Abstract
The NCAA imposes durational eligibility limits restricting a student athlete’s eligibility to compete in college sports. Under NCAA rules, an athlete is granted four-seasons of competition in any single sport and no more than five-years of eligibility commencing at matriculation. These rules have come under increasing scrutiny in federal court, as the law acknowledges commercial realities. In numerous cases, federal district courts have enjoined their enforcement against Division I football players under the Sherman Act. On the eve of the Final Four, 2026, the White House weighed in, expressing support for durational limits, and arguing (without support) that imposing limits will enhance, rather than inhibit, opportunity. A fact-based examination of the student experience in higher-ed, however, demonstrates that the NCAA’s durational eligibility rules do not support, and even undermine, the NCAA’s stated mission: to promote participation in athletics as a vital, co-curricular student activity. This essay argues that the NCAA’s durational eligibility rules should be abolished and that students should be permitted to compete as student-athletes for as long as their institutions are willing to permit them to remain students and athletes. Doing so will remove a discriminatory, illegal, and irrational ruleset and allow universities and colleges to determine which of their students are eligible to compete in college sports at all levels.
Recommended Citation
Lewis, Michael
(2026)
"DOING AWAY WITH THE NCAA’S DURATION OF ELIGIBILITY RULES,"
UNH Sports Law Review: Vol. 5:
Iss.
1, Article 4.
Available at:
https://scholars.unh.edu/unhslr/vol5/iss1/4
Recommended Citation
Lewis, Michael (2026) "Doing Away With The NCAA's Duration of Eligibility Rules," UNH Sports Law Review: Vol.5: Iss.1: Article 1.