HOUSTON — Moments after draining a 27-foot game-winning shot over his former Suns teammates, Rockets veteran superstar forward Kevin Durant found it difficult to contain his emotions. The pleasantries exchanged after the final buzzer indicated the existence of bonds that still remained between Durant and his old colleagues, but the raw emotion of the moment — or more importantly, what it represented — took over.
Durant’s blunt honesty, delivered in an almost satirical fashion, cut through the room like a knife, all while reminding us of the other side we don’t see often. The fast-paced nature of the NBA — and the business of basketball, to some degree — routinely eschews personal feelings in lieu of the overarching structure of the sport. Our brains are wired to the transactional roller coaster the game brings, obsessed with trade talk, free agency and mass upheaval.
But far too often, we forget that for as much fun as it is to drum up fake trades and hypotheticals, these players are living out their lives in front of us — with real feelings and experiences. The NBA is the great equalizer, from the two-way late roster addition to the future Hall of Famer with one of the most decorated resumes in basketball history. Regardless of how Durant eventually found his way to Houston, it was evident the Suns, despite the fiasco that their 2024-25 campaign was, were comfortable with a future without Durant.
“It hurt because I put all my effort, love and care towards the Suns and Phoenix area,” Durant added. “But that’s just the business. That’s the name of the game. So when you play against a team, you got a chip on your shoulder. In the back of my mind it’s there. Nothing but love for the players, but I want to beat that team.”
Durant’s leadership and poise are especially needed in moments like this. The Rockets will be without starting center Alperen Şengün for at least two weeks after the Turkish big man rolled his right ankle against Dallas over the weekend. But Houston’s issues with their crunchtime execution have been well-documented, still with a 7-9 clutch record and a -9.7 net rating, per Second Spectrum. Head coach Ime Udoka has routinely expressed his satisfaction with how Durant approaches the game and closing moments, seeking out the best play instead of his own. But Monday night was a gentle reminder that perhaps one of the NBA’s best finishers should have the ball in his hands with the game on the line.
Advertisement
“We wanted to get him the ball at the right spot,” Udoka said. “We want to keep it simple, not do too much where they can deny or take something away. Get him open to his spot. He said it felt good as soon as he let it go.”
With the win, Houston has now won five out of their last six games and are just two games out of second place in the Western Conference. An important upcoming road trip with two games in Portland and Sacramento could set up the Rockets for a big homestand to kickstart the new year.
However things shake out, it is all a reminder of Durant’s immense talent and what his presence means for the Rockets. And that superstars are people too.
Can Hollywood Smothers get Alabama’s run game on track in 2026?
The NC State running back is transferring to the Crimson Tide, according to multiple reports. Across 11 games in 2025, Smothers rushed 160 times for 939 yards and six touchdowns. He averaged just under six yards a carry before sitting out NC State’s bowl game ahead of entering the transfer portal.
Advertisement
Smothers has averaged six yards a carry across his NC State career. As a redshirt freshman in 2024, he rushed for 571 yards on just 89 carries and also had six touchdowns. He also has 57 career catches for 453 yards and three touchdowns.
It’s the second transfer of Smothers’ career. He appeared in four games as a freshman at Oklahoma in 2023.
Alabama’s Jam Miller was the team’s leading rusher with 504 yards in 2025. Miller averaged less than four yards a carry and so did second-leading rusher Daniel Hill. He had 75 carries for 284 yards and a team-leading six touchdowns.
Overall, Alabama had just 1,562 yards on 456 carries. The Tide averaged just 3.5 yards a rush as a team all season. To put that into context, Alabama ranked 123rd out of 134 teams in rushing yards per game.
Advertisement
As Smothers is heading to Tuscaloosa, the Tide also have a commitment from five-star running back Ezavier Crowell. The Alabama native is the No. 18 prospect in the country and the No. 2 running back while also being the top recruit in the state.
In his final season as the Arizona Cardinals’ head coach, Jonathan Gannon essentially benched Kyler Murray. With Murray battling injuries, Gannon said in November that Jacoby Brissett would remain the starter even if Murray came back healthy.
That situation never manifested, as Murray eventually missed the rest of the season due to a foot injury. The former No. 1 overall pick played in just five games, and heads into the offseason with major questions about his future following everything that transpired in 2025.
Advertisement
But if Murray is upset about the way Gannon handled things this year, the quarterback isn’t showing it publicly. Following Gannon’s firing Monday, Murray sent out a heartfelt message paying tribute to his former head coach.
In a tweet, Murray said he “genuinely loved going to war” with Gannon.
Murray’s response came as a surprise, especially after it appeared the long-time starter was benched by Gannon in 2025. The circumstances behind that benching, however, were a bit muddled.
With Murray sidelined with his foot injury, Brissett stepped in as the team’s starter and put up some promising numbers in his first three games. Following a Week 9 win over the Dallas Cowboys, Gannon was asked about Brissett’s status as the starter. During his postgame comments, Gannon said Murray would still be the team’s starter when he was healthy.
Advertisement
Less than 24 hours later, the coach appeared to change his mind, saying Brissett would remain the team’s starter even if Murray came back.
Gannon was never put in that position, as Murray was unable to return the rest of the way.
