As college athletics enters a new era of five-year eligibility, athletes once told their collegiate careers were over are turning to the courts to pursue one more year. What began as an NCAA rule change has quickly become a nationwide legal battle over who gets a fifth year, who does not, and who has the power to decide. As the NCAA seemingly undergoes a new change every day, what will expanded eligibility mean for the future of the NCAA, NIL opportunities, revenue sharing, roster construction, and the rapidly changing economics of college sports?

The NCAA Division I Cabinet unanimously approved the new age-based eligibility model on June 23, 2026, replacing the traditional four-seasons-of-competition limit with a framework that allows qualifying athletes up to five years of eligibility.[1] Under the new rule, an athlete’s continuous five-year eligibility period begins with either (1) the athlete’s initial full-time enrollment in college or (2) the applicable academic year after the athlete turns nineteen, whichever comes first.[2] Since the NCAA adopted its new eligibility rule, athletes across the country, particularly those who exhausted their eligibility following the 2025–26 academic year, have turned to the courts seeking relief that would allow them to return for the 2026–27 season.

The legal landscape surrounding the NCAA’s new eligibility rule continues to change as new decisions are issued. On July 31, 2026, a federal district court in Colorado granted a preliminary injunction which temporarily prevented the NCAA from enforcing its eligibility rules against a class of Division I athletes who began competing during the 2022–23 academic year and exhausted four seasons of eligibility by the end of 2025–26.[3] The ruling appeared to open the door for thousands of athletes to return for a fifth season, but that relief was short-lived. On August 21, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit granted the NCAA’s request to stay the preliminary injunction while the appeal proceeded, allowing the NCAA to resume enforcement of its eligibility rules against athletes who were relying solely on the Wisne order.[4] Importantly, the stay is not a final ruling on whether the NCAA’s eligibility restriction is lawful, nor does it eliminate separate temporary restraining orders (“TRO”) obtained by athletes in state courts across the country.[5] The result is an increasingly divided system in which two similarly situated athletes may receive different answers regarding their eligibility to compete in 2026–27, depending on whether they obtained their own court-ordered protection.[6]

A TRO is “a judge’s short-term order forbidding certain actions until a full hearing can be conducted.”[7] It is very possible that the sports industry sees an immediate increase in athletes seeking their own TROs to preserve their ability to compete. In fact, Ole Miss tight end Dae’Quan Wright was set to become the first player to make the transition from the NFL back to NCAA college football.[8] After successfully obtaining a TRO allowing him to pursue a fifth season of college eligibility, Wright was waived by the Cleveland Browns and subsequently committed to play football for Louisiana State University (“LSU”) this 2026–27 season.[9] The Southeastern Conference (“SEC”), joining the Big Ten Conference, quickly established its own policy that prohibits signing athletes who have: (1) “[p]reviously declared for the NFL, NBA, or WNBA draft, and did not appropriately withdraw”; (2) “[s]igned a contract with an NFL (or other professional football league), NBA/G-League, or WNBA (or affiliate) team”; or (3) “[b]een listed on an NFL (or other professional football league), NBA/G-League, or WNBA (or affiliate) roster.”[10] However, this poses a new question: Can the SEC’s new policy override a court order? The answer, at least for now, appears to be no, but this answer is not so straightforward. The SEC agreed to comply with applicable court orders protecting athletes from conference penalties, allowing SEC schools to roster those athletes despite the conference’s newly adopted policy.[11]

This development raises yet another question surrounding the eligibility framework: how should the NCAA treat athletes who transition from college to professional sports, then seek to return to the NCAA? The uncertainty becomes apparent when comparing Dae’Quan Wright’s experience with that of University of Tennessee linebacker Arion Carter. Carter initially declared for the 2026 NFL Draft following his 2025 collegiate season, but was suspended for two games after accepting a $427 flight from an NFL agent to attend an NFL pre-draft training facility.[12] Although Carter later withdrew from the draft, repaid the cost of the flight, terminated his agent representation, and returned to the Tennessee Volunteers, the NCAA still imposed a penalty for receiving a professional benefit while still technically a collegiate athlete.[13] The NCAA later reduced Carter’s suspension to one game.[14] In contrast, Dae’Quan Wright received a $25,000 signing bonus and a total of $50,000 in guaranteed money when he signed his undrafted free-agent NFL contract.[15] This disparity of outcomes has raised concerns about fairness and consistency within the current eligibility landscape. Before returning to collegiate competition, both Wright and Carter were required to repay the benefits they received, including Wright’s NFL compensation and Carter’s $427 flight.[16] However, Carter remained subject to an NCAA suspension, while Wright’s TRO temporarily permitted him to return without the same penalty.[17] This demonstrates how judicial relief may produce significantly different consequences for athletes.

