WVU Ruling Sets Stage for Supreme Court Fight Over NCAA Eligibility Limits

This signals that the U. S. Supreme Court is potentially one step closer to weighing in on whether the NCAA limiting athlete eligibility to four seasons of a sport in five years is a violation of antitrust law.

The ruling comes as Yahoo Sports reports on Wednesday that the NCAA is contemplating a change in eligibility rules so that athletes would have five years to compete from the time they turn 19 or when they graduate from high school—whichever is earlier. That potential rule change, just like any other NCAA eligibility rule, could be challenged as violating antitrust law since it would not be bargained with a players’ association. More from Sportico.

com Varsity Nears Trial in Latest Cheer Antitrust Suit. Will It Proceed? Sportradar's Antitrust Suit From Ex-Partner Faces Challenges NCAA May Alter Pro Draft Eligibility.

Antitrust Suits Will Follow. In the absence of collective bargaining, an eligibility rule can be depicted as problematic since the NCAA, as the controlling overseer of conferences and colleges, “buys” the services of college athletes. It’s also problematic because schools agreeing to restrict how long each could pay athletes means they are conspiring to limit how they compete for athletes, depriving those athletes of the fruits of the competition.