Why Are College Athletes Suing for a Fifth Year?

College athletes are suing for a fifth year because a single season now carries real money, not just playing time. In June 2026, the NCAA adopted a new age-based eligibility model that lets future athletes compete for up to five years, but the transition left a group of current and recent players on the wrong side of the cutoff. Those athletes argue the rules treat them unequally and cost them a year of competition, NIL income, and pro development. Cases from quarterback Diego Pavia, junior-college players, and the 2022 recruiting class are now testing exactly where that line falls.

College eligibility used to sound simple. You had five years to play four seasons. That rule is changing, and the money riding on it is a big reason these fights have landed in court.

We spend a lot of time at NIL Club helping athletes make the most of the years they have on campus, so we have watched this closely. Here is what is actually happening, in plain terms, and what it means for the athletes caught in the middle.

For years, Division I athletes generally had four seasons of competition within a five-year window.

A redshirt year could let an athlete stay on a team without using a season. Injuries created waiver questions. Junior college competition added another layer, because the NCAA could count those seasons toward an athlete's total. The system got hard to follow, since two athletes could show up at the same school with very different eligibility clocks.

COVID made it messier. The NCAA gave athletes affected by the pandemic an extra season, so college sports spent several years with eligibility that looked completely different depending on when someone enrolled, where they played, and whether they got a waiver.

Then came the Diego Pavia case.

Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia started his college career at New Mexico Military Institute, which competes in the NJCAA rather than the NCAA. He played there before transferring to New Mexico State and later Vanderbilt. Under the rules in place at the time, his junior college competition counted toward his four seasons.

Pavia sued the NCAA in November 2024. He argued that counting his junior college season against his Division I eligibility restricted his ability to compete and earn NIL compensation. A federal judge granted him a preliminary injunction in December 2024. The NCAA then issued a broader waiver that let certain athletes who had competed at non-NCAA schools play an additional season during the 2025-26 academic year.

The financial part of the case mattered just as much as the playing time. Pavia told the court he believed another season at Vanderbilt could produce more than $1 million in NIL compensation. That reframed eligibility entirely. Losing a season could also mean losing a year of earnings, exposure, and professional development. If you want a sense of why junior-college athletes have so much at stake here, our guide on whether JUCO players can get NIL deals breaks down how those opportunities work.

Pavia's case did not create an automatic fifth year for every athlete. But it put new pressure on a system that was already shifting.

The NCAA took a much larger step in June 2026. Division I adopted an age-based eligibility model that replaces the old four-seasons-in-five-years structure for future athletes.

Under the new rule, an athlete's five-year eligibility period generally begins at the earlier of two points: when the athlete first enrolls full time in college, or at the start of the academic year after the athlete turns 19. Once that clock starts, it runs continuously. In practice, the NCAA is moving away from tracking individual seasons and traditional athletic redshirts.

For athletes who first enroll in fall 2027 or later, only the new age-based system applies. The transition rules are what matter most right now:

• Athletes who still had eligibility remaining after the 2025-26 academic year can generally use either the previous rules or the new age-based model, whichever gives them the better result.
• Athletes who first enroll full time during 2026-27 can also use whichever model is more favorable to them.
• Athletes who used their final season under the old system during 2025-26 do not automatically get another season.

That dividing line is at the center of the latest disputes.

Consider two athletes who are almost the same age. One finishes a fourth season in spring 2026. The other still has one season available when the new rules arrive.

The second athlete may benefit from the new system. The first may not. That difference has led some athletes to argue that the transition rules unfairly shut them out of a fifth year.

One current challenge comes from athletes who graduated high school in 2022. In Wisne v. NCAA, a class action argues that members of that group who played four straight seasons beginning in fall 2022 should not lose access to a fifth season while younger athletes move into the new five-year model. The athletes have raised antitrust and contract claims against the NCAA. On July 31, 2026, a federal court in Colorado certified a nationwide class and granted a preliminary injunction. On August 21, 2026, the Tenth Circuit stayed that injunction while the NCAA appeals.

