes of piggybacking off Aguilar's lawsuit if he's granted the injunction. It would initially only help athletes in Tennessee with a similar fact pattern to Aguilar because the case is in state court. But it would certainly influence similar legal challenges in other states, at least indirectly, or pressure the NCAA to grant a blanket waiver to halt its eligibility rules nationwide.
Heagerty must consider the ramifications of his decision, especially if he rules in Aguilar's favor.
Chancellor Chris Heagerty questions Cam Norris, attorney for Tennessee quarterback Joey Aguilar, during a hearing for Aguilar in Knox County Chancery Court in Knoxville, Tenn., on Feb. 13, 2026.
Is Joey Aguilar owed NIL money or another Tennessee season?
Heagerty chided Norris for not providing an exact dollar figure that Aguilar would miss out on by not playing for Tennessee in the 2026 season.
Advertisement
Norris said UT has access to approximately $2 million in NIL money for the quarterback, but his value could go as high as $4 million.
Aguilar doesn't have a signed NIL contract, something he can't have without being granted eligibility, and the NIL market fluctuates wildly. Therefore, his damages aren't clearly defined.
NCAA attorney Taylor Askew argued that conceptual damages aren't good enough.
"(Aguilar's argument) ignores fundamental principles of antitrust law, which require plaintiffs to come forward with sound economic evidence based on current market realities," Askew wrote in a court filing. "None of that economic evidence is present here."
Advertisement
Heagerty could see that as a gap in Aguilar's case. If so, he could deny the injunction and invite Aguilar to take his argument to trial in hopes of recouping those monetary damages.
However, a trial would extend well beyond the 2026 football season. Even if Aguilar won and received monetary damages from the NCAA, he would never get another chance to play college football, which Norris argued is the definition of irreparable harm.
Heagerty could accept that argument and grant the injunction because there's no clearcut dollar figure that equates to playing a season of college football.
"You can ask any former player who ever donned the orange and white what it's worth to them to play a season for Tennessee or another Division I college football program," Norris said. "They would tell you it's a priceless experience. It can't be quantified with damages, which makes it irreparable."
Advertisement
Will Knoxville judge consider Tennessee fan reaction?
Public pressure from Tennessee fans also could play a part.
Aguilar led the SEC in passing yards last season. If Heagerty denies the injunction, declaring Aguilar ineligible, it could weaken the Tennessee football team in 2026.
That wouldn't play well with a portion of the UT fan base, including some voters. Heagerty ran unopposed for his position in 2022 and was elected to an eight-year term.
The NCAA claimed Aguilar is hoping for a UT bias.
"(Aguilar) here is betting that in a contest between the Court's allegiance to the University of Tennessee football and the law, this Court bleeds orange," Askew wrote in a court filing.
Advertisement
But Heagerty showed no signs of that influence at the hearing, when he interrogated several points from Aguilar's side. There was no outward appearance of bias.
Clearly, Heagerty is a UT fan. Not only is he a two-time UT graduate, but he also demonstrated a deep knowledge of Vols football history during the hearing. Heagerty referenced UT players from decades ago, recited portions of the 2026 schedule and praised Aguilar's play.
Perhaps that admiration could help Aguilar's case. But Heagerty's longstanding fandom also could work in the NCAA's favor.
Heagerty has followed UT football for at least 50 years. The notion that Aguilar's eligibility makes or breaks the program would seem shortsighted and hyperbolic to a fan who's seen so many players come and go.
Advertisement
Plus, Heagerty probably knows that UT fans aren't unanimous in wanting Aguilar back. They all respect the popular quarterback, and most hope he returns in 2026. But a portion of UT fans want to move on to young quarterbacks George MacIntyre and Faizon Brandon.
Heagerty faces scrutiny regardless of his decision. He at least appeared comfortable with that reality during the hearing.
Adam Sparks is the Tennessee football beat reporter. Email adam.sparks@knoxnews.com . X, formerly known as Twitter @AdamSparks . Support strong local journalism by subscribing at knoxnews.com/subscribe .
Get the latest news and insight on SEC football by subscribing to the SEC Unfiltered newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox.
This article originally appeared on Knoxville News Sentinel: What is delay for Joey Aguilar vs NCAA eligibility by Knoxville judge?
