NCAA 5-in-5 Rule Faces Legal Challenges as College Football Season Nears

The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit on August 21, 2026 paused an earlier ruling that allowed certain class of 2022 student-athletes to compete for a fifth season. With the college football season days away, schools and athletes face continued uncertainty as similar eligibility challenges continue in federal and state courts.

In our March 3, 2026 update on the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) eligibility rulings, we noted that looking ahead, institutions should anticipate continued challenges to NCAA eligibility rules and operational variability that results. In the months that followed, this was borne out, most notably through the NCAA's 5-in-5 rule and subsequent challenges in federal court.

NCAA ELIGIBILITY RULE AND FEDERAL COURT CHALLENGE

On June 23, 2026, the NCAA adopted the 5-in-5 rule, which provided student-athletes with five seasons of competition within a five-year eligibility window. This rule effectively eliminated the redshirt system, in which student-athletes could retain eligibility based on playing time, as well as hardship or injury waivers. The NCAA applied this rule to all student-athletes from the high school class of 2023, who would generally be rising seniors this coming 2026–2027 academic year.

A group of student-athletes from the high school class of 2022 quickly challenged the 5-in-5 rule in Wisne v. NCAA in the US District Court for the District of Colorado. On July 31, 2026, Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney granted a preliminary injunction in the plaintiffs' favor, based on the plaintiffs' argument that the 5-in-5 rule arbitrarily denied their right to compete and earn compensation through NIL and the NCAA revenue-sharing system in violation of antitrust laws.

The NCAA sought clarification of Judge Sweeney's ruling, and on August 2, 2026, the court clarified that while the NCAA was enjoined from prohibiting the plaintiffs from competing, the ruling did not enjoin the NCAA's roster limit, transfer, and revenue-sharing rules. This clarification was particularly important for football, as the transfer portal closed on January 16, 2026, meaning that players who did not enter the portal could not retroactively do so, limiting them to returning to their prior teams if they were eligible for a fifth year of competition.

The NCAA appealed to the Tenth Circuit and sought a stay of the injunction, which was granted on August 21, 2026 pending appeal. With only days until the college football season starts, schools will have to react quickly to any further Tenth Circuit decision regarding class of 2022 players who were previously relying on the initial injunction for eligibility.

STATE COURT ELIGIBILITY CHALLENGES

Outside of the federal antitrust context, class of 2022 student-athletes have been filing state court claims for eligibility and the ability to enter the transfer portal on a player-by-player basis. For example, on August 19, 2026, in Pyburn v. NCAA in Louisiana state court, a group of 33 student-athletes, including 16 college football players, obtained a temporary restraining order (TRO) permitting them to return to college athletics and enter the transfer portal. This TRO was issued just over a week before the start of the college football season and after several of these football players had signed NFL contracts and participated in NFL camps. These players are now seeking renewed NCAA eligibility and transfer rights as a fallback if they are cut by their NFL teams.

LOOKING AHEAD

As the recent Tenth Circuit stay in Wisne creates uncertainty and urgency for class of 2022 athletes, we expect state-level suits to be filed in quick succession ahead of the fast-approaching college football season, which will not bring uniformity or nationwide clarity regarding the NCAA's ability to enforce its rules. Until any congressional intervention or collective bargaining, the piecemeal challenges to NCAA enforcement will continue.