NCAA weighs a 5-year eligibility limit for college athletes that would start at 19 or HS graduation

Michigan celebrates after defeating UConn in the NCAA college basketball tournament national championship game at the Final Four, Monday, April 6, 2026, in Indianapolis. (AP Photo/AJ Mast)

An NCAA panel is scheduled to discuss potential changes to eligibility rules that would include an age limit, according to two people with knowledge of the situation.

The proposal, which mirrors language written in the executive order issued by U.S. President Donald Trump last week, would give athletes five years of eligibility with the clock starting when an athlete turns 19 or graduates from high school, whichever is earliest. There would be limited exceptions but they would not include injuries, which has been a common reason for players to ask for and receive extra eligibility.

The details will be reviewed and discussed by the Division I Cabinet next week, but not voted on for implementation, according to the two people who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity Wednesday because the NCAA hasn’t publicly discussed the proposal. Yahoo Sports was first to report the details.

Trump called for “clear, consistent and fair eligibility limits, including a five-year participation window” that limits athletes to one transfer with one more available once they get a four-year degree.

Speaking at the Final Four over the weekend, NCAA President Charlie Baker said Trump wanted to figure out a way to “get something on the books that works and represents what most people are looking for at this point, which is a much simpler eligibility process, which we’ve been talking to our committees about.”

Still unknown is whether the rule would shield the NCAA from lawsuits over eligibility. Dozens of players have sued for extra years, claiming injuries and other circumstances made them candidates for extra eligibility.

Heisman Trophy runner-up and Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia remains the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging an NCAA rule counting seasons spent at junior colleges against players’ Division I eligibility time. That case is slated for trial in February.

Ole Miss quarterback Trinidad Chambliss, who led his team to the College Football Playoff last season, went to court after the NCAA denied a waiver request to play in the 2026 season after he was healthy enough to play in just three of his five seasons. A three-judge panel of the Mississippi Supreme Court recently denied an NCAA appeal.

While Ole Miss could have the dynamic Chambliss back this fall, at fellow SEC school Tennessee quarterback Joey Aguilar’s bid for an injunction that would have enabled him to keep playing for the Volunteers this fall was denied by a Knox County judge.

“I think it would be great if we got to five years of eligibility for our players,” New Mexico football coach Jason Eck said. “So much is in flux by what kind of judge you get and things like that. I think getting away from that, where there’s a lot of subjectivity, having a really objective criteria would be great.”

Some of the players who have gone to court contend the NCAA has no right to limit their ability to earn money with eligibility caps. The NCAA is seeking a limited antitrust exemption from Congress, saying it needs the help to clear up the confusing landscape.

Attorney Mit Winter, who specializes in sports law, called the five-year proposal tied to an age limit “a very sensible rule” in offering a “more black and white” evaluation to player eligibility, particularly for schools navigating a complicated waiver process determined on a case-by-case basis.

Yet the same hurdles would remain when it comes to holding up against lawsuits, such as players still not being considered employees or having collective bargaining to establish agreed-upon standards.

“To the legal aspect, yes, I would imagine there would still be legal challenges to it,” Winter said of the proposal. “It might be a little easier to defend than the current rules we have. But when you just look at it from a broad point of view, it’s still essentially limiting how long someone can work as a college athlete and be paid as a college athlete.

“Now that athletes are being paid in many cases millions of dollars per year, you could see why someone would want to challenge a rule that says you can only be paid as a college athlete for five years.”

AP Sports Writer Steve Megargee contributed.

Aaron Beard and Eddie Pells, The Canadian Press