Women's Basketball
Sponsored by

new NCAA 5 for 5 rule

1,999 Views | 9 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by stu
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Due to a recent court decision this is now applicable to class of 2022 players. Until it isn't, who knows how the court cases will finally be resolved.

Anyway it won't apply to Sakima (class of 2020) or Claudia (class of 2021). But current seniors Lulu, Gisella, Mjracle, and Shannon will get a fifth year (2027-28) if they want to stay.
SFCALBear72
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who are likely candidates to take advantage of this ruling?

I'm guessing Gisella and Shannon.

I think Lulu has her eyes on the WNBA particularly with two more teams soon to be added. Mjracle also
has that vision.
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I have no idea who might stay. I assume that will depend on how much each player and the team as a whole improve this season. I'd guess anyone with a good chance to make a WNBA team would take it. Then if we make it to the Sweet Sixteen or better some players might want another shot.
OBear073akaSMFan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

I have no idea who might stay. I assume that will depend on how much each player and the team as a whole improve this season. I'd guess anyone with a good chance to make a WNBA team would take it. Then if we make it to the Sweet Sixteen or better some players might want another shot.

Definitely if the team does well players will have a better chance of staying. This is a key season for the Bears!
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49662242/ex-ole-miss-starters-granted-restraining-order-5th-year

Former Ole Miss starters Dae'Quan Wright, Zxavian Harris and Wydett Williams, all of whom signed with NFL teams this summer, are among a group of athletes who were granted a temporary restraining order Wednesday to return to college for one more season.

The trio of former Rebels standouts joined 30 other athletes from a variety of sports in a lawsuit filed against the NCAA in Louisiana state court Wednesday. The NCAA did not respond to ESPN's request for a comment Wednesday evening, but the association has appealed similar decisions made it other courts this summer.
brevity
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

Due to a recent court decision this is now applicable to class of 2022 players. Until it isn't, who knows how the court cases will finally be resolved.

Anyway it won't apply to Sakima (class of 2020) or Claudia (class of 2021). But current seniors Lulu, Gisella, Mjracle, and Shannon will get a fifth year (2027-28) if they want to stay.


You're combining two separate things. The NCAA itself passed a 5-in-5 rule over the summer that applies to current student-athletes, including the seniors you mentioned. The more recent federal court ruling ONLY addresses players who are already out of eligibility after graduating high school in 2022 and completing four years at college: 2022-23, 2023-24, 2024-25, 2025-26.

Under this 5-in-5 rule, the only players who complete their eligibility in Spring 2027 are redshirt seniors, and anyone else who graduated high school in 2022 and are somehow still playing (JUCO transfers maybe, or players now eligible for 2026-27 because of the court ruling).

There are some explicit exceptions to the 5-in-5 rule, like for players in service academies and those who undertake religious missions. But for the most part, everyone in Division I has 5 years after high school graduation or their 19th birthday (whichever is first) to complete their eligibility:

Once the five-year period starts, it runs continuously. It does not pause because a student-athlete does not compete, transfers, sits out, changes teams or takes time away from participation, meaning student-athletes, coaches and athletics departments no longer have to track athletic "redshirts."

To my knowledge, the California 2026-27 roster looks like this for 5-in-5 purposes:

Year 5

6-1 forward Naya Ojukwu (10.9 minutes per game in 2025-26)

Year 4

5-10 guard Lulu Twidale (36.3 mpg)
5-10 guard Mjracle Sheppard (29.7 mpg)
5-11 guard Gisella Maul (29.4 mpg)
5-11 guard Anastasia Drosouni (6.7 mpg)

5-10 guard Shannon Dowell (29.2 mpg at Missouri)

Year 3

5-10 guard Sofia Bowes (2.4 mpg)

6-5 center Albina Syla (24.7 mpg at Rhode Island)

Year 2

6-0 forward Taylor Barnes (31.6 mpg)

6-2 forward Carly Amborn (3.7 mpg at Stanford)

Year 1

6-4 forward Jovana Jevtovic
6-3 forward Anna Lagonikaki
5-8 guard Ruby Perkins
6-2 forward Zara Russell

Notes:

- Naya Ojukwu, despite being classified as a junior on the team website, is a Year 5 player; she enrolled as a Utah freshman in the fall of 2022.

- Anastasia Drosouni's redshirt freshman year of 2023-24 is now irrelevant; it grants her no more time than anyone who did play in 2023-24.

- Because 13 of the 14 players on the 2026-27 squad could theoretically return for 2027-28, Charmin Smith's ability to recruit current high school seniors is severely limited for next year. Specifically, with a hard roster limit of 15 from the House Settlement, she can only add 2 new players, whether freshmen or incoming transfers.

Keep in mind that, at a national level, an entire class of college seniors who don't have to leave in Spring 2027 creates an roster crunch and an admissions crisis for high school athletic prospects trying to enter college. The best among them will find the space, but there just isn't room for the rest of them.
ClayK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It seems unlikely that any Cal players will make WNBA rosters, though it is possible, I guess. But barring that, all those players can probably make more money playing in college -- not to mention getting a free master's if they've already graduated -- so why not stay?

Of course, they may not stay at Cal. If someone else offers them more money, they would likely take the better salary.
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
brevity said:

...
Naya Ojukwu, despite being classified as a junior on the team website, is a Year 5 player; she enrolled as a Utah freshman in the fall of 2022.
...

Naya's bio shows she played at 3 different schools as a freshie before coming to Cal. I couldn't find any details but I assume that required some kind of exemptions from usual NCAA rules. Would any of those exemptions still apply?
brevity
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

brevity said:

...
Naya Ojukwu, despite being classified as a junior on the team website, is a Year 5 player; she enrolled as a Utah freshman in the fall of 2022.
...

Naya's bio shows she played at 3 different schools as a freshie before coming to Cal. I couldn't find any details but I assume that required some kind of exemptions from usual NCAA rules. Would any of those exemptions still apply?


I don't think so, but it's not 100 percent clear.

Her bio is indeed vague, but the May 2025 announcement that Naya Ojukwu was joining the team provides a couple more details.

Prior to Morgan State, Ojukwu spent the 2023-24 season at Gonzaga where she received a medical hardship waiver from the NCAA after appearing in nine games and averaging 1.2 points and 1.0 rebounds in 6.2 minutes per game. She spent the 2022-23 season at Utah and played in four games with averages of 5.3 minutes, 3.3 points and 2.3 rebounds per contest before receiving a hardship waiver from the NCAA.

According to this law firm blog article, the NCAA 5-in-5 rule would get rid of redshirts and medical hardship waivers:

Under the proposed five-year eligibility model, athletes would no longer be able to regain seasons of eligibility through redshirts or waivers, except for specific circumstances such as maternity leave, military service, or religious missions. The focus shifts from counting seasons of competition to tracking whether the athlete remains within their five-year window.

NCAA President Charlie Baker has emphasized this proposal's goal of creating a "much simpler eligibility process." The NCAA's proposed changes aim to simplify eligibility rules and provide clearer standards for student-athletes, addressing inconsistencies that have led to numerous legal challenges.


The idea is that the NCAA would no longer have to review these injury situations on a case by case basis, because every player would have a hard and automatic 5 years to squeeze in as much eligibility as he or she can. That seems to be their intention moving forward, but does that also mean reversing any redshirts or medical hardship waivers they have previously awarded? Even if the answer is yes, I suspect someone who missed 2 years of eligibility will eventually challenge the 5-in-5 rule in court.

stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks, that makes sense.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.