Navigating NCAA Eligibility: COVID-19 Waivers, Transfer Portal Dynamics, and the Future of College Sports

The landscape of NCAA eligibility has undergone significant transformations in recent years, driven by factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the advent of the transfer portal, and the introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) opportunities. These changes have created both opportunities and challenges for student-athletes, coaches, and institutions alike. This article delves into the complexities of NCAA eligibility, exploring the impact of COVID-19 waivers, the dynamics of the transfer portal, and the ongoing legal battles that could reshape the future of college sports.

The COVID-19 Eligibility Relief: A Temporary Shift

The COVID-19 pandemic forced the NCAA to cancel all championships in the spring of 2020, prompting them to propose “eligibility relief” to senior student athletes who missed out on the opportunity to compete in their sports at that time. In response to the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the NCAA granted student-athletes an additional year of eligibility. This decision, while intended to provide relief to those whose seasons were cut short, has had far-reaching consequences.

Impact on Rosters and Recruiting

Because eligibility relief allows senior athletes to compete for an additional year, a program’s coach’s recruiting needs may change-especially if they decide to hold roster spots for current athletes who plan to return for a fifth year. If you are a 2020 seniors who has already committed, eligibility relief could impact your rookie year. If the program you plan to play for includes several seniors, you could be facing a very different roster if your school decides to honor an extension of eligibility.

The extension of eligibility impacted team dynamics, recruiting strategies, and scholarship distribution. As Wendy Wilson, Associate Director of Athletics-Compliance, noted, “We still don’t know everyone who is coming back.” The fluidity of these decisions created uncertainty for coaches and administrators as they navigated roster management and financial aid allocations.

Two Forms of Extensions

There are two forms of extensions that the NCAA set in place. The first one is a season of competition waiver. All winter and fall sports from this past year automatically qualify for this waiver. Last year, spring sports got some of their games in and students competed. The NCAA gave all these athletes a season of competition waiver because they didn’t play a high percentage of their games. For fall sports, the NCAA did the same thing. A few months later, the NCAA gave the same waiver to winter sports. For 2021 spring sports, however, this changes. If a team plays more than fifty percent of their games, an athlete’s season counts towards their eligibility. Spring sports have a cap since they don’t play a conference-only schedule. This waiver also gives schools the right to cancel games when they need to.

The second form of extension from the NCAA is the extension of eligibility. This allows students to come back for another year even if they were planning to graduate in 2021. This also offers non-seniors a chance to add an extra year of eligibility to their collegiate career.

Institutional Discretion

Universities have the ability to self-impose their waivers. For example, the University of Wisconsin told student athletes they needed to move on. GVSU on the other hand has offered this to their student athletes. Not only has GVSU had to work with their own students who decide to extend their eligibility, but they also have to deal with transfer students who want to come since their former schools don’t offer an eligibility extension.

Financial Aid Implications

These decisions also affect teams’ financial aid situations. The NCAA gives schools financial aid limits for their teams. Institutions, coaches, and students decide on financial aid. At GVSU, the final word on financial aid decisions comes from a team’s coach. The administration at GVSU is still hashing out the final numbers for the team’s financial scholarship budget. There are other factors for these decisions, like the number of new recruits coming to the team next year. For the 2022 academic year, the NCAA will exempt a student athlete who would have graduated in 2021 from a roster.

The Rise of the Transfer Portal and NIL: A New Era for Student-Athletes

The NCAA transfer portal and NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) have ushered in a new era for student-athletes, granting them greater autonomy and financial opportunities. However, these developments have also raised concerns about roster management, competitive balance, and the overall landscape of college sports.

Increased Player Mobility

Student athletes normally have five years to play four seasons of their sport. Prior to the portal and new NCAA transfer rules, student-athletes faced several hurdles if they wanted to transfer more than once, and coaches did not have a whole new crop of seasoned players available each time the portal opened. Now players have more opportunities to be wooed by coaches and try on a new program to see if it is finally the right fit. And if it isn’t? They have the freedom to go somewhere else. And what happens when that next school finally feels like the right spot, but they only have one more year of eligibility left? They are going to want more.