The 33-year-old Brissett continued to build on his strong start, and put up decent numbers for the Cardinals down the stretch, finishing with 23 touchdowns against eight interceptions. But the veteran couldn’t lead the team to wins, finishing 1-11 on the year.
The strong performance may have been enough to keep Brissett in Arizona next season. He originally signed a two-year deal with the team that runs through 2026, though the Cardinals have an easy out this offseason. He may have made that decision much easier on the team.
Advertisement
For Murray, things could get more complicated. The 28-year-old has had moments of brilliance during his career, but hasn’t been able to build off them in recent seasons. Murray is still owed a fair amount of money after signing a five-year, $230 million extension with the Cardinals in 2022, so parting ways with the passer could prove difficult.
But after another year in which Murray failed to progress, the former No. 1 overall pick’s NFL future is murky. Whether Murray gets another opportunity to start next year will likely depend on who the Cardinals hire, and how they feel about Murray’s ability.
Advertisement
Murray probably wouldn’t be in this position if not for Gannon. Despite that, the quarterback still has love for his former head coach.
Austin Simmons is going from Ole Miss to Missouri.
The Rebels QB has officially signed with the Tigers after entering the transfer portal with a do-not-contact tag, according to On3. The Tigers had been seen as Simmons’ ultimate destination as soon as reports emerged that he was going to transfer.
Advertisement
Simmons is expected to remain with Ole Miss for the rest of the College Football Playoff. The Rebels play Miami in a Fiesta Bowl semifinal on Thursday night. A win puts Ole Miss in the national title game on Jan. 19.
The redshirt sophomore opened the season as Ole Miss’ starting quarterback ahead of Trinidad Chambliss. However, he suffered an ankle injury in the team’s Week 2 win over Kentucky. Chambliss then took over as the Rebels’ QB and didn’t relinquish the job as he went on to finish eighth in the Heisman voting and Ole Miss made the College Football Playoff for the first time.
In eight appearances in 2025, Simmons was 45-of-75 for 744 yards and four touchdowns with five interceptions. He was 20-of-31 for 341 yards and three touchdowns and two interceptions in the team’s Week 1 win over Georgia State and was 13-of-24 passing for 235 yards and two interceptions while rushing eight times for 44 yards and a TD before he was injured against Kentucky.
The Miami native was Jaxson Dart’s backup in 2024 as Chambliss was still at Division II Ferris State. In nine appearances a year ago, Simmons threw 32 passes. His most memorable contribution that season came in a win over Georgia when he was 5-of-6 passing for 64 yards as Dart was receiving treatment for an ankle injury of his own.
Advertisement
Simmons was a four-star recruit out of high school and the No. 19 quarterback in the country.
Missouri was in search of a quarterback in the transfer portal after 2025 starter Beau Pribula announced that he would transfer at the end of the regular season. Pribula struggled in SEC play after a hot start to the season and also suffered an ankle injury against Vanderbilt in November. True freshman Matt Zollers — the team’s No. 3 QB at the start of the season — started two games in Pribula’s absence and also started the Tigers’ Gator Bowl loss to Virginia. Against the Cavaliers, Zollers was just 12 of 22 for 101 yards and an interception.
The 6-foot-3, 231-pound quarterback is joining his old USF coach Alex Golesh on The Plains and has one year of eligibility remaining after delivering one of the best seasons in college football.
Advertisement
He threw for 3,158 yards and 28 TDs with just seven interceptions while also running for 1,008 yards and 14 TDs. His combined 42 TDs were tied with Indiana’s Heisman-winning QB Fernando Mendoza as the most in college football.
Brown has been with the Bulls for all four seasons of his career and actually threw for more yards during a standout sophomore campaign (3,292 yards and 26 TDs, with 809 rushing yards and another 11 TDs on the ground) after just pulling spot duty during his freshman season. His junior year in 2024 was cut short due to a broken bone in his leg suffered in a game against Tulane in late September.
The Bulls were in the running for the American title and a spot in the College Football Playoff before a late-season slide that featured losses on the road to Memphis and Navy knocked them out of the picture.
Brown will join a Tigers team with a new head coach in Golesh, who is very familiar with the QB’s game after leading USF for the past three seasons. The Bulls went 23-15 over those three seasons.
Advertisement
The duo will now hope to find some success in the SEC, where the Tigers have been struggling for most of the past decade. The team went 5-7 this season and fired coach Hugh Freeze on Nov. 2 after a 3-3 start.
It’s the most wonderful time of the year: the NFL playoffs! Fourteen teams remain alive, and that means 49 possible Super Bowl combinations are still possible. Using our patented combination of analytics, star power, watchability, history, off-field narratives and good old-fashioned gut feelings, we’ve ranked every possible combination, from “it’s our last gasp at football” to instant classic. And away we go:
49. Jaguars vs. Panthers. You can’t fool us, NFL. This is just an old Thursday Night Football game in fancier clothes. Regular season: Jaguars won 26-10, Week 1.
Advertisement
48. Texans vs. Packers. There’s always a chance the ads could be good.
47. Jaguars vs. Eagles. Are we biased against the Jaguars’ ability to deliver a good Super Bowl? Yes. Has the franchise’s entire history justified this bias? Also yes.
