The world knows by now that the NCAA Clearinghouse ruled unfavorably in the case of Enes Kanter's amateurism. Specifically, they stated that $33,033 too much had be given to the Kanter's and thus he was to be considered a professional basketball player. Due to these facts in the case, he was ruled "permanently ineligible", a statement that makes a reversal during the appeals process seem bleak. Since we are all now heavily impacted by the appeals process, let's take a look at how it works.
Most interestingly to me, the appeals process does not include NCAA Clearinghouse staff. It is independent and comprised of representatives from NCAA member colleges, universities and athletic conferences. This committee can reduce or remove the conditions, but it cannot increase the conditions imposed by the staff.
This appeals process will not be to argue the facts in the case. The appeal in this case is to determine whether or not the NCAA applied the rule to the circumstances of this unique situation. Namely, the appeals body will determine whether or not the money used for educational expenses should be considered as an allowable expense under the rule.
Another difference in this process is that Enes Kanter will have an opportunity to speak to the committee. He'll have an opportunity to explain to the committee "the uniqueness of his circumstances" as Mitch Barnhart explained.
The two possible outcomes are clear. The appeals committee says Enes can play by removing or reducing the previously applied sanctions, or they uphold the original ruling of permanent ineligibility. Obviously the previous is the desired outcome for Enes, Kentucky and Big Blue Nation. And it shouldn't be necessarily considered a closed appeals process due to the facts above.