While Wright obtained the proper individual judicial relief, even his eligibility was short-lived, as LSU ultimately left him off its roster amid escalating legal pressure from the SEC, which threatened to expel LSU from the conference.[18] Wright is now left without the opportunity to compete at either level this year, as the NFL subsequently informed its teams that he is ineligible to visit, try out with, or sign with an NFL club for the remainder of the 2026 season.[19] Moreover, as the weeks have progressed since the NCAA implemented its new eligibility policy, the legal landscape has continued to shift, with appellate courts dissolving injunctions that had initially granted athletes temporary relief by lower courts.[20] Wright’s experience aptly illustrates the uncertainty surrounding the eligibility policy, as nearly every week brings a new judicial ruling that alters, limits, or reverses the TROs previously granted to student-athletes.

Looking beyond the courtroom, expanded eligibility raises broader questions about how a fifth year could reshape college athletics, particularly NIL and revenue-sharing opportunities, roster composition, and the recruitment of incoming and transfer athletes.[21]

The new eligibility rule also gives athletes an additional year to capitalize on NIL opportunities and continue building their own personal brands. For veteran athletes, a fifth season could be valuable as they enter an extra year with greater name recognition, a larger audience, and a proven record of performance that could increase their value for potential NIL endorsements.

Last but not least, this new rule also dispenses with redshirt waivers.[22] Under the previous system, athletes or coaches often used a redshirt season to preserve an athlete’s year of eligibility. Under the new five-year framework, athletes may compete throughout their continuous eligibility period, thus reducing the need to preserve a season through a redshirt year. This could allow coaches to put younger athletes on the field earlier without unnecessarily using one of their limited seasons of competition. At the same time, the new eligibility guideline allows experienced athletes to remain on rosters for a fifth season without increasing the number of roster spots available.[23] With more athletes competing for the same limited number of roster spots, competition for roster spots and playing time could increase. This may reduce opportunities for incoming freshmen and force programs to reconsider how they approach high school recruiting, the transfer portal, and overall roster development.

Though each day brings a new ruling, as of October 2, 2026, this is the state of the NCAA eligibility battle. What began as a change to the NCAA’s eligibility framework has evolved into a much larger legal fight. With the 2026-27 seasons now underway or rapidly approaching, the coming weeks will be critical as courts continue to address these challenges and shape the future of college athletics. Until appellate courts or Congress provide greater clarity, eligibility may increasingly depend not only on an athlete’s status under NCAA rules, but also whether that athlete can obtain judicial relief before the opportunity to compete disappears.

[1] Megan Durham Wright, Division I Adopts Age-Based Eligibility Model, NCAA: NCAA Eligibility Center (June 23, 2026), https://www.ncaa.org/division-i-adopts-age-based-eligibility-model/.

[2] NCAA Division I and Division II Age-Based Eligibility Rules, NCAA, https://www.ncaa.org/eligibility-center/division-i-and-division-ii-age-based-eligibility-rules/ (last visited Aug. 31, 2026).

[3] Wisne v. NCAA, No. 1:26-cv-03063, 2026 WL 2214234 (D. Colo. Jul. 31, 2026); see also Dan Murphy, Court Halts Order, Denies Extra Year of Eligibility, ESPN: NCAAF (Aug. 21, 2026), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49682102/court-halts-order-denies-extra-year-eligibility.

[4] Murphy, supra note 3.

[5] Id.

[6] Id.

[7] Temporary Restraining Order, United States Courts, https://www.uscourts.gov/glossary-legal-terms/temporary-restraining-order (last visited Aug. 31, 2026).

[8] Trey Wallace, NCAA Created This Mess, Now LSU Set to Make Dae’Quan Wright College Football’s First NFL Returnee, Fox News: Outkick (Aug. 24, 2026) https://www.foxnews.com/outkick-sports/ncaa-created-mess-lsu-set-make-dae-quan-wright-college-footballs-first-nfl-returnee.

