Claim: Jacob Manu’s lawsuit will force the NCAA to give all athletes a guaranteed fifth year of competitive eligibility.

On October 9, 2025, Jacob Manu, a Division I linebacker and former Arizona Wildcats standout, filed a federal antitrust lawsuit challenging the NCAA’s core eligibility structure. The case stems from a late-season knee injury during his time at Arizona and the eligibility rules that prevented him from regaining a season of competition after transferring to Washington. As Sports Illustrated reported, Manu recovered, earned a starting role with the Huskies, and then ran into the NCAA’s “four seasons in five years” framework, which left him with no path to continue playing beyond the 2025 season.

What the eligibility rules say

According to the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s official legislative database (LSDBi), Bylaw 12.8 states that “a student-athlete shall not engage in more than four seasons of intercollegiate competition in any one sport.” The five-year eligibility clock begins when the student-athlete first registers at an institution for a full-time program (Bylaw 12.8.1). The NCAA’s public student-athlete compliance guide similarly explains that athletes may not compete more than four seasons within a five-year eligibility window.

In his lawsuit, Manu seeks injunctive relief to stop those rules from being enforced so that he can secure a fifth year of competitive eligibility. He also asks for declaratory and other relief available under federal antitrust statutes.

How the lawsuit has unfolded

After the case was filed on October 9, 2025, it moved quickly. On October 22, Manu filed a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and preliminary injunction, asking the court to bar the NCAA from enforcing the four-seasons-in-five-years rule while the litigation proceeds. On October 29, he submitted a supplemental brief and supporting declarations to reinforce his emergency request for immediate relief.

On November 10, the judge ordered that the case be transferred from the Western District of Washington to the Middle District of Tennessee, where another antitrust case against the NCAA is already underway. This transfer was a procedural step. It did not grant or deny eligibility relief, but it did place Manu’s lawsuit into the same judicial pipeline as the other challenge to the NCAA’s participation limits.

How fans are interpreting Manu’s case

In October 2025, the Youth Sports Business Report claimed the NCAA was “likely” to adopt a new “5-in-5” eligibility rule that would grant athletes five full seasons of competition within five years. This report was based solely on coach speculation and has not been verified or reflected in any current NCAA rulebook or official legislation. The article framed the proposal as being under serious review and quickly triggered widespread speculation online.

As the report circulated, Reddit threads across college sports communities filled with assumptions that a universal five-year window was imminent. Users debated competitive balance, recruiting impacts, and whether courts had already forced the NCAA to change its rules. Some comments illustrated how speculation can quickly solidify into perceived fact. One user wrote, “I like 5 years but they have to stop the 7 year thing. Just has to be a flat cap.” Another argued, “Yeah they didn’t understand that the 5 year suggestion was actually because people hated that a lot of players got 6-7 years due to Covid and other reasons.” A third commenter added, “Offering a 5 year timeframe allows us to curb most of these ridiculous situations of 25 year olds playing in their 6th or 7th seasons in exchange for allowing guys to have 5 fully healthy years.”

Manu’s antitrust lawsuit, filed around the same time, only fueled these assumptions, leading many fans to believe that a court ruling or NCAA decision was already underway. None of this reflects official action, however. The NCAA legislative database shows no amendments to the eligibility bylaws, which still limit athletes to four seasons within a five-year window. The compliance guide remains unchanged, and no NCAA governance body has announced or approved any “5-in-5” reform. This chain of speculation shows how unverified reports can be easily misinterpreted and evolve into misinformation as they spread through social media and online forums.

Will the rules change?

Not automatically. Even if Jacob Manu ultimately wins his lawsuit, a court ruling would not, by itself, rewrite the NCAA rulebook or require the association to give every athlete a fifth year of eligibility. The lawsuit asks the court to block enforcement of the current “four seasons in five years” limitation and to award relief available under antitrust law. If Manu succeeds, that outcome would apply to him and potentially to other athletes who seek similar relief, but it would not legally force the NCAA to adopt a universal five-year eligibility framework.

For the NCAA’s rules to officially change for all athletes, the association’s internal governance structure would still need to act. That process includes Division I council proposals, committee review, comment periods, and a membership vote before any change takes effect. Courts can prohibit enforcement of a rule that violates federal antitrust law, but judges do not draft or impose replacement policies. A win for Manu could increase pressure on the NCAA to voluntarily amend the eligibility clock in order to reduce litigation risk, yet that kind of shift would be a strategic policy choice, not a direct legal requirement.

In other words, the lawsuit may open the door to reform, but it does not guarantee that reform will take place. The legal question in court is whether the NCAA’s current eligibility rules unlawfully restrict athletes’ opportunities under antitrust law, not whether every NCAA athlete must receive a fifth season moving forward.

A recent example from transfer rules

A recent precedent helps illustrate how these cases usually work. In State of Ohio et al. v. NCAA, the U.S. government and a coalition of states challenged the NCAA’s Division I Transfer Eligibility Rule. The proposed final judgment (filed May 30, 2024) required the NCAA to provide an additional year of eligibility only to qualifying student-athletes who had previously been rendered ineligible under that specific rule.

Crucially, the judgment was limited in scope. It did not strike down the NCAA’s entire eligibility framework, did not apply to all athletes, and did not automatically grant an extra year of eligibility across all sports or situations. It addressed the Transfer Eligibility Rule as it applied to a defined group of athletes.

This example shows how a successful legal challenge can deliver relief for a specific set of athletes and clear away a particular rule, while still falling short of a sweeping policy overhaul. It does not, by itself, create universal eligibility changes for every student-athlete in the NCAA.

Our Verdict: Partially True

Jacob Manu’s lawsuit genuinely challenges the NCAA’s “four seasons in five years” eligibility rule and could, if successful, secure an additional year of eligibility for Manu and potentially for other athletes who pursue similar relief through the courts. However, the claim that the lawsuit will automatically force the NCAA to grant a guaranteed fifth year of competition to all athletes is inaccurate. Court rulings in antitrust cases do not, on their own, rewrite NCAA legislation or mandate universal eligibility reforms, and any broad policy change would still have to go through the NCAA’s internal governance process.

Our fact-checking sources

• Court filing, Manu v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, filed October 2025 (Case No. 2:25-cv-01956), U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington: CourtListener
• Article, UW’s Manu Files Suit Against NCAA Over Eligibility Concerns, Sports Illustrated, published October 2025: Sports Illustrated
• NCAA legislative database summary, Summary of NCAA Regulations PDF, 2024-25 compliance season: NCAA Regulations PDF
• NCAA public student-athlete compliance guide, LSDBi report: NCAA LSDBi Report
• Federal court order transferring Manu’s case, Justia PDF, filed 2025: Justia Court Order PDF
• Article, NCAA’s 5-in-5 eligibility rule likely delayed, Youth Sports Business Report: Youth Sports Business Report
• Reddit comment (Quote 1) on Manu v. NCAA case: Reddit Comment 1
• Reddit thread (Quote 2) discussing NCAA issues: Reddit Thread
• U.S. Department of Justice document, State of Ohio et al. v. NCAA: DOJ Document