Basketball Players Sue NCAA Over New Five-Year Eligibility Model

Less than 24 hours after the NCAA voted to pass a new “age-based” eligibility model, players have filed a lawsuit to challenge its implementation.

The NCAA’s new policy allows players five years to complete as many seasons as possible, starting when they enroll in college or turn 19, and eliminates redshirts and waivers (except for a few extenuating circumstances like military service, pregnancy, and religious missions). As a result, players across sports will have the opportunity to play five seasons, although the policy won’t apply to players who have already exhausted their four seasons of eligibility.

On Wednesday, 15 men’s and women’s basketball players in this situation—who will not be able to have the fifth season in 2026–27—filed a lawsuit in Hamilton County, Ohio, against the NCAA. All of these players graduated from high school in 2022 and have played four seasons in the NCAA between 2022 and this past year. Under the new rules, they would theoretically have another year of eligibility. But the NCAA opted to exclude them from the new policy, saying it applies only to athletes who haven’t completed four years between 2022 and now. 

The lawsuit is requesting a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction requiring the NCAA to allow these players eligibility this fall.

The lawsuit is the first of several expected to be filed by attorneys Darren Heitner and Ryan Downton, both of whom have represented players across the country against the NCAA (Downton was the attorney representing former Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia, who blew the eligibility cases open in 2024). The attorneys have amassed more than 50 basketball players to sue the NCAA, they told Front Office Sports on Wednesday, and will file additional cases in multiple states this week.

In the complaint, players clarified they aren’t challenging the concept of the NCAA’s eligibility rules (as has been the case with other eligibility lawsuits, which said the rules violated antitrust laws). Instead, they’re challenging the NCAA’s application of the rule, which they say constitutes a violation of the contract between the NCAA and its member schools—of which players are “third-party” beneficiaries. 

“The NCAA’s application of this bylaw to Plaintiffs unfairly limits the number of games they can participate in during their ‘five-year eligibility window’ and unjustifiably restrains their ability to earn money through use of their name, image, and likeness (“NIL”) connected to their work as Division I athletes,” the complaint reads.

To bolster its case, the complaint notes the NCAA offered an extra year of eligibility to players whose 2020 seasons were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and that it has allowed players to join professional basketball teams (such as the G League) and then return to college. 

On Wednesday night, the NCAA released a statement calling the decision one that “represents our considered judgment about what is best for college sports.” The statement continued: “Giving those student-athletes another season would destabilize rosters just ahead of the coming season by disrupting settled expectations of countless student-athletes regarding their expected roster spots and playing time next year, including incoming freshmen who are eager to participate in the life-changing experience of college athletics.”

The NCAA said it doesn’t “intend to change course.”