[9] Id.; see also ESPN News Services, Agents: Dae’Quan Wright Waived by Browns, Set to Join LSU, ESPN: NCAAF (Aug. 23, 2026), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49705433/agents-daequan-wright-waived-browns-set-join-lsu.

[10] Heather Dinich, SEC Draws Rule to Stop NFL, NBA, WNBA Players from Returning, ESPN: NCAAF (Aug. 25, 2026), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49726430/sec-draws-rule-stop-nfl-nba-wnba-players-returning.

[11] Dan Murphy, Ruling: SEC Can’t Sanction Teams Using Players with NFL Ties, ESPN: NCAAF(Aug. 28, 2026), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49753638/ruling-sec-sanction-teams-using-players-nfl-ties; see also Mark Heim, SEC to Comply with Court Orders, Allow Pro Players to Sign, Yahoo! Sports (Aug. 29, 2026), https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/sec-comply-court-orders-allow-150232323.html.

[12] Mark Schlabach, Tennessee’s Arion Carter Suspended 2 Games Over $427 Flight, ESPN: NCAAF (Jul. 29, 2026), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49480319/tennessee-arion-carter-suspended-2-games-427-flight.

[13] Austin Curtright, Arion Carter, Tennessee Star, Suspended 2 Games for Gifted Flight from Agent, USA Today Network (Jul. 29, 2026), https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2026/07/29/arion-carter-suspension-tennessee-football-josh-heupel-statement/91089522007/; see also ESPN, Suspension of Vols LB Arion Carter Reduced to 1 Game, AD Says, ESPN (Aug. 25, 2026), https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49723716/suspension-vols-lb-arion-carter-reduced-1-game-ad-says.

[14] ESPN, supra note 13.

[15] Dae’Quan Wright Contract Details, Spotrac, https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/player/_/id/107577/daequan-wright/transactions (last visited Aug. 31, 2026).

[16] Jennifer Bubel, What Happens to Dae’Quan Wright’s NFL Rights if He Returns to LSU?, AS USA: NFL (Aug. 24, 2026), https://en.as.com/nfl/what-happens-to-daequan-wrights-nfl-rights-if-he-returns-to-lsu-f202608-n/; see also Adam Sparks, Why Could NFL Players Return to College While Arion Carter is Suspended?, Knoxville News Sentinel: Football (Aug. 24, 2026), https://www.knoxnews.com/story/sports/college/university-of-tennessee/football/2026/08/24/arion-carter-suspended-ncaa-tennessee-football-nfl-players-return-college/91438763007/.

[17] Sparks, supra note 16.

[18] Brad Crawford, LSU Roster Finalized: Lane Kiffin Doesn’t Add Ex-NFL Players Dae’Quan Wright, Zxavian Harris to Team, CBS Sports (Sep. 8, 2026), https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/lsu-roster-ex-nfl-players-lane-kiffin-daequan-wright-zxavian-harris/.

[19] ESPN News Services, NFL Reminds Teams Harris, Wright Ineligible to Sign in 2026, ESPN (Sep. 17, 2026), https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/49966817/nfl-reminds-teams-harris-wright-ineligible-sign-2026.

[20] Nick Bromberg, Kentucky Appeals Court Dissolves Injunction that Granted 38 Players, Including Thomas Castellanos, Seth Trimble and Mark Mitchell, a Fifth Year of Eligibility, Yahoo! Sports (Oct. 2, 2026), https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football/breaking-news/article/kentucky-appeals-court-dissolves-injunction-that-granted-38-players-including-thomas-castellanos-seth-trimble-and-mark-mitchell-a-fifth-year-of-eligibility-222113682.html.

[21] Kristi Dosh, Senate Passes Protect College Sports Act. What You Need to Know, Forbes: Business: Editors’ Pick: Sportsmoney (Sep. 29, 2026), https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristidosh/2026/09/29/breaking-down-the-protect-college-sports-act-passed-by-the-senate/.

[22] NCAA, supra note 2.

[23] Maura Carey, The NCAA Changed its Eligibility Rules. What Does that Mean for Transfers, Rosters and Playing Time?, Yahoo! Sports (June 23, 2026), https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/ncaa-changed-eligibility-rules-does-192349980.html.