Student Athlete Eligibility

Subscribe to Student Athlete Eligibility via RSS

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

A three-page memo distributed to schools provides further clarity regarding Deloitte’s role as the approved clearinghouse for name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals, as outlined in the House settlement and guidance documents. Deloitte’s NIL clearinghouse and review platform will be known as “NIL Go.” We briefly addressed the role of the NIL clearinghouse in a previous blog post.

On April 25, U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi ordered the NCAA not to enforce its Five-Year Rule against Rutgers University cornerback Jett Elad.[1] The impact of name, image, and likeness (NIL) agreements on the new world of Division I sports underpinned two key findings in the opinion: (1) the NCAA’s junior college rule (JUCO Rule) is subject to federal antitrust laws; and, (2) Elad had a likelihood of success on the merits because Division I student-athletes have a greater ability to benefit from NIL agreements compared to non-Division I athletes.

Rutgers University football player Jett Elad is one of the latest student-athletes to file a federal antitrust lawsuit against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.[1] Elad’s lawsuit challenges what he calls the NCAA’s “arbitrary and unreasonable” application of its new waiver allowing student-athletes who attended and competed at a non-NCAA school (e.g., junior college (JUCO)) for one or more years to remain eligible to compete in 2025-26 academic year (JUCO Waiver).