In the lawsuit, Pruitt alleges that UT and the NCAA conspired to make him the “sacrificial lamb” for rules violations that preceded his tenure as Vols coach.

He also believes that he shouldn’t be punished for allegedly paying players because the NCAA now allows athletes to receive compensation for their name, image and likeness.

“The NCAA punished Pruitt for something that is no longer illegal,” Pruitt’s complaint said. “Jeremy Pruitt may be the last coach in America to be punished for impermissible player benefits.”

Pruitt also claims that UT was already paying football players against NCAA rules when he was hired in December 2017, but that former athletics director Phillip Fulmer swept it under the rug and the investigation intentionally ignored that information.

“The investigation was intentionally limited to avoid examining historical misconduct at UT, which long preceded Jeremy and was hidden from him,” said Pruitt’s complaint, which was filed in DeKalb County, Alabama, on Wednesday and obtained by Knox News.

How Jeremy Pruitt, NCAA and Tennessee reacted to suit

On Thursday, Pruitt did not immediately respond to a Knox News request for comment. But his attorneys — Joseph M. Cloud, David W. Holt and Allen Dodd Jr. — released a joint statement.

“We stand wholeheartedly behind Coach Pruitt’s claims as details in the complaint. While we appreciate the public’s interest in this matter, we do not intend to try Coach Pruitt’s case in the media,” Pruitt’s attorneys said. “Coach Pruitt’s claims deserve to be evaluated by an Alabama jury. We intend to give Jeremy the fair and impartial forum that the NCAA would not allow. At this time, our efforts will remain focused on pursuing justice through the appropriate legal channel.”

In a statement, UT said it is “confident in the actions taken in the Pruitt case. We will continue to prioritize our student-athletes and winning with integrity.”

The NCAA released the following statement: “NCAA rules are proposed and adopted by member schools and penalties for violations are imposed by a committee of representatives from NCAA member schools and conferences as well as individuals from the public who have legal training. In this case, the Committee on Infractions found violations and assigned penalties, both of which were affirmed by the Infractions Appeals Committee.”

Why Jeremy Pruitt is suing for $1100 million

UT fired Pruitt for cause in January 2021 in the early stages of a yearslong recruiting scandal. It began with an internal investigation in November 2020 and ended with an NCAA verdict in July 2023.

The NCAA put UT football on probation for five years as punishment for more than 200 violations committed under Pruitt, and it gave Pruitt a six-year show-cause. That meant a university could not hire Pruitt without NCAA approval during the length of his ban.

In July 2023, Pruitt was hired as a physical education teacher at his alma mater, Plainview High School in Rainsville, Alabama, where his lawsuit against the NCAA was filed. He is currently helping coach Plainview football alongside his father Dale Pruitt.

This is Pruitt’s latest attempt to recoup the $12.6 million buyout that he never received from UT because he was fired for cause and potentially millions of dollars he could’ve earned as a college football coach.

Pruitt had a 16-19 record in three seasons at UT, but 11 victories were later vacated by the NCAA because those games included ineligible players. Before being hired at UT, Pruitt was one of the most sought-after defensive coordinators in college football.

“The NCAA effectively established a tribunal designed to reach a predetermined conclusion: Jeremy would be blamed, the University of Tennessee would be commended, and UT would have cover for its decision to avoid paying Jeremy his just compensation,” Pruitt’s complaint said.

Pruitt says Phillip Fulmer knew about cheating

Pruitt claims UT was cheating when he was hired in December 2017, and that he alerted Fulmer less than one week into his tenure.

“Pruitt discovered that payments were being made to some players,” his complaint said. “Pruitt immediately reported what he learned to the athletics director Phillip Fulmer. (Fulmer) told Pruitt that ‘he would handle it’ and deal with the university’s compliance department.”

Fulmer, the former Vols football coach, served as athletics director during the entirety of the Pruitt recruiting scandal. The NCAA did not implicate Fulmer in wrongdoing. He retired on the day Pruitt was fired and received $450,000 a year – one-half of his annual compensation – through the end of 2023.

An internal university email, which Knox News obtained, revealed Fulmer’s state of mind as violations came to light in late 2020 and early 2021, during the early stages of UT’s investigation.

In that email, Fulmer appeared oblivious but not culpable in Pruitt’s rule-breaking.

Fulmer was either unaware of the gravity of the situation or went to great lengths to feign ignorance. He was not implicated in any violations, but it appears he was in the dark more than an athletics director typically would be.

During the NCAA hearing in April 2023, Fulmer played a part in defending UT against a failure to monitor charge from the NCAA and any potential accusation from Pruitt.

Pruitt claims ‘no reasonable person could find him guilty’

In the complaint, Pruitt mostly argues procedural misconduct by the NCAA in cahoots with UT. But he also pleads his innocence.

He accused the NCAA of negligently punishing him for “allegations for which no reasonable person could find him guilty.”

In that argument, Pruitt faces an uphill climb. The NCAA reported that at least 105 people were involved in more than 200 violations committed under Pruitt from 2018 to early 2021.

But Knox News uncovered documents that showed the circle was much larger – including recruits, family members or friends of recruits, UT players, high school coaches, boosters and even a “reservation checklist” Pruitt’s staff used to rope in Knoxville business managers complicit in violations.

Plus, Pruitt’s defensive coordinator, Derrick Ansley, said Pruitt initiated and oversaw the cheating. He was among seven former Pruitt assistant coaches and staffers who received show-cause penalties.

NCAA allowed paying players after Pruitt case

Even if Pruitt was guilty, his timing was terrible. And he hopes that can help his lawsuit.

In July 2021, six months after Pruitt was fired, the NCAA began allowing college athletes to profit off their name, image and likeness. And UT was among the industry leaders in facilitating the payment of players by NIL collectives, which was permitted under the new rules.

During its probe into Pruitt, the NCAA found that almost $60,000 of cash or gifts were provided to UT recruits, players and their families by Pruitt, his wife Casey, and numerous coaches, recruiting staff and at least one booster.

That’s a very small figure compared to the millions of dollars that NIL collectives began paying college players shortly after Pruitt was charged with wrongdoing.

In his complaint, Pruitt argues that the NCAA punished him “for actions that, by the NCAA’s own admission through its rule changes, are neither illegal nor wrongful.”

Pruitt says UT, NCAA rigged the case against him

Pruitt claims that the NCAA allowed UT to direct the investigation where it wanted – at him – by paying private lawyers to do the NCAA’s work.

“The NCAA empowered the University of Tennessee to use its own attorneys to investigate the university,” the complaint said. “… (The NCAA was) acting in bad faith in concert with UT to promote the university’s self-preservation interest at the expense of Jeremy’s career.”

In November 2022, Pruitt made the same argument during his initial response to NCAA allegations. At that time, his lawyer called it a “one-sided” probe run by investigators paid by UT to ignore evidence that would’ve supported Pruitt’s claims.

It’s true that the NCAA lacks the manpower and resources to pull off such a widespread investigation. So UT funded much of it by paying almost $2 million in legal fees to Bond, Schoeneck & King, a law firm specializing in high-profile NCAA cases.

UT staffers facilitated interviews and arranged for electronic evidence to be collected. BSK lawyers conducted the interviews and organized the evidence. NCAA enforcement staff were present for some of the interviews and had access to the transcripts.

But Pruitt would have to prove that UT and its lawyers withheld crucial evidence or testimony that would’ve exonerated him.