NASHVILLE — In a concept under consideration by college leaders, athletes could play five full seasons of competition over a five-year span, while redshirts, waivers and other exceptions for additional seasons of eligibility are eliminated.

In what would be a significant change to eligibility rules, the idea is in the early stages of the association’s labyrinth approval process and has not reached the point of formal proposed legislation. The discussion emerges in the weeks after a Tennessee court’s decision extending the eligibility of Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia.

While the “5-in-5” rule has long been discussed in NCAA circles, the idea has surfaced as a potentially urgent matter to simplify and, perhaps, solve a new, budding attack on another set of NCAA rules — this time, eligibility. Any eligibility change is likely to follow the impending approval of the House antitrust settlement in April and is one of many long-standing rules that the NCAA said this summer may see a “comprehensive review” as part of the post-settlement world of athlete revenue-sharing.

College leaders are exploring the possibility at the annual NCAA convention here in Nashville — a fitting site for such an event. Pavia competes at a school just a few miles away.

“I think the five-and-five model is one being considered that could simplify things, remove red tape and there would be a lot more certainly for student-athletes,” Baylor president Linda Livingstone, the chair of the NCAA Board of Governors, told Yahoo Sports on Wednesday. “It’s a very interesting model to discuss. In theory, it sounds like an interesting solution that would simplify things a lot. My understanding is no redshirts or waivers. You can play five seasons but you only have five years.”

Eligibility is the latest NCAA rule in the crosshairs of the courts.

A Tennessee court last month granted a preliminary injunction brought by Pavia that extends his eligibility by a year, agreeing with the Commodores QB that his junior college playing seasons should not count against his four-year NCAA eligibility limit. In response, the NCAA granted an extra year of eligibility to all those athletes in a similar position as Pavia — those who played at least one year of junior college and whose NCAA eligibility was scheduled to expire this academic year.

Current NCAA eligibility rules permit an athlete to play four full seasons in a five-year span and grants them the ability to play a portion of a fifth season by using a “redshirt.” Athletes already having used their redshirt season can also apply for additional years of eligibility for various reasons, most notably season-ending injuries and other issues that may have prohibited them from completing a full season.

Under one version of the 5-in-5 model, waivers and redshirts are eliminated — a way to end subjective decisions that often lead to legal entanglements. Exceptions for religious missions and military service are the subject of debate, according to those involved in the discussions.

“One of the challenges we’ve had with the eligibility issue is that there are waivers,” Livingstone said. “Partly because of the legal environment, if you’re denied a waiver, there is an incentive to challenge that waiver. It’s almost become difficult to deny any waivers. The question is then, ‘Why do you even have a model that has waivers in it?’”

The NCAA is fighting at least two cases over eligibility rules — the Pavia case and one in Mississippi, where a Southern Miss basketball player is suing the association seeking an extra year of eligibility. Both cases could result in the dismantling of NCAA eligibility rules in a similar way that the courts struck down the association’s prohibition on athlete compensation and its restrictive transfer policies.

However, the 5-in-5 idea may not solve all issues, says SEC commissioner Greg Sankey. The concept was first introduced in the early 1990s and has been considered repeatedly for years, off and on, he said.

“It is an interesting conversation, but there is a lot that needs to be understood,” he told Yahoo Sports. “Why is this the right idea? Can the NCAA actually escape its waiver-granting behavior? Will schools stop seeking waivers? What is the relationship of this proposed change to the current legal environment—does it resolve issues or create more concerns? How does a five-year eligibility model change access to college athletics opportunities for students entering from high school? These and other questions need to be answered during a continuing conversation on the five-year eligibility idea.”

ACC commissioner Jim Phillips, a member of the Board of Governors, the NCAA’s highest-ranking governing body, says the discussion on 5-in-5 should continue but other pressing issues have taken precedence, such as the House settlement, governance structure and so on.

“Is this good for student-athletes?” Phillips asks. “Will our institutions have the discipline not to seek waivers, legal measures? What does it do to high school seniors and the roster compression they have felt throughout Covid? Certainly, we should discuss as we look to the future but I am certainly not ready to endorse at this moment.”