46. Chargers vs. Panthers. There are those who say an 8-9 team shouldn’t make the playoffs. Those people would be forced to eat their words if the Panthers make the Super Bowl. Those people probably shouldn’t worry too much about that happening.
45. Chargers vs. Eagles. We’re not quite sick of the Eagles the way we were of the Chiefs, but another Super Bowl of tush-pushin’ might do it. Regular season: Chargers won 22-19, Week 14.
Advertisement
44. Texans vs. Panthers. Matchup of the top two 2023 draft picks. They grow up so fast.
43. Jaguars vs. Packers. America needs to see Trevor Lawrence hoisting a Lombardi Trophy, if only because it would inspire an entire generation of young men to grow long, luxurious locks.
Trevor Lawrence arrived in the NFL with as much hype as any quarterback in recent memory … and also the best hair the league has ever seen. (Photo by Mike Carlson/Getty Images)
(Mike Carlson via Getty Images)
42. Steelers vs. Panthers. Steel Panther is an outstanding faux-80s heavy metal band, but it’s a safe bet they won’t be asked to play a Super Bowl halftime show anytime soon.
41. Texans vs. 49ers. The Texans are one of only four teams that’s never made a Super Bowl. This would be a hell of an introduction, against one of the teams that’s made the most. Regular season: Texans won 26-15, Week 8.
Advertisement
40. Bills vs. Panthers. Look, Buffalo, if you can’t get it done against the Panthers, you ain’t ever getting it done. Regular season: Bills won 40-9, Week 8.
39. Texans vs. Seahawks. In their regular-season Week 7 matchup, the Seahawks won, 27-19, Week 7. But the Texans would lose only one more game all season.
38. Patriots vs. 49ers. Couple blue bloods going at it — New England has the most Super Bowl appearances with 11, while San Francisco is tied with Pittsburgh, Dallas and Denver with 8.
37. Bills vs. Eagles. Back in the regular season, the Eagles won 13-12 in Week 17 when Josh Allen couldn’t convert a last-second two-point conversion. Would this go-around be any better?
Advertisement
36. Chargers vs. 49ers. Did you know that former 49er Trey Lance is on the Chargers? Think they want him back? This is a Super Bowl XXIX rematch (49ers won 49-26).
35. Texans vs. Eagles. With the Eagles’ struggling offense and the Texans’ dominant defense, this might be the Super Bowl where a team produces negative offensive yards.
34. Chargers vs. Rams. I wish John Madden were still alive, if only because I’d love to hear what he would do with the name “Ladd McConkey.”
33. Jaguars vs. 49ers. Matchup of the No. 1 overall pick (Trevor Lawrence) with the Mister Irrelevant pick (Brock Purdy). The NFL is weird, man. Regular season: Jaguars won 26-21, Week 4.
Could Mr. Irrelevant really win a Super Bowl? (Photo by Kevin Sabitus/Getty Images)
(Kevin Sabitus via Getty Images)
32. Bills vs. Packers. I feel like the “Buffalo Bills lost in four straight Super Bowls” lore hasn’t quite translated down to Gen Z, which is a good thing for Buffalo. Imagine the memes if that happened today.
Advertisement
31. Steelers vs. 49ers. Somehow these two teams have never played each other in a Super Bowl, despite each making it to the Big Game eight times.
30. Jaguars vs. Rams. If Matthew Stafford plays in another Super Bowl, aging dads all over the country are going to shred their shoulders trying to throw like him. Regular season: Rams won 35-7, Week 7.
29. Chargers vs. Packers. Technically proficient football, but we’ll have to work to come up with a good narrative for this one.
28. Broncos vs. Panthers. A rematch of Super Bowl 50 (Broncos won 24-10). In other words: suit up, Cam Newton, here’s your shot at redemption!
Advertisement
27. Chargers vs. Seahawks. We need the Chargers in the Super Bowl just to assault Jim Harbaugh with Michigan questions the whole week.
26. Patriots vs. Panthers. A Super Bowl XXXVIII rematch (Patriots won 32-29 in a surprisingly good game that came down to an Adam Vinatieri kick). Regular season: Patriots won, 42-13, Week 4.
25. Steelers vs. Eagles. Loser leaves Pennsylvania.
24. Jaguars vs. Seahawks. It’s OK to admit you’re still waiting for the Sam Darnold blowup game this season. Regular season: Seahawks won 20-12, Week 6
23. Steelers vs. Bears. Aaron Rodgers could play against the team he owns one more time! Regular season: Bears won 31-28, Week 12.
Advertisement
22. Broncos vs. 49ers. This is a Super Bowl XXIV rematch, back in the days when the 49ers did things like win Super Bowls 55-10. Ouch.
A Broncos-49ers Super Bowl would be a rematch of the biggest blowout in history when Jerry Rice and the Niners won 55-10 in Super Bowl XXIV. (Photo by Rich Pilling/Diamond Images via Getty Images)
(Diamond Images via Getty Images)
21. Bills vs. Rams. Any drive that ended in anything less than a touchdown would be a failure and likely lead to a loss.
20. Steelers vs. Seahawks. Rematch of Super Bowl XL, which the Steelers won 21-10. Back in the regular season, the Seahawks easily won 31-17 in Week 2.
