Started By
Message

NCAA adopts new eligibility rules

Posted on 6/23/26 at 1:42 pm
Posted by red sox fan 13
Valley Park
Member since Aug 2018
19237 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 1:42 pm
LINK
quote:

Under the new rules, players will be granted five years of eligibility to be completed within five years of high school graduation or an athlete's 19th birthday, whichever comes first. There would be limited exceptions for factors like religious missions, maternity leave and military service.
quote:

In effect, the new rule eliminates redshirts across college sports. Under the previous system, athletes had five years to compete over four years. There would not be further waivers for injury or other extenuating circumstances.
quote:

For schools with current student-athletes who may be eligible for hardship waivers or extensions of eligibility, the Cabinet indicated that the deadline to submit any waiver requests to NCAA staff is July 31. After that date, waivers would no longer be available for current student-athletes or prospects.

Student-athletes whose fourth season of collegiate eligibility was completed by spring 2026: No additional eligibility.
Currently enrolled student-athletes with eligibility remaining after the 2025-26 academic year: Flexibility for schools to apply the age-based model or continue with the previous eligibility rules (four seasons to compete with five total years of eligibility), whichever is most beneficial to that individual.
Prospects expected to graduate from high school in spring 2027: Age-based model only.
Prospects expected to graduate from high school in spring 2026, regardless of planned enrollment date: Age-based model only.
Prospects who graduated prior to spring 2026 and have not enrolled: The NCAA Eligibility Center will review the prospect's individual circumstances and apply the age-based model or existing delayed enrollment eligibility rules, whichever is most beneficial to that individual.
I am in favor of this but I'm sure it will take about 0.6 seconds for someone to sue over it.
Posted by OleVaught14
Member since Jun 2019
12385 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 1:43 pm to
quote:

I am in favor of this but I'm sure it will take about 0.6 seconds for someone to sue over it.


This is 100% the right rule to make.

But as you note, they'll still lose in court the first time it gets challenged.

Also, right on queue:

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
This post was edited on 6/23/26 at 1:45 pm
Posted by Ingeniero
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2013
23565 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:00 pm to
Good. This has been a huge problem in running. Coaches would go get a 28 year old Kenyan that's been running as a pro since he was 17 and now he's a 28 year old freshman. It's bullshite. I hope the NCAA wins any lawsuits that come from this

It'll be interesting to see how it affects schools like BYU where students delay enrollment to go on missions.
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
131654 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:02 pm to
Good

But to the courts we go
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
73019 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:08 pm to
It will be hard to reconcile this and the JUCO exemption. Even though that would be the best system the cancer they’ve let in won’t allow for it.
Posted by Yaboylsu63
Member since Mar 2014
3557 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:16 pm to
This really is the best for the game at this moment in time.

The 26 year olds playing for natty’s is not how it was meant to be.
Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
74011 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:18 pm to
quote:

it will take about 0.6 seconds for someone to sue over it.

100000% players will sue over there being no paternity leave or some other hardship. If you want to take a hard-lined stance, you can't leave an avenue for exceptions. That's where the NCAA fumbled the bag in the first place
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
131654 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:19 pm to
There will be 1000 lawsuits

I imagine 90% of Indiana's roster will sue given they are all like 40

This also would have prevented Tyler Shough from basically being anything at all
Posted by SOBmustpay
North Louisiana
Member since Jun 2026
395 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:34 pm to
I’m not even sure if this is a thing anymore, but I guess players like Josh Booty wouldn’t have been able to play football his senior year at LSU. Wasn’t he 25 that year?
Posted by Ghost of Colby
Alberta, overlooking B.C.
Member since Jan 2009
16003 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:51 pm to
Chris Weinke graduated high school in 1990.
He won the Heisman in 2000.
He was 28 years old.
Posted by LSUbasketballfan
Member since Jan 2021
759 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:53 pm to
No rule made by the NCAA carries any weight. Attorneys will be lining up for this one. Will be their easiest case ever.
Posted by Uncommon Idea
Member since Feb 2025
455 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 2:57 pm to
What about gambling? Just asking for a friend.

- Srendan Borsby
This post was edited on 6/23/26 at 2:58 pm
Posted by OldSouth
Folsom, LA
Member since Oct 2011
11031 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 3:45 pm to
Hopefully this cuts off the 30 year old Aussie punter taking a scholarship from an 18 year old American kid.
Posted by RoscoeHarper
Edmond, OK
Member since Aug 2011
5022 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 4:27 pm to
quote:

It'll be interesting to see how it affects schools like BYU where students delay enrollment to go on missions.


There are three carve outs - religious mission, military service, maternity.
Posted by New Money
Athens, GA
Member since Jun 2023
4443 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 4:54 pm to
It doesn't matter what rules the NCAA adopts until the feds change the antitrust laws.
Posted by QJenk
Atl, Ga
Member since Jan 2013
17814 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 4:56 pm to
This is actually a great rule with a lot of common sense. Which means it will only take a few months for some court to rule against it.
Posted by idlewatcher
Planet Arium
Member since Jan 2012
98628 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 5:10 pm to
quote:

But as you note, they'll still lose in court the first time it gets challenged.


Based on what exactly? Serious question
Posted by OleVaught14
Member since Jun 2019
12385 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 5:12 pm to
quote:

Based on what exactly? Serious question


The exact same reasons they are losing their current eligibility based lawsuits. Until there is collective bargaining and/or congressional antitrust protection they'll just continue to lose.
Posted by EvrybodysAllAmerican
Member since Apr 2013
12941 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 6:11 pm to
quote:

No rule made by the NCAA carries any weight. Attorneys will be lining up for this one. Will be their easiest case eve


NCAA needs to grow some nuts and enforce their own rules. Courts can overrule their player eligibility decisions but they can’t overrule forfeits , tv deals, and losing bowl/playoff eligibility. That’s the only power the ncaa has and they should use it to get this madness back to some normalcy.
This post was edited on 6/23/26 at 6:14 pm
Posted by littleavery1948
Member since Oct 2014
6457 posts
Posted on 6/23/26 at 7:45 pm to
Haugh, Condon and Chinyelu gonna run it back AGAIN in 2028!
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram