On June 23, 2026, the NCAA Division I Cabinet unanimously approved a historic overhaul of student-athlete eligibility rules, adopting an age-based model that grants student-athletes five full seasons of competition after entering college. The vote marks the most significant structural change to NCAA eligibility rules in decades and resolves — at least formally — a system that had become both legally vulnerable and administratively unworkable.
Student Athlete Eligibility
Brendan Sorsby Folds: Drops Lawsuit and Applies for NFL Supplemental Draft
After being ruled eligible to play for Texas Tech this upcoming season, Brendan Sorsby is forgoing his college career and applying to enter the NFL’s Supplemental Draft. We previously wrote about the Sorsby saga and his reinstatement. However, a week after a judge ruled that Sorsby would be eligible to continue playing football for Texas Tech, the Big 12 filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas[1] seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief to punish Sorsby for sports betting.
Brendan Sorsby Bet on Himself and Won: Now What?
On June 8, 2026, District Court of Lubbock County Judge Ken Curry ruled in favor of Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby after the NCAA initially ruled him ineligible to play collegiate football. In granting the temporary injunction, Judge Curry held that Sorsby, who notably entered a gambling rehabilitation facility following the NCAA’s ruling, “has demonstrated he will suffer a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury,” allowing him to continue his college football career after admitting to betting, including on his games.[1]
How the NCAA’s 5-in-5 Eligibility Proposal Impacts Youth and College Hockey
Editor’s Note: This post was updated on June 9, 2026, to reflect the NCAA’s updated guidance issued on June 5, 2026, in response to recommendations from stakeholders in men’s ice hockey, men’s basketball, and the U.S. national service academies.
During its May meeting, the Division I Cabinet proposed and discussed an age-based eligibility model (i.e., the 5-in-5 proposal) that would give student-athletes five years of eligibility, beginning either the academic year after turning 19 or upon graduation from high school, whichever happens first.
Eligibility After Alston: Why Pavia and Chambliss Won — and Aguilar Didn’t
By Michael S. Lowe & Derek Centola on
The name, image, and likeness (NIL) era has transformed more than compensation. It has reframed eligibility as an economic right — and that shift is driving a new wave of litigation against the NCAA.
Recent cases involving quarterbacks Diego Pavia, Trinidad Chambliss, and Joey Aguilar illustrate both the growing pressure on NCAA eligibility rules and the doctrinal fault lines that determine who obtains emergency relief — and who does not.
Trinidad Chambliss’ Contract-Based Challenge to NCAA Eligibility Decisions
By Philip Nickerson on
Posted in NCAA Policies, Student Athlete Eligibility
Trinidad Chambliss’ lawsuit in the Chancery Court of Lafayette County, Mississippi, asks the court to bar the NCAA from enforcing its eligibility denial and to require the association to apply its bylaws as written and as promised.
The Five-Year Rule Under Fire — Again: Ortega v. NCAA and the Latest Antitrust Challenge to Eligibility Limits
The NCAA’s five-year eligibility rule continues to face sustained antitrust scrutiny. The most recent challenge has been raised in the Southern District of Iowa by Cuban-born Division I wrestler Reineri Andreu Ortega in the case Ortega v. NCAA, No. 25-CV-00496. As with similar challenges, Ortega challenges the NCAA’s practice of starting an athlete’s eligibility clock before the athlete ever enrolls at an NCAA institution, arguing that the rule unlawfully restrains athlete labor markets in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Sixth Circuit Dismisses NCAA Appeal as Moot: Pavia’s College Athlete Eligibility Continue
By Michael S. Lowe & Philip Nickerson on
Posted in Student Athlete Eligibility
Background: From the Trial Court to the Appeal
Diego Pavia’s journey to a NCAA Division I starting quarterback position was anything but conventional. After leading his junior college (JUCO) team to a national championship, Pavia transferred to first one, then a second, Division I school. By 2024, Pavia became a breakout star in the SEC, leading his school to a historic win and drawing attention from NFL scouts. He also began receiving lucrative offers tied to his name, image, and likeness, yet his eligibility was in doubt.
Martinson v. NCAA: NCAA’s Five-Year Eligibility Rule Is Commercial and Subject to the Sherman Act
By Michael S. Lowe & Philip Nickerson on
Posted in NCAA Bylaws, Student Athlete Eligibility
Former University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) football player Tatuo Martinson is the latest NCAA athlete to successfully convince a federal district court to enjoin the NCAA from enforcing its “five-year eligibility rule” against a former junior college (JUCO) athlete. Martinson joins Diego Pavia,[1] Jett Elad,[2] Cortez Braham Jr.,[3] and four West Virginia University football players[4] as having prevailed on this issue, in contrast to James Coley Jr.,[5] Jagger Giles,[6] and Jackson Hasz,[7] who had similar efforts rebuffed by the NCAA.
Seventh Circuit Overturns Fourqurean Fifth-Year Preliminary Injunction
On July 16, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, overturned a preliminary injunction that would have granted University of Wisconsin cornerback Nyzier Fourqurean a fifth year of eligibility. The NCAA’s “Five-Year Rule” limits student-athletes to four seasons of competition within a five-year period. Fourqurean played four seasons: two at Grand Valley State University and two at the University of Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin requested a waiver of the Five-Year Rule from the NCAA, citing circumstances that reduced Fourqurean’s playing time in his first season.