19. Texans vs. Bears. Watching Caleb Williams against the Texans’ defense would be fun, in a sick kind of way.
18. Patriots vs. Packers. Brett Favre won his ring in this matchup back in Super Bowl XXXI, which the Packers won 35-21. This was when nobody thought the Patriots would ever be able to put together a decent Super Bowl team.
Advertisement
17. Steelers vs. Rams. A rematch of Super Bowl XIV, which the Steelers won 31-19. Terry Bradshaw was named MVP of that game despite throwing three interceptions.
16. Bills vs. Bears. A buffalo vs. a bear would be a hell of a fight, let’s be honest.
15. Broncos vs. Eagles. The Eagles want to believe they can repeat as Super Bowl champions. Going through the AFC’s No. 1 seed would be a rough way to do it. Regular season: Broncos won 21-17, Week 5.
14. Chargers vs. Bears. Seriously … what if the Bears are good?
13. Bills vs. 49ers. Another matchup of early-90s titans that seems like it should have happened but never did.
Advertisement
12. Jaguars vs. Bears. This could be a battle for the future of the NFL, quarterback-wise. Anyone who can unlock Trevor Lawrence and Caleb Williams deserves all the credit in the world.
11. Broncos vs. Rams. Strength vs. strength — the Rams’ high-powered offense vs. the Broncos’ Rocky Mountain-solid defense.
10. Bills vs. Seahawks. The “No, No, No, No, No … YES!” Bowl of quarterback performances.
9. Broncos vs. Seahawks. A rematch of Super Bowl XLVIII, which the Seahawks won 43-8. Best remembered for a snap flying over an unprepared Peyton Manning’s head on the very first play of the game.
8. Patriots vs. Eagles. Rematch of Super Bowls XXXIX (Patriots won 24-21) and LII (Eagles won 41-33). Two words: Philly Special.
Advertisement
7. Broncos vs. Packers. Rematch of Super Bowl XXXII, where the Broncos won 31-24 and John Elway got his ring at last. Aww. Regular season: Broncos won 34-26, Week 15.
6. Patriots vs. Rams. Rematch of the first Super Bowl of the Tom Brady era (XXXVI, Patriots won 20-17) and the most boring (LIII, Patriots won 13-3). This one figures to be better.
5. Texans vs. Rams. Best defense vs. best offense? Yes, please. Regular season: Rams won 14-9, Week 1.
4. Patriots vs. Seahawks. Rematch of Super Bowl XLIX (Patriots won 28-24). Think the Seahawks will throw the ball at the goal line?
3. Broncos vs. Bears. A possible all-timer just because of the potential here. These two teams could meet in the next five Super Bowls.
Advertisement
2. Steelers vs. Packers. Rematch of Super Bowl XLV (Packers won 31-25). Regular season: Packers won 35-25, Week 8. Oh yeah, and there might be an Aaron Rodgers story or two told about this game.
1. Patriots vs. Bears. A Super Bowl XX rematch, which the Bears won 46-10. Or should I say: Da Bears. If Chicago reaches the Super Bowl on the 40th anniversary of the famed 1985 team, we better get a Super Bowl Shuffle Remix.
Nevada-based Circa Sports had the largest payout ever for a legal sports betting contest this NFL season, with a survivor pool of 18,178 entries — with each entry costing $1,000 — and a record $18.718 million prize pool.
In the contest, contestants must select a single NFL team each week to simply win its game outright and aren’t allowed to use the same team twice in a season. Circa’s contest also has an extra week around Thanksgiving and Christmas, making the contest 20 weeks in total.
Advertisement
Heading into Week 18, there were only six entries remaining — and one of them had selected Joe Burrow’s Cincinnati Bengals against Shedeur Sanders’ Cleveland Browns. With total prize pool of over $18.7 million, that means that each of the six remaining entries had an implied value of a little over $3 million.
Two of the other entries had the Minnesota Vikings (won vs. Packers), one had the Atlanta Falcons (won vs. Saints), one had the Jacksonville Jaguars (won vs. Titans) and one had the New England Patriots (vs. Dolphins).
Despite dominating the first half, the Bengals were down 14-12 at halftime thanks to not one, but two Browns defensive touchdowns — including a 97-yard interception return by Devin Bush on a tipped Burrow pass.
Advertisement
After a late go-ahead 4-yard touchdown pass from Burrow to Ja’Marr Chase with 1:29 remaining in the game, Sanders led the Browns down to the Bengals’ 31-yard line with three seconds left to set up a 49-yard field goal attempt.
Cleveland kicker Andre Szmyt nailed the kick to give the Browns a shocking 20-18 win and cost one entry over $3.1 million.
Hopefully, that bettor hedged some of his exposure on Cleveland before the game, but nonetheless a tough way to finish off a great season.
NEW ORLEANS — Late Thursday night, one man meandered through Ole Miss’ celebratory locker room with something other than the recent Sugar Bowl win over Georgia on his mind.
Somewhat exasperated and a bag thrown over his shoulder as he hurried to round up players to leave the Superdome, Austin Thomas, the program’s new general manager, quipped to a couple of nearby media members, “The portal opens in a couple hours!”
Advertisement
This time of year, a confluence of events creates a congested college football calendar. The back end of the coaching carousel is roaring, with schools hiring and firing assistant coaches. Roster retainment and replacement is humming as more than one-fifth of FBS players have entered the 15-day transfer portal since it opened on Friday.
