SUPER SENIORS: A Deep Dive Into NCAA Eligibility
UNM’s Mustapha Amzil dribbles against St. John’s Aaron Scott during the Red Storm’s 85-71 win over the Lobos in Madison Square Garden on Nov. 17, 2025. Pamela Smith/Associated Press
Rules are meant to be broken.
When it comes to NCAA eligibility, do we even know what the rules are anymore?
The NCAA’s bylaws should set the rules for determining student-athletes’ eligibility to play in NCAA-sanctioned sports.
The default rule is that student athletes are given five years to play four seasons of college athletics.
Traditionally, this rule applied to athletes who competed in NCAA Division II (D-II), Division III (D-III), NAIA, or Junior College (JUCO) sports for a full season.
A season of full participation at any collegiate institution, including JUCO and D-II, would count towards the full four years of athletic competition within a five-year period.
In response to COVID-19, the NCAA granted a waiver extending another year of eligibility to most athletes who competed in NCAA sports at all levels in 2020-21.
We have reached the tail end of the COVID-19 waiver for most student-athletes whose seasons in 2020-21 did not count towards the NCAA’s five-year rule.
For student-athletes whose five-year clock started in the 2021-22 season, they are back to the traditional five years to play four seasons.
Antitrust Lawsuits Over “Lost NIL Opportunities”
Antitrust lawsuits have provided NCAA student-athletes with loopholes around the five-year rule after the NCAA allowed NIL compensation in 2021.
Student-athletes who have played at the D-II or JUCO level have argued in court that they have gotten fewer opportunities to make NIL compensation than athletes who have competed in D-I for all four years.
Several of these lawsuits are pending, so we focus on three of the most recent that appear to be changing the landscape of NCAA eligibility.
Albuquerque native Diego Pavia waves to fans as he leaves the field after Tennessee defeated Vanderbilt 36-23 on Nov. 30, 2024. George Walker IV/AP Photo
Albuquerque native Diego Pavia filed an antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA in federal district court in late 2024. Pavia claimed that because the NCAA counted his two years at New Mexico Military Institute (NMMI)—a JUCO—towards his total four years of competition, he was being treated disproportionately compared to NCAA student-athletes who competed for four years at a D-I institution because they had four years to receive NIL compensation, whereas he only had two.
The federal district court agreed.
The court granted Pavia’s motion for a preliminary injunction that stopped the NCAA from enforcing its eligibility rules to prevent Pavia from playing an additional year. The NCAA has since appealed the ruling. Pavia can play at least one additional season at Vanderbilt. Pavia turns 24 this month and has played five college football seasons: two at NMMI, two at New Mexico State and 2024 in Nashville with the Commodores.
Wisconsin defensive back Nyzier Fourqurean was a former D-II college football player who was denied a fifth year of eligibility by the NCAA. He played his first two seasons at D-II Grand Valley State before playing the last two seasons at Wisconsin.
He sued the NCAA and claimed that the NCAA eligibility rules that denied his waiver, and counted his two seasons at Grand Valley State, placed him at an unfair competitive disadvantage to receive NIL compensation compared to four-year D-I athletes, who got four years to obtain NIL money.
Like Pavia’s case, the federal district also agreed, granting an injunction that prevented the NCAA from denying Fourqurean’s request for an additional year of eligibility.
The Court’s memorandum opinion states, “[the NCAA’s] eligibility rules likely depress competition for roster spots, and thus, player NIL earnings, by categorically excluding athletes after four seasons of competition when their marketability for NIL income is more likely than not to be at its apex.” See Fourquean v. NCAA No. 3:25-cv-00068, (W.D. Wisc. Feb. 6, 2025).
In other words, the NCAA’s ability to arbitrarily enforce its eligibility rules creates an unfair restriction on competition for NIL compensation for D-II athletes like Fourqurean. Fourqurean started playing college football in 2020.
He has played four full seasons within five years and as it stands now, will be allowed to play an additional season next year at Wisconsin.
Rutgers University Safety Jett Elad tested the waters in NCAA D-I Football for one season at Ohio University before playing one season at Garden Community College and then two more seasons at UNLV, where he would have exhausted his eligibility last season under the current NCAA bylaws.
After the Pavia ruling, Elad was optimistic that he had one more season of eligibility and was reportedly offered an NIL deal worth nearly $500,000 to play at Rutgers this upcoming season.
After the NCAA denied Elad’s waiver request to play an additional season, Elad sued the NCAA in federal district court, arguing that the NCAA’s five-year rule unfairly punishes players like him who, like Pavia, have taken other routes to compete in NCAA sports, but have less opportunities to receive NIL compensation compared to athletes who have played NCAA D-I for four seasons.
The federal district court in New Jersey is expected to rule on Elad’s case this week. Elad has been enrolled in college since 2019 and will turn 24 this year.
Possible Change To the NCAA’s Five-Year Rule
The cases for Pavia, Fourqurean, and Elad do not necessarily have a precedential effect on all other NCAA athletes.