Individual players have also gone to court. In October 2026, Syracuse basketball player Amarri Monroe received a preliminary injunction that temporarily allows him to compete while his eligibility lawsuit moves forward. His case challenges how the new rules apply to athletes from his class.

These cases do not mean every senior now has a legal right to a fifth year. Courts can reach different conclusions based on the athlete's history, the specific rule being challenged, the type of relief requested, and the law in that jurisdiction. That distinction matters.

Some eligibility lawsuits focus on a different issue entirely. Former junior college athletes have argued that time spent competing outside the NCAA should not reduce how long they can compete at an NCAA Division I school.

Pavia made that argument successfully enough to receive preliminary relief. Other athletes followed. In Robinson v. NCAA, four former junior college football players challenged the NCAA's treatment of their JUCO years. A federal district court granted them preliminary relief for the 2025-26 season, and the Fourth Circuit later vacated that injunction and sent the case back for further proceedings.

These cases often get lumped together as "fifth-year lawsuits," but the details matter. One athlete may challenge the treatment of junior college competition. Another may challenge the transition into the new age-based rule. A third may have a separate issue involving professional participation, enrollment timing, or another eligibility rule. The headline can look the same while the legal argument underneath it is completely different.

This is the part of the debate that would have looked very different five years ago. Another season once meant another year of games. Today, it can also mean another year of NIL income.

An athlete can earn through brand partnerships, fan subscriptions, merchandise, appearances, camps, and social content while they remain eligible to compete. That does not mean every fifth-year athlete will make a fortune. Most will not. But another year can still carry real value.

An athlete who has spent four seasons building a following often enters year five with more name recognition than ever. Fans know the player. Local businesses know the player. Brands have performance data from past campaigns. The athlete also knows how to create content and manage partnerships far better than they did as a freshman. For some athletes, year five could be their strongest NIL year yet, especially if they have been growing their audience the whole way through. For a fuller picture of the income at stake, our breakdown of the top NIL revenue streams shows how those pieces add up.

That helps explain why eligibility disputes now involve economic arguments that barely existed before 2021. Revenue sharing is part of that shift too, and our guide on revenue sharing vs. NIL in 2026 explains how a single extra season can carry scholarship value, revenue-sharing value, and NIL value all at once.

This point deserves extra attention, because the phrase "five-for-five" can be misleading. The NCAA itself says the new model does not guarantee five seasons to every athlete.

The five-year period runs continuously once it starts. Limited exceptions, such as qualifying pregnancy, military service, or a religious mission, can pause or extend it. Taking a year away from competition does not automatically stop the clock. Transferring does not restart it. Sitting out does not necessarily create another year at the end. Age and enrollment timing matter too, so an athlete who delays enrollment may already have part of the window running before they arrive on campus.

So avoid assuming, "The NCAA changed the rule, so I get five years." Your own eligibility timeline still decides it.

If you think the new rule could affect you, start with your compliance office. Ask for your eligibility timeline in writing. Confirm when your five-year period began, how many seasons you have used, and whether the old or new rules apply to you.

Do not make a transfer decision, sign a housing agreement, or plan another season based on a social media post about somebody else's court case. One athlete winning an injunction does not automatically make another athlete eligible. The rules are changing quickly, and individual facts matter.

At NIL Club, we look at another year of eligibility as another year an athlete can keep building. That might mean growing a fan community, taking part in another brand campaign, selling athlete merchandise, or simply getting more comfortable with how NIL works.

The important part is that NIL should fit around college athletics, not take it over. Eligibility comes first. School still matters. Your sport still matters. Once those pieces are in place, NIL can add value to the time you already have on campus, and that only gets more important as college careers get longer. When an athlete is weighing another year, we point them toward income that lasts rather than one-off paydays, which is exactly what our guide on recurring vs. one-time NIL income is about.

Nobody should assume they have an extra season until their school confirms it. But if you do have another year, you also have another year to build something around your name.

NIL Club gives student-athletes a way to connect with fans, participate in brand opportunities, and earn alongside their teammates without turning NIL into another full-time job. Your eligibility has a clock. Make the years you have count.

If you are a student-athlete, find your school and claim your team's NIL Club to start building today.