And, for the last few weeks, teams have been preparing and playing in bowl or playoff games. For another few days, at least the four playoff teams will continue to operate the off-the-field business aspect of the industry while preparing for postseason games.
There’s something else, too: Because of coaching changes, assistants at playoff teams like Ole Miss and Oregon are juggling jobs elsewhere, too.
“We need to change the calendar,” former Alabama coach Nick Saban said Thursday during ESPN’s “College GameDay,” echoing the feeling from many administrators and coaches within the industry.
College football’s calendar causes headaches for players, coaches, fans, schools and basically everybody else in the industry. (Bruno Rouby/Yahoo Sports)
There’s good news: The calendar is changing — at some point.
Advertisement
The NCAA Football Oversight Committee, led by Georgia athletic director Josh Brooks and Buffalo AD Mark Alnutt, is examining the college football calendar and is expected to recommend potentially significant changes to several aspects as soon as this offseason.
“We’re trying to take a step back and look at everything in totality so we’re not doing one-offs that have an impact on other parts of the calendar,” Brooks told Yahoo Sports. “We’ve got to take a 30,000-foot view and see how everything could be better.”
In an interview with Yahoo Sports from the Sugar Bowl site last week in New Orleans, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey says calendar changes should start with one idea: eliminating the December early signing period. “Put it back in February, maybe even mid-February,” Sankey said, referring to the traditional February signing day. “What we’ve done is pressured the front end of recruitment.”
Signing day is just one aspect that officials will explore in the examination of the calendar. Others include: 1. The future of Week Zero (will it become the new Week 1?); 2. The playing dates of the College Football Playoff (is there a way to return the semifinals to New Year’s Day?); 3. The date of the transfer portal (is a single spring portal gaining more momentum?); and 4. Spring and summer access periods (will the sport, finally, implement OTA-type summer training?).
Advertisement
Overall, the goal of any calendar changes is to decongest December-January. Or, as Saban suggests, create a more NFL-like calendar for college football, which includes the draft (signing day) and free agency (the portal) happening after the postseason and eliminating spring practice. In that model, the assembling and development of most of a team in the offseason would shift from December-March to April-June.
“You wouldn’t have these issues with coaches changing jobs because everybody could finish the season with their team because there would be no hurry,” Saban said.
But that’s easier said than done.
The early signing date
The three-day early signing period, beginning on the first Wednesday in December, has replaced February’s traditional signing date as the primary window for athletes to strike agreements with their schools (normally, about 80% of top athletes sign in December).
Advertisement
Many conferences lobbied for the early date to accelerate the recruiting process, ending recruitments sooner, building a roster fast and preventing powerhouse programs from flipping athletes later.
However, at least some folks believe that the early signing date — along with the transfer portal — has increased midseason coach firings and expedited coach hirings, as administrators work to have coaches in place ahead of these dates.
While administrators kicked around, and still are considering, a summer signing date (the Big Ten proposed a June date in years past), Sankey believes that a complete elimination of the early signing period is a way to slow the coaching firing and hiring that’s taken place earlier in the season than ever.
“Philosophically, I think everybody would say that you should start the season and complete the season with every sport with your roster and coaching staff intact, noting there could be serious life exceptions,” Sankey said. “How do you get there? Some of it is, you look at the calendar and try to move some of the upfront pressure.”
Advertisement
At the annual American Football Coaches Association Convention next week, executive director Craig Bohl plans to hold several meetings to discuss the calendar as a whole, including the early signing date.
“You hear that coaches are being fired earlier because you’ve got to get your guys signed,” Bohl said.
The transfer portal
Most coaches — and all but one of the 10 FBS conferences — supported moving to the current portal structure in a change last year: from two portal periods (December and April) to a single period (January). Big Ten administrators and coaches argued for a portal in the spring, such as March and April, to more align with the academic calendar (most end in May), revenue-share cap year (ends in June) and have the postseason finish before player transactions.
Advertisement
Most others supported a January portal to assemble their team and develop them during traditional spring practice. In fact, the SEC and its coaches — most publicly Georgia’s Kirby Smart — argued for this.
Well, as the portal hums amid an expanded College Football Playoff and coaching changes and semester classes begin, some believe the portal’s timing should be revisited.
“We have a transfer portal that opens on Jan. 2 because that’s what was identified by the American Football Coaches Association as the coaching community’s solution,” Sankey said. “Is the coaching community going to work to make that work or not?”
In discussions with coaches, Bohl says the shifting of the portal to January created a “much better” December. There was tampering, sure, he said, but “as challenging as the portal window is now, it’s better than where we’ve had it before.”
“Everybody has to look at it like this: College football has changed,” Washington AD Pat Chun said last summer. “We should not have transfer movement until we crown a national champion.”
Spring and summer access
The portal’s date impacts decisions on the future of spring practice.
Over the last several years, schools are pivoting away from spring games, and many coaches are holding more limited spring practices. Should they be discontinued and replaced with more summer training?
Advertisement
Last year, the AFCA released a proposal to alter spring and summer access by permitting coaches to hold six OTA-style practices in the summer (mostly June). The proposal allowed for coaches to also move a portion of their spring practices to the summer.
