The NCAA, a cartel with astonishing levels of control over the multi-billion dollar college athletics industry, is having a rough autumn.

First California passed a law that would allow college athletes in the state to make money from their name, image and likeness — long a taboo practice under the system of so-called “amateurism” that the NCAA purports to protect. Other states have followed by introducing similar legislation, with seeming bi-partisan support for the radical idea that college athletes should be allowed to partake in the free market that is supposed to be so essential to our way of life.

But now the NCAA faces perhaps an even greater challenge, with the University of Memphis openly defying the organization and opting to play one of its top players, James Wiseman, despite Wiseman being potentially “ineligible.” This is more than a seismic shift; it’s internal hemorrhaging that threatens college sports as we know it. Because Memphis is the NCAA — it’s an association of schools, after all — and now an ex-NBA star, Tigers coach Penny Hardaway, and his school president are openly challenging the foundation of how college sports has been administered.

To catch you up on the case: Wiseman was declared ineligible because Hardaway paid for his family to move to the Memphis area back in 2017. Hardaway was coaching at a high school at the time and, yes, Wiseman ended up playing there. The NCAA declared Wiseman ineligible because it determined that Hardaway became a Memphis booster when he gave the school a million dollars to establish an Athletic Hall of Fame in 2008.

However, Wiseman’s attorney Leslie Ballin (yes, really) filed for and received an injunction from a local court, and Wiseman played in a 92-46 win over Illinois-Chicago (he scored 17 points, grabbed nine rebounds and blocked five shots.) After the game, Hardaway vowed that Wiseman would continue to play.

The NCAA, by then, had already issued a statement of its own: “The University of Memphis was notified that James Wiseman is likely ineligible. The university chose to play him and ultimately is responsible for ensuring its student-athletes are eligible to play.”

That’s where we stand now. Memphis, with its No. 1 recruiting class, is going to put its team on the floor and play while Wiseman’s case is no doubt tied up in court.

We’re accustomed to seeing NCAA teams bend the rules to win, then get caught after the fact and have their wins “vacated.” You remember when Louisville didn’t actually win the national title in 2013, right? Well, this is essentially a proactive version of that; Memphis is saying it simply does not care about the NCAA’s process. Its team is on the floor.

That’s a huge deal. Here’s how Memphis Commercial-Appeal columnist Mark Giannatto put it:

If Wiseman’s attorneys and Memphis can prove that in court, this lawsuit could become the case that topples the NCAA. If a judge believes what almost every Memphis fan you’ll encounter believes — that the NCAA’s treatment of Wiseman is just the latest example of arbitrary and unjust enforcement of its rules — it could change college sports’ governing body more than any legislation.

It stands to reason that Hardaway would be the one to take this sort of stance. He doesn’t need college basketball the way other coaches do. The system is meaningless to him. He made $120 million just in salary as an NBA player, and had plenty of endorsements, especially early in his career. He doesn’t need to play nice. And so he isn’t.

Memphis likely realized this would be the case when it hired Hardaway, and president M. David Rudd appears to be standing by him.

Richard G. Johnson has been a forceful advocate for college athlete rights, and he makes an interesting argument in the thread to which Joe Nocera, who literally wrote the book of the history of the NCAA, replies. But he’s trying to argue using semantics that Hardaway didn’t do anything wrong … when it’s pretty clear that he did (per NCAA rules, I mean; gifting money is, otherwise, a kindness). He gave that large donation in 2008 to Memphis, making him a booster, then in 2017 paid money to the family of a top recruit who eventually ended up playing at Memphis. That’s a clear violation in the rule book. And Memphis is still fighting it. That’s why this is so important. As Giannatto put it: “If Wiseman is able to force his way onto the court through the courts, it effectively neuters the NCAA eligibility process.”

Surely Ohio State boosters are machinating behind the scenes and trying to figure out if there’s a way to get Chase Young back on the field. The star defensive end is expected to sit out four games because he took — and repaid — a loan from a family friend that was apparently used to get loved ones to the Rose Bowl last year. That’s an outrageous punishment that deserves to be challenged; missing the Maryland game probably already cost him any chance at the Heisman, or even of being invited to the ceremony, despite the fact he’s clearly been one of the top players in college football.

Harry Edwards, the sociologist who has agitated for college sports reform longer and more powerfully than anyone, has said that a player boycott would be the surest way to enact change. That’s always been a difficult ask, though; even the most principled athlete would have trouble walking away from a meaningful game.

Memphis, though, is effectively boycotting the NCAA’s bylaws, which have long been the underpinning of how the organization controls athletes. That action, combined with the sweep of legislation meant to limit the NCAA’s control, may have us on the cusp of long-needed reform that gives college athletes the power they already earned.