NCAA tweaks proposed 5-for-5 rule; vote schedule for June 23-24
The NCAA Cabinet met Friday and tweaked the proposed 5-for-5 Rule. The key point of this age-based eligibility model would allow student-athletes up to five years of competition during a five-year window. The idea is to simplify eligibility and eliminate all the current exceptions, such as redshirt seasons, medical waivers, and subjective hardship appeals.
Yesterday’s tweak, per ESPN, “now says the clock will start upon initial full-time enrollment in college or at the beginning of the academic year following their 19th birthday, whichever occurs first.”
The rule has a lot of support, including NCAA President Charlie Baker and outgoing VT President Tim Sands, who is currently the Chairman of the Division I Board of Directors.
Sands was quoted as saying “This is about clear and consistent standards. The time is now to reform the period of eligibility rules.”
This rule will reportedly take effect at the beginning of the 2026–27 academic year, which means current student-athletes would be covered and could potentially play a fifth season. So VT softball’s upcoming year’s roster, including seniors-to-be Michelle Chatfield, Emma Mazzarone, Zoe Yaeger, Addy Foster, Annika Rohs and others, could play an extra year, IF they so desired (AND IF there were a roster spot available).
The downside, as Extra Inning Softball recently pointed out, is the roster congestion that this rule could cause. For example, VT Softball currently has five commits in the Class of 2027. If the roster limit stays at 25 (which it sounds like it will), there could be a real log jam if some of the players want to play a fifth year.
Stay tuned.
16 Replies
1mo
Otherwise, there will be few opportunities for kids to continue their athletic careers at the college level.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
1mo
softball programs. Isn't it that way in other sports? "Super" Travel Softball?
(In response to this post by UpperQuad)
1mo
It also makes it tough for students who enroll after military service and want to play a sport. On a positive note, it should reduce the number of foreign pros brought over to the USA for college teams in track, basketball, and soccer.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
1mo
... folks on a mission or someone who goes in the service and then want to play sports.
NCAA would lose a court case so fast if they ruled either of those athletes out of eligibility.
(In response to this post by UpperQuad)
1mo
“Exceptions are being considered for religious missions, military service, and pregnancy.”
(In response to this post by UpperQuad)
1mo
My guess would be 16 or 17 but that information is not available
(In response to this post by FriendofCoal)
1mo
. . . Alumni Weekend breakfast I'd say your estimate is likely accurate. It's clear that our coaches need to be graded on a curve based on resources provided. We're just not going to be competitive in some sports with the current funding/spending model.
** Edited by MidloHokie at 6/7/2026, 8:26:56 PM
(In response to this post by VTChip)
1mo
consolidation of talent.
(In response to this post by MidloHokie)
N
nkhooch
1mo
(In response to this post by VTChip)
1mo
That is, student-athletes who exercised their Covid year did not count against a school’s roster limit.
I’m hoping something similar will happen this time, but it hasn’t been mentioned in any of the articles I’ve read
(In response to this post by nkhooch)
1mo
If you have a player the caliber of Michelle Chatfield who you can get a 5th year of playing, certainly you give her a roster spot over a recruit. It's equal to giving a roster spot to someone like Addy Foster thru the portal over a recruit.
Wonder if junior colleges have softball programs or if there are places for softball like Fork Union is for football, not military, but someplace where a recruit can go for a season or two with the understanding that they can get spot at VT in a year or two instead of right out of hi school. Maybe a higher level of travel ball to delay college.
Automatic 5th year without "permission" may have a serious ripple effect.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
1mo
Probably be a juggling act by Pete to make it work. 🤞
(In response to this post by VTChip)
1mo
research but six looks like an abnormally high number. Virtually an entire recruiting class staying on the team all four years and now being given the opportunity for a fifth year? If six stay on next season for one end of the roster, something definitely has to give on the other end, probably the middle and factors into how you work the portal.
Roster Management is more than juggling. It's become Rocket Science.
(In response to this post by Hockeydad)