Bucky McMillan on Charles Bediako Ruling: “How Is It Made Right for Us?”
COLLEGE STATION, Texas - After a hard-fought, high-scoring loss to Alabama, Texas A&M head coach Bucky McMillan is asking a question that many around college basketball are quietly thinking: How does the NCAA account for eligibility rulings that impact competitive balance midseason?
The situation centers around Charles Bediako, the former Alabama big man who returned to college hoops under a temporary restraining order issued last month. That order allowed him to suit up for the Crimson Tide in five games - including their 100-97 win over Texas A&M - before a Tuscaloosa circuit court judge denied his preliminary injunction on Monday, rendering him ineligible moving forward.
McMillan, speaking Tuesday, made it clear he’s not looking to relitigate Alabama’s roster decisions. But he does believe the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee should consider the unique circumstances when evaluating the Aggies’ résumé - especially when that résumé includes a narrow loss to a team that had Bediako available when others won’t.
“You hope it’s got to be,” McMillan said, when asked if the committee should factor in Bediako’s now-ineligible status. “We’re trying to compete and get the best seed we can for the SEC Tournament.
We’d love to get the one seed. We’d love to win the league - we know that.
I’m not talking about Alabama. I don’t care about Alabama.
How do they make it right for us?”
That question - how is it made right for us? - hung in the air as McMillan continued.
“They’re not going to be able to play with their full roster against the other teams when we had to play against their full roster,” he said. “And that’s something that you hope - I don’t know how that’s made right for us for the NCAA Tournament.”
Bediako, who previously spent two seasons with Alabama through 2022-23, returned to the college ranks after a stint in the NBA G League. His eligibility case has sparked broader questions about how the NCAA handles players transitioning between professional and collegiate levels - and whether temporary legal rulings should allow participation that could later be deemed ineligible.
Before the restraining order expired, Bediako appeared in five games for Alabama, starting two. He averaged 21.6 minutes, 10 points, and 4.6 rebounds per game as the Tide went 3-2 during that stretch. Against Texas A&M, he logged 19 minutes, contributing five points, four rebounds, an assist and a block.
Because of the restraining order, Alabama won’t have to vacate any of those five games - a detail that led McMillan to joke about Bediako’s stat line in their matchup.
“I don’t want anything to be counted against an ineligible player; I just want his points not to count,” McMillan quipped. “That’s a joke, so nobody get that out there where we have death threats going on. It’s not for me to decide, is the reality of it.”
Humor aside, McMillan’s underlying point is serious: When eligibility rulings shift midseason, it creates ripple effects that can’t be easily undone. A team like A&M, fighting for seeding in both the SEC and NCAA tournaments, now has to carry a close loss to a team that had an advantage no other opponent will face.
McMillan also used the moment to make a broader case for consistency in rule changes and eligibility enforcement - emphasizing that midseason adjustments, especially ones that impact competitive fairness, undermine the structure of the game.
“If we think that because we can make a lot of 3s from 30 feet, and yet they’re giving people three points because they can make 3-pointers at 23 feet, why can’t they be four-pointers at 30 feet?” McMillan said. “Well usually, that is something after the season we talk about.”
“We’re not going to go in the middle of the season and say, ‘Well, we feel that they’re making 23-footers, so let’s make these worth four points all of a sudden.’ That’s not how it works.”
His message was clear: rules, eligibility decisions, and competitive standards should be settled before the season tips off - not rewritten on the fly. And when they are changed midseason, the NCAA needs to think carefully about how those decisions impact the teams left to deal with the fallout.
For now, Texas A&M moves forward with its eyes on the SEC standings and a potential top seed in the conference tournament. But McMillan’s words are likely to echo in committee rooms and coaching offices alike: When the rules shift midstream, who’s responsible for making it right?