A court injunction for one of these athletes applies only to their case, but the NCAA has responded to some of these lawsuits by creating exceptions to the five-year rule for all similarly situated athletes.
For example, after the Court’s decision in Pavia’s case, the NCAA issued a memo to its member institutions granting an additional year of eligibility to JUCO, NAIA , and other similarly situated athletes whose eligibility would have expired after the 2024-25 athletic calendar year.
The antitrust litigation surrounding the NCAA’s eligibility rules raises the question of whether the NCAA will permanently change its eligibility bylaws to allow all student athletes, whether they played in JUCO, D-II or all their seasons in D-1, an additional year for a total of five years of eligibility to play in athletic competition. A rumor was floated in early 2025 that the NCAA was considering a fifth year of eligibility for all student athletes:
A fifth year of eligibility was further discussed by a member of the NCAA Board of Governors in mid-January 2025: “I think the five-and-five model is one being considered that could simplify things, remove red tape and there would be a lot more certainly for student-athletes,” Linda Livingstone, Baylor University President and the Chair of the NCAA Board of Governors, as reported by Yahoo Sports. “In theory, it sounds like an interesting solution that would greatly simplify things. My understanding is no redshirts or waivers. You can play five seasons, but you only have five years.”
The NCAA's National Convention was held in Nashville in January and no major rule change was announced after the convention.
The NCAA Division I Council and the NCAA Division I Board of Directors can change the NCAA bylaws that set the current five-year eligibility rules.
The Council acts as the NCAA’s primary legislative authority, but the Board must ultimately approve certain changes to existing bylaws or the creation of new bylaws by the Council.
The NCAA Division I Council and the Division I Board of Directors meet several times throughout the year and major changes are documented in written meeting reports posted on the NCAA’s website. Possible changes to the five-year rule were not discussed in the most recently available meeting reports from both the Council and the Board from earlier in the year.
Former, Current, and Prospective Lobos’ Eligibility
Lobo fans have wondered how former Lobo basketball players Mustapha Amzil and CJ Noland have any eligibility left after they recently announced they were entering the NCAA transfer portal.
The short answer is, they don’t, yet.
Under the current NCAA bylaws, Amzil has exhausted his eligibility. He played 155 games over the course of five seasons, including an additional COVID-19 year. Amzil has entered the portal as a graduate transfer but is not eligible to participate because graduate transfers are subject to the same five-year rule.
C.J. Noland is also out of eligibility.
Noland does not get a COVID-19 year because he began athletic competition in 2021-22. He’s played his full four seasons in four years — 122 games at three different schools.
At this time, it looks unlikely that Amzil or Noland would qualify for a hardship waiver or another waiver extending their eligibility because neither had a season significantly limited by injury, nor did they appear to have their seasons limited in any way by circumstances beyond their control.
Noland and Amzil are likely hoping for a change to the five-year rule, which could grant both of them one more year of eligibility. Even though Amzil has already played five years, one of those did not count because it was a COVID-19 year.
He would get one more season if the NCAA modified its five-year rule to give college athletes five years of athletic competition.
The question with recent Lobo basketball commits Antonio Chol and Milos Vicentic is how much eligibility they have left. Chol played two seasons at Rutgers, though he only played in four games his freshman season and will be given a redshirt for that year. He played in seven games in his sophomore year at Rutgers and a full season at Garden City Community College in 2024-25.
The Pavia rule does not extend him an additional year of eligibility because it only applies to JUCO and NAIA athletes whose eligibility would run in 2024-25. As it stands now, Chol will have two years of eligibility, but could potentially get a third year pending a possible rule change from the NCAA for JUCO or similarly situated players by giving them an additional season of eligibility.
Vicentic started his career at D-II McKendree University in 2020-21. He played in only two games that season as a redshirt. That year does not count towards the season he played, and he also does not get an automatic additional COVID-19 year.
Vicentic played three more full seasons at D-II McKendree, then transferred to UC San Diego to play for Olen last season as a graduate transfer. Vicentic suffered a season-ending injury in UCSD’s season opener. His last season does not count towards his eligibility.
He currently has one year of eligibility, pending a potential rule change from the NCAA for D-II players that would extend their eligibility.
Some Lobo fans have been monitoring transfer portal entries of Hayden Gray and Tyler McGhie — two standout players for new UNM head men’s basketball coach Eric Olen last season at UCSD.
Many pundits around the country thought Gray and McGhie exhausted their eligibility.
Gray, who led all of NCAA D-I last season with 110 steals while also shoot 41% from 3-point range, started his college career in 2021-22 at D-II Azusa Pacific. He’s played his full four seasons of eligibility in four years and is ineligible under the current NCAA bylaws.
The same is true for McGhie, who set a UCSD single-season record last year with 117 made 3-point field goals. McGhie began athletic competition in 2020-21 and played in 16 games at Western Carolina.
McGhie transferred to D-II Southern Nazarene and played in two full seasons.
McGhie was eligible for the COVID-19 extra year and played two more seasons under Olen at UCSD. Like Amzil, McGhie has played as much college basketball as he could and would need a waiver granted or a rule change by the NCAA to be eligible.