Read also: Crafting Your NCAA Profile

The transfer portal allows student-athletes to transfer to other institutions with greater ease, seeking better opportunities for playing time, coaching, or academic pursuits. This increased player mobility has led to significant roster turnover and has forced coaches to adapt their recruiting strategies.

NIL Opportunities and the Desire for Extended Eligibility

With the dawn of the NIL era, student-athletes now have the ability to make money while they play collegiate athletics, perhaps more money than they will earn in their first job. And they understandably want to take advantage of that opportunity for as long as they can.

The ability for student-athletes to profit from their NIL has created a financial incentive to extend their college careers. Athletes who have the potential to earn significant NIL revenue may be more inclined to utilize their extra year of eligibility or seek waivers to prolong their playing careers.

Concerns about Competitive Balance and Roster Management

Michigan State Hall of Fame coach Tom Izzo went further, calling the extra eligibility year a “good intention” that might have been a “mistake” in hindsight. “It sounded fair and good, but when you added that with the NIL and the transfer portal, it’s been absolute chaos,” Izzo said.

The combination of the transfer portal and NIL opportunities has raised concerns about competitive balance in college sports. Some argue that the concentration of talent at a smaller number of institutions could widen the gap between the "haves" and "have-nots." Additionally, managing rosters and scholarships has become increasingly complex, as coaches must navigate the competing interests of returning players, incoming recruits, and transfer portal additions.

Legal Challenges to NCAA Eligibility Rules: A Shifting Landscape

The NCAA's eligibility rules have faced numerous legal challenges in recent years, as student-athletes seek greater control over their careers and compensation. These lawsuits could have a profound impact on the future of college sports.

Recent Court Cases

There is a record number of student-athletes in the transfer portal for 2025 and many of them do not have eligibility remaining but are simply waiting to see what happens in several court cases across the country. After the results from Pavia v. the NCAA resulted in a blanket waiver that extended an additional year of eligibility to former junior college athletes enrolled at a Division I institution facing their final season of eligibility - yes, it’s that specific - many peers are now hoping they will see a similar result.

Several high-profile cases have challenged the NCAA's restrictions on eligibility, including:

Fourqurean v. NCAA (January 2025): Nyzier Fourqurean, a former football player at the University of Wisconsin, sought an injunction to stop the NCAA from enforcing the five-year rule. Fourqurean argued that his year at Division II Grand Valley State should not count against his Division I eligibility and cited NIL earnings and House settlement revenue sharing as reasons for wanting to stay in school.
Elad v. NCAA (March 2025): Jett Elad, a football player seeking an extra year to play at Rutgers University, challenged the NCAA's five-year ruling, citing his competition at a junior college and the potential to earn $500,000 in NIL money. Elad's request for a preliminary injunction was granted, with the court citing the changing landscape of college athletics and irreparable harm to his NIL earning potential and future NFL career.
Zeigler v. NCAA (May 2025): Zakai Zeigler, a University of Tennessee basketball player, challenged the NCAA's limitation to four seasons of eligibility, arguing that he could make between $2 and $4 million in NIL if he were able to play a fifth season. Zeigler's case also invokes Tennessee's NIL state law, which prohibits the NCAA from interfering with an athlete's ability to earn compensation.

Potential Implications

All of these lawsuits will have far reaching implications on NCAA eligibility. The onslaught of lawsuits and waivers is likely not the status quo the NCAA wants to maintain but how do they solve this? Is it allowing every student-athlete five seasons of competition and withdrawing the waiver process entirely? Could it be tied to academics and if a student-athlete graduates in four years but wants to also complete a graduate degree they could do so while continuing to play college sports? It is also fair to consider that five years might not be the stopping point. At what point will a court say that a person has had enough time in college even if they still have the ability to earn NIL compensation? Will there be a monetary threshold to consider? Could student-athletes with the ability to make over a certain amount in NIL be granted an additional year as opposed to a student-athlete who does not? All of these are questions the NCAA needs to consider.

