A possible change in college eligibility rules to allow athletes five years of competition instead of four will not be implemented in the near future, according to a memo circulated on Wednesday by the NCAA.

What has been dubbed the “five-for-five” rule, allowing athletes to play five seasons without using redshirts, has been an oft-discussed topic among college football and basketball coaches, with some saying they expected the change soon.

Wednesday’s memo, sent to Division I schools by Illinois athletic director and Division I cabinet chair Josh Whitman, made it clear that the current eligibility rules — five years to play four seasons — will remain in place for the rest of this academic year as well as the 2026-27 academic year.

“During its October meeting, the Division I Cabinet determined that, for the remainder of the current academic year and for the rosters competing during the 2026-27 academic year, it will maintain existing eligibility rules as they pertain to student-athletes competing in no more than four seasons of athletics competition in a particular sport over a consecutive five-year period,” Whitman said in the memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Athletic. “The Cabinet is studying these policies, along with several related eligibility rules, and will later consider what changes, if any, to implement for future academic years. When challenged, the current rules have been upheld by the overwhelming majority of courts.”

The NCAA eligibility rules have been under legal attack for much of the last year, with more than two dozen lawsuits challenging what counts toward the current standard of five years to play four seasons.

Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia tipped the first domino by claiming in a lawsuit that his time playing in junior college should not count toward his NCAA eligibility clock. A judge granted Pavia an injunction, and the NCAA responded with a narrow waiver that allowed Pavia and athletes who met the same specific criteria to play this season.

While there was internal discussion at the NCAA level more than a year ago about studying eligibility and looking at a five-for-five rule, that has been shut down, as conferences and the NCAA push for federal legislation that will give them some protection from constant antitrust lawsuits.

Changing eligibility rules under the current conditions would likely expose the new rules to legal challenges as well.

Still, multiple coaches have publicly said they expected five-for-five to take effect and advocated for it to eliminate issues where players decide to redshirt unexpectedly to preserve a season of eligibility. Oklahoma coach Brent Venables said on Tuesday that he thought five-for-five “needs to” happen.

Earlier this season, Nebraska coach Matt Rhule said he was having difficulty making redshirt decisions for his roster because he was under the impression that five-for-five would be coming soon. Texas coach Steve Sarkisian, speaking on the SEC coaches teleconference last week, said he supports five-for-five.

“I think it’s a terrible position to put these players in to make these decisions (midseason),” Sarkisian said. “There’s money involved, there’s revenue sharing, there’s NIL, there’s different factors, and I think it’s putting agents and family members and student-athletes in a difficult position to make business decisions in the middle of a season.”

College basketball coaches surveyed by The Athletic earlier this year at Nike’s annual Peach Jam tournament were split, with 15 saying they were in favor of five-for-five, 10 voting against it and four unsure or not answering.

“I think five years makes a lot of sense,” an ACC head coach said. “Most college kids — normal college students — take five years now to graduate. So it would make sense, stand to reason, that a student-athlete get five years, too.”

Said a West Coast Conference head coach who was against it: “I think the old model of five years to play four worked so well, and you had that extra year in case they got hurt. The academic piece has been totally lost in this. There are guys who have gotten a sixth or seventh year with so many waivers. It’s crazy.”

Whitman sent the memo on Wednesday expressing that the D-I cabinet wanted to provide clarity because “the situation for student-athletes, coaches and administrators remains untenable, with rules changing seemingly on a moment’s notice because of any single court’s temporary ruling.” The memo also advocated for congressional help to protect eligibility rules and other academic standards. College athletic leaders have long been lobbying for federal help to establish nationwide standards for schools to navigate ever since name, image and likeness compensation became allowable in 2021.

“As these situations demonstrate, we need bipartisan legislation that empowers college sports to set these basic rules that support academics as a foundational purpose of collegiate athletics,” Whitman said in the memo.