Until last week, I personally thought that there was no chance that Mike Williams would ever wear the Cardinal and Gold again. There were just too many obstacles in his path, and then there’s the obvious question of whether he would even consider returning. Even at this point, I still find it pretty unlikely. However, it is hardly impossible any more. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if it happened.

There were a couple of reasons that I had harbored serious doubts until last week. The first was the NFL’s willingness to compromise and let Williams into a supplemental draft. It seemed like the league was going to be receptive to the idea because they wanted to be fair to Williams due to the unprecedented circumstances. Then there was the NCAA, which in the past has not exactly been a player’s best friend, even when the facts favor the player. The NCAA, as far as I know, has never allowed a player who has signed with an agent to compete in college football or basketball. Plus, with Myles Brand, former president of Indiana University, as the head man at the NCAA, I thought it would be unlikely that academic standards would be relaxed to accommodate football players.

However, the NCAA has appeared to soften their stance. Brand has stated that the NCAA would do what they could to clear the way for Williams and Maurice Clarett to come back to school. The rhetoric continued from Brand’s main adviser, Wally Renfro. "Without making any attempt to raise false hopes, the odds are better. There’s a philosophy in place that looks for ways to grant benefit of the doubt to student-athletes different than what we have had in the past. You still have to look at the circumstances. You still have to look at how the rule was violated. What you’re looking for are gray areas as opposed to application of the rule in very black-and-white terms." These statements are a serious departure from the organization’s policy in the past. There are likely still some within the NCAA who are very much against allowing Williams and Clarett back. It would blur the amateur line, and it would draw some criticism for compromising academic standards. However, momentum will come from up top, and my guess is that if Brand and Renfro want to loosen the restrictions, then the restrictions will be loosened.

Why the change? Sure, the NCAA is trying to become a more player-friendly bunch, and this situation provides the perfect opportunity to put a new face on an organization that has been regarded as rigid and antiquated to date. That’s only an ancillary result though. The secret to the new methods of the NCAA comes in its relationship with the NFL, especially regarding the three year rule. Neither the NCAA nor the NFL wants to see athletes leaving college or skipping it all together to join the professional ranks. Each group has their own reasons. Besides trying to be more amenable to the student athlete, the NCAA has other objectives. Students leaving school after their freshmen or sophomore seasons would further decrease graduations rates, especially if they continue to calculate them as is done currently. College athletics has taken a tremendous amount of criticism from the media for low graduation rates, mostly in football and basketball.

The bigger fear is that football will become more like basketball. Since players have been allowed to leave after one or two seasons, college basketball has lost some sparkle. It is viewed more and more as just a temporary trade school for the NBA, where academics are meaningless. Plus, it is harder to market basketball because there are few true superstars any more. The longer a player is in school and has success, the more people want to see him. The Emeka Okafors of the world are few and far between. Even Okafor will leave after his junior season. Gone are the days when Tim Duncan, Christian Laettner, Bobby Hurley and others would stay four years and be put on the marquee as a marketing tool. This has hurt college basketball, because many fans feel the game has lost its purity and that they can’t connect as easily with kids who are only around for a year. This past national championship game garnered the lowest ranking in over a decade. With lower ratings, the NCAA will likely not get as good a deal as they have in the past for the NCAA Tournament, and for the regular season. Football is the cash cow for the NCAA, and they don’t want anything to jeopardize the money source for the big conferences.

The NFL has its own interests to protect. First and foremost, they want to prove that the three year rule, which is supported by both the league and the Players’ Union, will not be successfully challenged. A compromise would invite more challenges. If the NFL were to bow and allow Williams and Clarett into a supplemental draft, that would set a bad precedent. All a player would have to do is win in the trial court, and apply for the draft. Even if the player lost on appeal, they would have Williams and Clarett to point to as players who lost appeals but were allowed to go into the NFL in a supplemental draft. Lawyers are skilled at picking courts where they could win their case, and the NFL could be sued in any district because they have contacts everywhere. By hard-lining those who applied for the draft before the stay was granted, they tell future challengers that winning in the trial court not only won’t get a player into the NFL that season, it may severely limit the player’s options.

Like the NCAA, the NFL fears the basketball model on their level. The NBA has seen a serious drop in interest in recent years, and many believe that the influx of high school players is one of the reasons. The NBA Draft specifically has been hurt. It used to be on par with the NFL Draft in popularity, but not any more. The reason: regular fans don’t know who these kids are because they haven’t seen them play. College freshmen have had limited exposure in most cases, and high school players are not seen nationally unless their name is LeBron. When you add all the foreign players that have entered the draft, you end up with a first round of players that most fans have never even heard of. It’s hard to get excited about the addition of players that are unknown.

The NFL Draft on the other hand has grown exponentially in popularity. The entire seven rounds are televised, and a Madison Square Garden ballroom sells out every year. Fans know most of the players because all of them (with the exception of Larry Fitzgerald) have been in college at least three years. Fans can openly root for their team to pick a player that they know and have seen several times. Plus it’s much easier to take advantage of the addition of a talented player in terms of new season ticket holders and merchandising if the fans know who he is. The abolition of the three year rule would clearly change that, as it has in basketball. ESPN gets spectacular ratings for the draft considering its time slot, meaning they pay the NFL big money for the rights to televise it. The NFL does not want to lose the natural buzz that currently comes from their draft. That buzz comes from a popular (and free) farm system in college football.

