The NCAA is facing a federal class-action lawsuit over its new five-year eligibility model.
A group of 11 Division I student-athletes, including standout basketball player Cade Tyson, have filed the class-action suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado in hopes of securing an additional season of eligibility.
The NCAA Division I Cabinet unanimously approved the new age-based eligibility model last month, which grants student-athletes five years of eligibility starting from the time of their 19th birthday or their full-time college enrollment, whichever comes first.
However, the new rules do not apply to the student-athletes who exhausted their eligibility during the 2025-26 season.
All 11 plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit completed their fourth year of eligibility last season and are seeking an additional year.
“These athletes aren’t asking for special treatment,” Rob Shelquist, a partner at Cuneo Gilbert Flannery & LaDuca, LLP, said in a statement.
“They’re asking to not be singled out and excluded from the NCAA’s eligibility framework. The NCAA updated the rules but refused to apply them only to the very group that was most immediately affected. If the NCAA has determined that five years of eligibility is the fair rule for college athletes, then athletes who would still be eligible but for completing four years of eligibility should not be deprived of the same educational, athletic, and NIL opportunities.”
The plaintiffs include seven men’s basketball players, one women’s basketball player, two baseball players and one women’s track and field athlete.
Full List of Plaintiffs
- Cade Tyson (Minnesota men’s basketball)
- Brock Wisne (Northern Colorado men’s basketball)
- Anthony Johnson (Arizona State men’s basketball)
- Louie Jordan (Radford men’s basketball)
- Jefferson De La Cruz Monegro (Cal State Fullerton men’s basketball)
- Isaiah Jones (South Florida men’s basketball)
- Aidan Shaw (Boston College men’s basketball)
- Dimond Loosli (Penn State baseball)
- Jake Morell (Seattle University baseball)
- Aislin Malcolm (Robert Morris women’s basketball)
- Abigail Jefferies (Long Island University women’s track and field)
“College athletes have a limited number of opportunities to compete,” said Christian Hudson, a partner at Cuneo Gilbert Flannery & LaDuca, LLP. “When the NCAA updated its eligibility rules but excluded this group of athletes, it took away a season that could change the trajectory of their athletic careers and academic plans.”
If the lawsuit were to be successful, it could essentially nullify the NCAA’s new eligibility rules for student-athletes who completed their fourth year in 2025-26 (not just the 11 in the lawsuit). These athletes would then be allowed to enter the transfer portal and extend their careers, according to ESPN.
Prior to this federal lawsuit being filed, the NCAA has faced numerous other state lawsuits over the new eligibility model, including from a group of 15 basketball players in Ohio that filed immediately after the new rules were passed. That group of players has since expanded to 24, and last week, an Ohio judge granted them a preliminary injunction.
According to The Associated Press, Judge Christopher Wagner determined that the new eligibility rules have adversely affected 2022 high school graduates in an arbitrary manner.
However, the NCAA issued a statement on June 24 reaffirming its commitment to the new model while acknowledging the lawsuits at hand.
DI Cabinet statement regarding Age-Based Eligibility Rule:
“In April, while the Age-Based Eligibility Rule was still under consideration, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors, informed by the Division I Cabinet and by DI student-athlete leaders made clear that its intent was…
— NCAA News (@NCAA_PR) June 24, 2026
Under the new eligibility rules, in addition to granting student-athletes five years of eligibility within a five-year window, there will also be no more redshirt seasons or waiver exemptions except for in a few select cases, such as pregnancy, religious missions or military service.
The NCAA reportedly spent $63.5 million on outside counsel in 2025.
This is slightly off topic but I’m gonna put it here. The Austin Sectionals are going on and looking at the swimmers entered, it’s amusing to see Tyler Ray (21 yrs old) and Jack Wilkening (22 yrs old) both just graduated and then you see Luka Mladenovic at 22 years old going into his sophomore year. I don’t have an issue with the foreign swimmers but the age stuff kinda boggles my mind.
These people need to move on and start their non college athletic careers.
While the NCAA announced the proposed rule while these athletes still had eligibility, the approval came after the last championship event completed for the year, meaning all of these athletes had exhausted their eligibility under existing rules. As a result, they are no worse off than any athlete who completed their eligibility in previous years. I have no idea what the courts will do, but any rule change needs to start somewhere.
The NCAA must have seen this coming, so what was the reason behind the decision?