However, some coaches are against waiting until May or June, more than five months after the completion of the regular season, to assemble their full team. And if you move the portal and eliminate spring practice, what about the players who, after the regular season, have already decided to leave in the spring? Do they continue on their current campus for another four months attending classes and working out with the team?
“Is that a good thing?” Brooks asks.
NC State coach Dave Doeren said last summer that “you don’t want to spend three months training guys who are leaving” while holding spring practice.
Advertisement
Week Zero and CFP dates
For years now, administrators have toyed with the idea of turning Week Zero into the new Week 1. As it stands now, schools must be granted a waiver to compete on Week Zero (there are usually 10-15 games involving FBS teams).
However, FBS officials are considering eliminating the waiver process, completely opening Week Zero to all schools as FCS did last year. This may lead to a few intended or unintended consequences. Schools, wanting an additional bye week, would begin playing on Week Zero much more regularly, to the point that it becomes the new season-opening weekend.
And that leads to a much bigger move: shifting the entire regular season up by a week. This could be a long-term play to arrive at that destination. Why shift the regular season up? Officials could then move up an expanded College Football Playoff that continues to finish deeper and deeper into January, both conflicting with the NFL playoff slate (an issue for TV purposes) and stretching into the spring semester.
Advertisement
However, there are complications with this from two entities of which college sports hold a financial and historical relationship: television and the bowls. Would TV networks support turning Thanksgiving weekend — a smorgasbord of rivalry games from Thursday through Saturday — into conference championship game weekend?
And then there are the six CFP bowls, which hold sacred playing on New Year’s Day. Shifting up the season means semifinal play on New Year’s Day (two bowl games instead of four).
Nothing about any of this is easy. But, perhaps soon enough, the calendar will be decongested.
Only a few months ago, James Nnaji faced a career crossroads.
A Summer League audition with the New York Knicks hadn’t produced so much as an invitation to training camp, let alone his first NBA contract.
Advertisement
Since the salaries top college players were making dwarfed what Nnaji could earn overseas, the Nigerian 7-footer and his agent hatched an audacious plan. They began to explore the unprecedented possibility of going from the 31st pick in the 2023 NBA Draft at 18 to entering college basketball at 21.
Granting Nnaji immediate eligibility is the most extreme example yet of the NCAA’s reluctance to fight to keep professional players out of the college game. The NCAA had previously given colleges the greenlight to recruit prospects with experience playing in the G League or top overseas professional leagues. Now the governing body is also rolling out the red carpet for someone who once guarded Victor Wembanyama in a Summer League game, someone who was once a throw-in in the trade that shipped Karl-Anthony Towns to the Knicks.
“It’s wild out there right now,” Gonzaga coach Mark Few told reporters last week.
Advertisement
“We don’t have any rules,” Arkansas coach John Calipari lamented during a recent news conference.
“Santa Claus is delivering mid-season acquisitions,” UConn coach Dan Hurley quipped on social media. “This s— is crazy!!”
Just when many joked Arizona might want to reach out to LeBron James about playing alongside his son Bryce next season, NCAA president Charlie Baker at last drew a firm line. The NCAA will not grant college eligibility to any player who has previously signed an NBA contract, Baker clarified in a statement last Tuesday.
Why has the NCAA loosened eligibility restrictions to the point where such a commonsense statement is necessary?
Advertisement
Is the risk of exposing itself to fresh legal challenges really the main reason for the NCAA’s hesitance to try to enforce stricter rules? Or might the NCAA have an ulterior motive? Could it be intentionally trying to spark public outrage in hopes of persuading Congress to finally grant antitrust protection that would reestablish the NCAA’s authority and shield it from the threat of litigation?
As Mit Winter, an experienced attorney specializing in collegiate sports law, told Yahoo Sports, “I don’t go the full conspiracy theory that the NCAA is making all these eligibility decisions for the sole reason of creating mass chaos so that Congress comes to help, but it’s definitely a side benefit of what’s going on.”
James Nnaji scored five points in his debut with Baylor in what turned out to be a loss to TCU. (Photo by Ron Jenkins/Getty Images)
(Ron Jenkins via Getty Images)
The NCAA tries to toe a fine line
Not long after highly touted center Enes Kanter committed to Kentucky in early 2010, the NCAA received a set of documents from his former Turkish club.
Advertisement
Officials at Fenerbahce were unhappy with Kanter’s abrupt departure after they had invested heavily in his development. As a result, they turned over financial records to the NCAA purportedly showing that Fenerbahce had provided the projected lottery pick payments that would jeopardize his amateur status.
On Nov. 11, 2010, the NCAA declared Kanter permanently ineligible to play college basketball for receiving benefits $33,033 above what the governing body deemed his “actual and necessary expenses.” The ruling epitomized how tightly the NCAA clung to a strict concept of amateurism before legal challenges dismantled the system.
The Supreme Court struck a deathblow to amateurism in June 2021 when it unanimously ruled that the NCAA’s restrictions on compensation for student-athletes were a violation of federal antitrust law. The landmark decision in NCAA v. Alston paved the way for the modern NIL and revenue-sharing era and left the NCAA’s model vulnerable to further legal challenges.
“Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a concurring opinion in NCAA v. Alston. He concluded by sharply noting, “The NCAA is not above the law.”
