After a robust discussion, the Division I Board of Directors on Monday directed the Division I Cabinet to advance an age-based eligibility concept that, if adopted in its current form, would permit student-athletes up to five years of eligibility beginning the regular academic year after they turn 19 or graduate from high school, whichever happens earlier. Under that model, Division I student-athletes would no longer be limited to only four seasons of competition within their five-year eligibility window. 

“The time is now to reform the period of eligibility rules to provide Division I student-athletes and our schools clear and consistent standards that align with current college athletes’ experiences,” said Tim Sands, president at Virgina Tech and chair of the board. “The board fully supports student-athletes receiving the unprecedented financial benefits now available to them and emphasized these changes would protect opportunities for high school student-athletes to access the benefits only college sports can provide, while delivering predictable outcomes for student-athletes and our schools.”

The board also expressed support for two key elements to be included in future changes:   

• Maintain the Division I core guarantees — including degree-completion funding for up to 10 years after a student-athlete’s eligibility expires if they have not yet earned a degree.
• Maintain existing rules — allowing four seasons of competition in five years of eligibility — for student-athletes competing in the 2025-26 academic year; new rules are not expected to retroactively apply to student-athletes whose eligibility is or will be completed by the spring of 2026.

“The new age-based model produced by the Cabinet and discussed by the board today is a great step forward in simplifying and stabilizing college sports, especially football. In addition to clearly defining an age range of college players, it allows student-athletes to compete over the entirety of their eligibility period,” said Sam Edwards, a football student-athlete at Michigan State and member of the board.

“This makes a world of sense in football for coaches and players alike, especially in the context of roster limits, where coaches can now use their entire roster without worrying about ‘saving’ a subset of players for redshirts. In a sport where many young players come in ready to contribute to varying degrees and in different phases of the game, this new eligibility landscape will be good for the game,” Edwards said.

The Cabinet is expected to meet next in May.

Transfers and tampering enforcement

At the request of the Big Ten Conference, the board unanimously adopted a narrow change to rules for the notification-of-transfer process, allowing schools to decline to enter a student-athlete into the Transfer Portal only if the student-athlete agreed to release the school from that requirement as part of a valid settlement-related benefits agreement with the school, for the period of that agreement.

The board also introduced a proposal that would direct the infractions process to presume violations occurred in cases of impermissible contact with transfer students (i.e., tampering). If the proposal is adopted by the Division I Cabinet in June, schools suspected of tampering with student-athletes prior to their entry into the Transfer Portal would need to demonstrate the violation did not occur to avoid penalties.

Student-Athlete Advocacy Committee

The board also received a report from the Division I Student-Athlete Advocacy Committee —formerly known as the Student-Athlete Advisory Committee — about its ongoing work to develop a potential model for the committee’s legislative authority. If ultimately supported by the Division I Cabinet, the model would enable SAAC to more actively propose rules that directly impact the student-athlete experience, including, for example, potential changes to Division I core guarantees.

Division I SAAC changed its name earlier this year to reflect the broader role student-athletes play in the restructured Division I governance model, which includes an increase in student-athlete representation on major committees by 128%.

–News release courtesy of the NCAA