K Altman Law warns NCAA's five-year eligibility doesn't ensure roster spots

The NCAA's new eligibility framework and a federal injunction may give more Division I athletes a fifth season, but K Altman Law says that expanded eligibility does not guarantee a roster spot, scholarship or compensation. The firm is urging athletes and families to scrutinize written offers, transfer rules and financial tradeoffs before committing to another year.

Why it matters: - NCAA rule changes and court orders may expand who can play another season, but athletes still need a school willing to carry them on the roster. - The gap between eligibility and actual opportunity can affect scholarships, revenue sharing, NIL income, graduation timing and career plans. - High school recruits can also lose out if returning veterans occupy roster spots and funding.

What happened: - The NCAA adopted a new Division I eligibility model in June that can allow qualifying student-athletes to compete for up to five seasons. - The model removes several older season-of-competition, redshirt, waiver and sport-specific rules and replaces them with an age- and enrollment-based window. - A Colorado federal court issued a class-wide preliminary injunction for certain Division I athletes who began competing in the 2022-23 academic year and finished four seasons by the end of 2025-26. - U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney later clarified that the injunction adds a season for eligible class members but does not override other NCAA limits tied to professional contracts, transfers, roster management and school-funded compensation. - The NCAA has appealed the ruling.

The details: - Candice Lapham, senior litigator at K Altman Law, said athletes should not assume expanded eligibility creates a right to a roster position, scholarship, revenue-sharing allocation or similar team role. - K Altman Law says athletes weighing a fifth season should confirm whether a school is offering a guaranteed roster spot or only hopeful language about playing time and team role. - Coaching changes, incoming transfers, new recruits, roster caps and changing team needs can alter an athlete's outlook. - Athletic aid may not automatically continue, and schools may be able to change or end support. - Athletes should verify whether aid covers graduate tuition, fees, housing, meals, medical treatment and other benefits, and whether appeal rights exist if aid changes. - A fifth season may create more earning chances, but athletes should separate school-funded revenue sharing from third-party NIL deals, collectives and endorsements. - Any agreement should address compensation, required services, exclusivity, ownership of content, termination rights, injury, transfer effects, eligibility changes, payment timing and dispute procedures. - Transfer-portal deadlines, admission rules, graduate-program limits, credit transfer issues and school-specific roster restrictions can still block an athlete from moving to another program. - Athletes should know whether another school has made a concrete offer before leaving an existing institution. - A fifth season may help an athlete finish a degree or pursue graduate school, but it can also delay employment, licensing, military service, additional schooling or a pro sports career. - K Altman Law says informal recruiting conversations are not the same as enforceable written commitments. - Statements from coaches, staff, collectives, donors or other representatives may not bind the university. - Material terms on roster status, aid, revenue sharing, NIL, academic placement and support services should be documented whenever possible. - Returning fifth-year players may take roster spots, scholarships, revenue-sharing dollars and playing time that otherwise could go to freshmen or younger athletes. - High school prospects should ask how many current players may return, how many spots are genuinely open, whether offers depend on other athletes leaving, how scholarships and revenue sharing will be allocated, whether transfers are being recruited at the same position and what protections exist if the roster changes before enrollment. - Lapham said the eligibility change can ripple through the recruiting pipeline, helping some veterans while leaving incoming athletes without the roster spot they expected. - K Altman Law advises student-athletes and families on NCAA eligibility, roster and scholarship disputes, transfers, NIL agreements, school-funded compensation, recruiting representations, disciplinary matters and Title IX-related concerns. - The firm says athletes and families facing time-sensitive decisions can request a confidential consultation through KAltmanLaw.com.

Between the lines: - The policy shift is not just about whether an athlete can return. It is also about who controls the scarce roster, scholarship and compensation slots attached to that extra year. - The preliminary injunction adds urgency because eligibility now depends on overlapping NCAA rules, court orders, institutional policies and individual circumstances. - That means two athletes with similar eligibility may face very different practical outcomes depending on school, sport, class status and contract terms.

What's next: - Athletes and families are expected to keep sorting through roster, scholarship, NIL and transfer decisions before committing to another season. - Final legal outcomes could still change depending on the NCAA appeal and any later court rulings. - Schools will likely continue adjusting roster management and compensation practices as the new eligibility framework takes effect.

The bottom line: - Five-year eligibility may open the door, but it does not guarantee a seat at the table.