The Players’ Union likes the three year rule because of the salary cap. They fear that taking a high school kid who is two or three years from playing (which nearly all of them will be) takes up cap room that will cause veteran players to lose their jobs. Union head Gene Upshaw is old school, unlike baseball and basketball player czars Don Fehr and Billy Hunter. Upshaw is less likely to support rookies making big money at the expense of established players, since he actually played the game. He also wants to keep a good relationship with the league, and he personally feels that 17-19 year old kids are generally not ready for the NFL.

So it’s pretty clear that the NCAA and the NFL have a common interest. That interest became public when the NCAA filed an amicus brief in favor of the NFL in the appeal of the Clarett case. Here’s my theory. The NFL was resigned to letting Williams and Clarett into a supplemental draft. The NCAA came to them and spoke about avoiding that precedent. If the NCAA allows Williams and Clarett to come back to school and play, then the NFL can tell those guys that they have a remedy that puts them right back to where they started. They can hard-line the players and deter others from challenging the rule until they can get into the next collective bargaining agreement, which is sure to happen with Upshaw’s support. Get this straight. The NCAA won’t do it because it’s fair to Mike. That is only a by product of the situation. That has never been the NCAA’s standard. The NCAA will do this because it is good for them, along with their partner, the NFL. If Mike was a junior, they would never allow him to come back if he signed an agent and missed school.

Don’t be surprised if the NCAA gives Mike an exception to the prohibition of signing and agent due to special circumstances. At the time Mike signed, he did it under color of law, thinking he would be eligible for the draft, or so the NCAA will say. His parents will be able to pay back any advances that Mike got from the agent, or if they can’t, he will be allowed to take out a personal loan to repay those advances. I’m sure banks would be more than happy to work with him. As for academics, the NCAA can argue that it is common practice for players, even seniors, to stop taking classes to prepare for the draft. Other players were able to enter the draft though, and Mike was not. So the NCAA could relax the rule stating a player needs a certain amount of units per semester by either allowing Mike to take less units in the summer, or by giving him a complete free pass for the spring.

Some would say that this has no chance of happening. “The NCAA has been strict about contact with agents, and with this academic rule.” Stating that they won’t relax the rules because they haven’t in the past completely misreads the situation. First, the good people of the NCAA have already told us that they’re willing to relax the rules. Second, they have their own interests to protect (and the NFL’s), which are stated above, and which have never intersected these rules before. The main thing to look at is how the actions will affect the NCAA and the NFL, not how they will affect Mike Williams or Maurice Clarett. Neither the NCAA nor the NFL cares about individual players. They care about what is good for their coffers and reputations. Also, anyone who thinks that USC won’t welcome Mike back because of recent history is kidding themselves. Pete Carroll has already said as much, as have some of Mike’s teammates. If the NCAA gives USC an opportunity, they WILL appeal to have him reinstated. I have absolutely no doubt about that.

So does Mike want to come back? This could be the biggest true obstacle in the whole thing, because I suspect that the NFL will win the appeal, and the NCAA can and will remove all other obstacles. Mike has said some absolutely stupid and hurtful things about the university, his teammates, and the fan base. He has been criticized for these statements, and rightfully so. These foolish rantings have caused bad feelings in Troy land, and rightfully so. Would Mike be willing to swallow his pride and come back? Then there’s still the question of whether Mike wants to study any more.

That being said, Mike may have little choice. If he loses the appeal, there will be no supplemental draft, which means no NFL this season. By the time a suit against the NFL came to completion, the season would likely be over. He would need a preliminary injunction to get in, which would be almost impossible to get. So that leaves him with three options. One, sit for the year and severely hurt his draft status. Out of sight, out of mind. Ask Maurice Clarett. Second, go to the CFL, which he and his agent have stated that they don’t want to do. Third, come back to SC and improve his draft status and possibly be the number one overall pick if he has the type of season that most believe he will have. Someone who is thinking objectively will jump at the third option in a heartbeat. Will Mike think objectively? It wouldn’t surprise me if he would rather go to Canada than come back.

That kind of thinking would be counter-productive. If the NFL wins the appeal and the NCAA clears the way, Mike should come back. It’s his best option. That means swallowing his pride, apologizing to his teammates and coaches (notice that I didn’t say the fans), and hitting the books for two, possibly one more semester (if the NCAA completely waives the spring requirement). Mike needs to not let his ego get in the way of what is best for him in the long run. If he was telling the truth when he said that his decision was about a dream to play in the NFL and not money, which I believe, then going to Canada should not be an option. He didn’t dream of playing in the CFL. Mike could come back, lead a triumphant season in his junior year, possibly win the Heisman or at least be invited to New York, bolster his legacy at the school with the fans, and plant a final “screw you” to his nay-sayers within the program.

At this point, Mike does not have control of whether he can come back or not. However, when it is all said and done, I won’t be shocked if the only thing standing between him and USC is his ego. The ball could very well be in his court.

Questions, comments, or info? Contact me at tvenegas@msn.com.