Advertisement
As the NIL market for impact basketball players at the high-major level skyrocketed north of seven figures, the best young international prospects began to take notice. Teenagers who might have chosen to develop abroad in previous eras left their high-level European club teams and jetted across the Atlantic because the salaries were as much as 10 to 15 times more lucrative.
Skilled 7-footers Zvonimir Ivisic of Croatia, Aday Mara of Spain and Motiejus Krivas of Lithuania were part of the initial wave of prized European prospects in 2023. A year later, future NBA first-round draft picks Egor Demin and Kasparas Jakučionis joined them. This year, 19-year-old German forward Hannes Steinbach is passing through Washington on his way to the NBA, as is Italian guard Dame Sarr, 19, at Duke and Greek guard Neoklis Avdalas, 19, at Virginia Tech.
“There used to be a small number of top [European] prospects that would consider the college route,” said Guillermo Bermejo, European-based director of global basketball at Gersh Sports, the agency that represents Nnaji. “It was a rarity for a player to choose that route versus staying pro and developing over here. Now the rarity is someone staying over here versus going to college. When you’re sitting down with a player and his family, the first thing that comes up is the college route, how it works and how to get there. It has been a 180-degree change.”
Last offseason, the influx of European pros entering the college game went from a trickle to a deluge. College coaches became more brazen about targeting international players with several years experience competing in the Euroleague or top professional domestic leagues.
Advertisement
Virginia’s leading scorer this season is a 22-year-old Belgian forward who was a key contributor for a professional club in Spain’s top division the previous two years. Louisville’s top big man is a 22-year-old German who last season was one of the Bundesliga’s most efficient players. North Carolina starts a 22-year-old guard from Montenegro who averaged 14.9 points per game in Southeastern Europe’s top league.
The NCAA’s lenience in granting those players college eligibility tempted other programs to test the limits of the governing body’s generosity. They targeted G League players who had once passed on the college route but now were having regrets due to the money available.
In late September, Santa Clara announced the signing of guard Thierry Darlan, who spent the previous two years with the now-defunct G League Ignite, the Delaware Blue Coats and the Rip City Remix. A month later, Louisville landed guard London Johnson out of the G League. Westchester Knicks center Abdullah Ahmed signed with BYU in November and just made his midseason debut this past Saturday against Kansas State.
How are these G Leaguers and European pros eligible when Kanter and others in his position once were not? Because, since the onset of the NIL era, the NCAA has been more forgiving in its interpretation of Bylaw 12.2.2.2.1, which states that “before initial full-time collegiate enrollment, an individual may compete on a professional team provided the individual does not receive more than actual and necessary expenses.”
Advertisement
Without protection from antitrust laws, the NCAA doesn’t appear interested in trying to legally defend banning players who have received five-figure or six-figure salaries from professional teams. The NCAA, as Baker recently put it, “is exercising discretion in applying the actual and necessary expenses bylaw.” International pros who were paid more than what the NCAA deems actual and necessary expenses have allegedly been able to get eligible by paying back the difference.
“I think it’s a strategy to manage legal risk in this new world,” said antitrust law specialist Sabria McElroy, a partner at Boies Schiller Flexner in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. “It’s becoming harder for the NCAA to defend eligibility restraints. They might have decided to allow these exemptions rather than open themselves up to more litigation challenges as they continue to hope that Congress will step in and do something.”
Recent statements from the NCAA seem to confirm as much.
In October, NCAA senior vice president Tim Buckley told Yahoo Sports that the NCAA’s ability to enforce “commonsense” eligibility and transfer rules is “currently under attack in courts across the country.”
Advertisement
“This is why we’re focused on partnering with Congress,” Buckley added.
NCAA president Charlie Baker is up against the toughest challenge the organization has ever faced. (Photo by Porter Binks/Getty Images).
(Porter Binks via Getty Images)
Congress to the rescue?
Congress is indeed the one entity with the power to swoop in and restore the NCAA’s ability to make rules and enforce them, but persuading legislators to provide an antitrust exemption will not be an easy feat in this political climate. Any potential bill would have to pass a staunchly divided House of Representatives, clear the 60-vote benchmark in the Senate and secure a signature from the President.
In July, the players associations in North America’s five major professional sports released a joint statement strongly urging Congress not to provide the NCAA any legal liability shield. “Granting an antitrust exemption to the NCAA and its members,” the statement argued, “gives the green light for the organization and schools to collude and work against student athletes.”
Advertisement
So far the NCAA’s bid to craft a bill with bipartisan support has gone nowhere. House leaders canceled plans to vote on the NCAA-backed SCORE Act on Dec. 3 because it lacked sufficient support.
“The SCORE Act was pulled from consideration because it simply didn’t have the votes, a clear sign that Members on both sides saw it for what it was: a gift to the NCAA and Power Two conferences at the expense of athletes,” Rep. Lori Trahan (D–Mass), a former Division I volleyball player, said in a December 3 press release.
The broad scope of the SCORE Act has torpedoed the NCAA’s bid to secure congressional support, according to Jeffrey Kessler, one of the world’s leading sports law and antitrust attorneys. If the SCORE Act passed, it would provide antitrust protection to the NCAA when establishing eligibility rules, limiting player transfers and restricting NIL earnings. It would also declare that college athletes aren’t employees and that individual states can’t pass laws conflicting with the SCORE Act.