These lawsuits have the potential to reshape the NCAA's eligibility rules and could lead to greater flexibility for student-athletes. The outcomes of these cases could determine whether athletes are granted additional years of eligibility based on factors such as NIL earning potential or the level of competition they have previously faced.

Academic Eligibility: The Foundation for Competition

While the focus often lies on athletic performance and eligibility waivers, academic eligibility remains a fundamental requirement for NCAA competition. Student-athletes must meet specific academic standards to be eligible to compete, ensuring that they are making progress towards a degree.

Core Course Requirements

Becoming eligible to compete in NCAA college sports requires meeting specific academic, amateurism, and participation standards as defined by the NCAA Eligibility Center and the NCAA Division I and II manuals. For Division I specifically, athletes must complete those four seasons within five calendar years from initial full-time enrollment. You’ll need to pass 16 approved NCAA Core Courses during your high school years. Exact requirements vary slightly between D1 and D2 schools. Your GPA will be calculated based on your performance in core courses, not your entire high school transcript.

Division 1 and 2 athletes must register with the Eligibility Center. You’ll need to pass 16 approved NCAA Core Courses during your high school years. Exact requirements vary slightly between D1 and D2 schools. Your GPA will be calculated based on your performance in core courses, not your entire high school transcript.

The 10/7 Rule

The 10/7 rule is a specific requirement for NCAA D1 eligibility. It means you must complete 10 of the required 16 core courses before your senior year of high school, or seventh semester. Seven of these 10 courses should be in subjects like English, Math or Natural/Physical Science.

Division III Standards

Division 3 schools are responsible for setting their own academic eligibility rules. If you are going to be competing for a D3 institution, or if you are unsure what division level you’ll be competing at, you can start with a free NCAA Profile.

Redshirting and Academic Eligibility

Redshirting preserves a season of competition but does not extend the five-year clock. Redshirting does not extend the five-year clock. If approved, the season does not count as one of the four seasons of competition. However, the five-year clock still runs unless additional relief is granted.

It is important to note that meeting NCAA eligibility requirements requires careful planning, academically and athletically. You may receive an additional season only in limited cases, such as: approved medical hardship waivers, prior COVID relief (if applicable), or NCAA-approved legislative relief.

The Future of NCAA Eligibility: Navigating Uncertainty

The future of NCAA eligibility remains uncertain, as the organization grapples with legal challenges, evolving player dynamics, and the need to balance the interests of student-athletes, institutions, and fans.

Potential Solutions and Considerations

The NCAA needs to consider potential solutions to address the challenges posed by the current eligibility landscape. Some possible approaches include:

Standardizing Eligibility Rules: The NCAA could consider adopting a more standardized approach to eligibility, potentially allowing all student-athletes five seasons of competition.
Tying Eligibility to Academics: Linking eligibility to academic progress, such as requiring student-athletes to graduate in four years to be eligible for an additional season, could incentivize academic achievement.
Establishing NIL Thresholds: The NCAA could explore the possibility of granting additional eligibility to student-athletes who meet certain NIL earning thresholds, recognizing the financial incentives for extending their careers.

Unseen Consequences

One of the unseen consequences of NIL is the fact that student-athletes want to stay in school longer to continue earning more. The downstream impact of this, though, is that students coming from high school may not be able to compete for roster spots against 22- or 23-year-olds with more experience and physical ability, particularly in the coming world of roster limits. What will the lawsuits and waivers from these athletes look like in four years when they’ve only played their last two seasons because they simply didn’t have the skills or abilities their older teammates did?

The Limbo for Coaches and Athletes

Many coaches, compliance officers and student-athletes will be in limbo this summer while college sports waits to see the results of these lawsuits. Some student-athletes will have to decide to move on given how long the courts can take, but unless the NCAA decides to make sweeping changes to their eligibility rules, these lawsuits will not be going away anytime soon.

tags: #NCAA #COVID #year #eligibility