Joey Aguilar’s Legal Battle with NCAA Nears Key Hearing in Tennessee Court
As the college football offseason rolls on, one quarterback’s fight for eligibility is heating up off the field. Joey Aguilar, currently entangled in a legal battle with the NCAA, is pushing for an additional year of eligibility-and the outcome of a key court hearing this Friday could determine whether he suits up for the University of Tennessee in 2026.
Aguilar’s case centers around a long-standing NCAA rule that counts time spent at junior colleges against a student-athlete’s Division I eligibility clock. His legal team is challenging that interpretation, arguing that it unfairly penalizes athletes who take the junior college route before transferring to a Division I program.
This Friday afternoon, a Knox County chancery court judge will consider whether to extend a temporary restraining order that currently allows Aguilar to remain eligible. Aguilar’s team is asking the court to convert that order into a temporary injunction-essentially keeping the door open for him to take the field this upcoming season.
The legal team filed a new brief on Wednesday, laying out their case ahead of the hearing. They anticipate that the NCAA will respond the day before the hearing, mirroring its approach in a similar case involving Charles Bediako in Alabama.
In that case, Bediako attempted to return to college sports after signing-but never playing under-a two-way NBA contract. The NCAA opposed his return, and SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey even filed a declaration warning that allowing former professionals back into the college ranks could create a competitive imbalance. Aguilar’s team points out that Sankey has not filed any such declaration in this case, or in a related federal case involving Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia.
Aguilar’s attorneys are drawing a clear line between his situation and broader policy debates. They emphasize that this case is about one athlete, one season, and one opportunity-not a sweeping challenge to NCAA governance. Still, the implications could be significant, especially if the court sides with Aguilar and sets a precedent for how junior college years are counted.
The brief also pushes back on what it describes as the NCAA’s resistance to state court involvement. Aguilar’s legal team argues that the NCAA has suggested state courts are biased toward their local programs-a claim they strongly reject.
At the heart of the matter is the question of harm. Aguilar’s lawyers argue that denying him eligibility would inflict irreparable damage-not just by keeping him off the field, but by costing him valuable NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) opportunities that are increasingly vital in today’s college football landscape.
The Friday hearing could be pivotal. If the judge grants the injunction, Aguilar would remain eligible to play while the legal process continues. If not, his college career-and his shot at a final season under center-could be over before it begins.
One thing is clear: this case isn’t just about eligibility. It’s about how the NCAA’s rules intersect with the evolving realities of modern college athletics. And for Joey Aguilar, it’s about fighting to finish what he started.