“It’s a complete overreach,” Kessler told Yahoo Sports. “They want everything, so they’re going to get nothing.”
Advertisement
Are the NCAA’s recent player eligibility decisions a premeditated attempt to stoke anger and entice Congress to intervene?
“I’m not sure I completely buy the idea that it’s all a congressional lobbying play,” said Boise State professor Sam Ehrlich, an expert on the application of antitrust law to college sports. “That’s just one heck of a swing, and given how things have fared for them on Capitol Hill over the past five-plus years, it seems like a really bad gamble.”
But might the NCAA perceive the uproar as a welcome side benefit to its strategy to limit legal risk?
“I think they view it as helping them in Congress getting a law passed,” Winter said. “They’re saying look at what these courts are doing to our eligibility rules. We can’t keep pro athletes out of college sports anymore because of what the courts have done. Congress, we really need an antitrust exemption.”
Advertisement
To Ehrlich, the theory that holds more weight is the idea that the NCAA is setting up the legal argument that there is no distinction anymore between professional and college basketball.
Athletes who file antitrust lawsuits must establish that the NCAA dominates a particular market before arguing that the NCAA is improperly restricting it. That argument becomes trickier if the NCAA can present college basketball as one option within the broader professional basketball market.
“The whole premise of these antitrust lawsuits is that the NCAA is a cartel, that the NCAA is dominating the market for amateur sports,” Ehrlich said. “If the NCAA leans into the current environment and says we’re not actually this distinct amateur sports entity anymore and we’re one of many leagues these players can play in, it gets a lot harder to show that the NCAA is restricting entrance into this broader market.”
The upside for the NCAA is it potentially maintains a legal argument to draw certain lines of governance.
Advertisement
The downside to the NCAA’s apparent unwillingness to fight to keep international and domestic pros out of college basketball is that the organization now faces an uphill battle trying to legally defend the other lines it has already drawn.
If a player who received a six-figure salary in Spain can gain college eligibility, why can’t a player who made a cameo appearance in the NBA on a two-way deal? Or if Nnaji can enter the NBA Draft, be selected in the second round and play college basketball, why can’t a former college player who went through the draft process, didn’t get selected as early as he wanted and now wants to come back?
“Once you allow one exemption it becomes much harder to draw other lines, to stop players who have signed NBA contracts and things like that,” McElroy said.
Other attorneys echoed that stance.
Advertisement
“If they’re going to say that signing an NBA contract is the line where you can’t come back, I think it’s going to be hard to defend that based on everything else that’s happening,” Winter said.
It’s a safe bet that some ambitious college coach will approach a fringe NBA player in his early 20s, offer him a seven-figure deal to play college basketball and then leave it up to the courts to assess the legality of NCAA rules forbidding that.
In fact those conversations are already happening.
College coaches have expressed interest to Bermejo in multiple European players on two-way deals.
“That’s just one more example of how they’re getting creative,” Bermejo said. “They want the best players and they’re open to possibilities they would have never thought about before.”
NASCAR commissioner Steve Phelps will resign from his position at the end of January. Phelps, who has been with NASCAR since 2005, announced his resignation in a statement Tuesday.
Phelps’ statement read:
“As a lifelong race fan, it gives me immense pride to have served as NASCAR’s first Commissioner and to lead our great sport through so many incredible challenges, opportunities and first over my 20 years.
“Our sport is built on the passion of our fans, the dedication of our teams and partners, and the commitment of our wonderful employees. It has been an honor to help synthesize the enthusiasm of long-standing NASCAR stakeholders with that of new entrants in our ecosystem, such as media partners, auto manufacturers, track operators, and incredible racing talent.
“As I embark on new pursuits in sports and other industries, I want to thank the many colleagues, friends and especially the fans that have played such an important and motivational role in my career. Words cannot fully convey the deep appreciation I have for this life-changing experience, for the trust of the France family, and for having a place in NASCAR’s amazing history.”
NACAR said Tuesday that Phelps “made the personal decision to step away from the company.” The company did not announce additional leadership changes and said it does not plan to hire a new commissioner. Phelps’ responsibilities will be delegated to other NASCAR executives.
In a 2023 text exchange with NASCAR VP Brian Herbst, Phelps called Childress a “stupid redneck” who “needs to be taken out back and flogged.” Phelps also referred to Childress as a “total ass-clown” in the exchange. Those comments came while NASCAR was working on a new charter agreement with Childress.
That text exchange came to light in November as part of the 23XI/FRM vs. NASCAR antitrust lawsuit. Phelps came under scrutiny after those remarks were revealed, with Childress saying he was seeking legal action and Bass Pro Shops CEO Johnny Morris implying Phelps should be removed from his position. Bass Pro Shops has been a partner with the sport for years.
Advertisement
In December, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports and NASCAR announced a settlement, ending the lawsuit.
Phelps’ resignation ends his 20-year run with NASCAR. He originally joined the company in 2005 as its vice president of corporate marketing. Phelps worked his way up through the organization over the years, eventually being named its president in 2018.
In March of 2025, Phelps was promoted into the role of commissioner. He lasted less than a year in that position.
