Alabama head coach Nate Oats was right when he said the NCAA’s eligibility system is broken. And the Charles Bediako situation is the latest example of how college basketball has become trapped in a rulebook full of contradictions, gray areas, and selective outrage. 

I’m an old school guy, and I don’t love the idea of former professionals playing college basketball. But the truth is that programs are left operating within the existing system, not the one critics wish we still had. If former professional players are eligible, Charles Bediako is eligible.  

Bediako is within his five-year window. He’s 23 years old. He’s enrolled in school and working toward finishing his degree. A high school athlete didn’t lose a scholarship or an opportunity because of him. This is a player returning to campus to do exactly what college athletics claims to value: education and development. 

The loudest criticism surrounding Bediako usually comes down to one thing: he signed a G League deal. And that’s where the NCAA’s hypocrisy becomes impossible to ignore. 

College basketball is filled with players who have played professionally. Not semi-pro. Not “kind of pro.” Real professionals. These are high-level players from overseas leagues often considered more competitive than the G League. Many college programs have benefited from these players, and the NCAA has allowed it. Just this year, the NCAA granted eligibility to a player who had spent the past five years playing professional basketball in Europe and had been drafted by the NBA. 

The money overseas is no joke either. In China’s CBA, players can earn $1 million to $3 million per year. In the EuroLeague, salaries commonly range from $500,000 to $800,000 per year. In Spain, Turkey, Russia, Italy, Israel, and Germany, pro salaries routinely reach into the hundreds of thousands. That’s real income. That’s real professional experience. 

So, what is the difference between a player who has played overseas for years and a player who has played in the G League? Is there even a difference?  

That question is at the heart of the Bediako debate, and it’s the question the NCAA can’t answer with any consistency. For too long, the NCAA has refused to enforce its own rules, but now it is selectively targeting one player in a way that is neither fair nor legal.

Charles Bediako should not be punished for choosing to pursue an education after high school rather than playing professional basketball overseas. He made a decision, pursued his career, and now he’s back in school. He is no different than countless other college players. 

For the most part, coaches around the country have been silent about this and are waiting to hear the outcome of the Bediako hearing. If it’s ruled in his favor, look for schools to do the same thing Alabama did, not because they want to push the boundaries, but because the NCAA has failed to draw clear ones. 

This is why the NCAA needs to fix its system now. We need eligibility rules that are transparent and ensure all student-athletes are treated fairly. Until that happens, targeting a single player operating within the law is wrong.  

The outrage shouldn’t be with Charles Bediako. The outrage should be with the NCAA. 

John Longshore, a Montgomery resident, serves as a sports analyst for both the Longshore & McKnight Show and WAKA Action 8 News.