2026 Men's Lacrosse

[billhoward]

Richmond unlike Cornell also lacks a vicious winter. The indoor facility at Cornell benefits a lot of Big Red teams.

[Al DeFlorio]

High school girls getting NIL:  https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/selfless-plays-earn-team-collins-2028-title-15000-in-nil-money-at-nilly/fdee8ffe-272e-420b-a438-a2dc5a1b1eba

[BearLover]

Now that players have five years of eligibility, Goldstein and Firth may be able to skip fall semester in 2026 and 2027 and use all five years of eligibility at Cornell before graduating. Hopefully the coaching staff is talking to them about this option.

I was wrong - this is currently impossible. According to Cornell athletics rules, athletes may only compete for four seasons unless they get a waiver (typically for injury). So you can expect to see Goldstein and Firth on UVA or Duke in a couple of seasons.

Is this a new rule in the wake of the NCAA changes? If it isn't, then I assume the same permission that wrestlers and football players have used in the past will continue to apply.

Not a new rule. But in the past the fifth year waiver was (at least in lacrosse) only used if a player missed a season to injury. So that doesn't help us retain players for a fifth year under the new eligibility rules (unless they missed a year to injury).

i wonder if that's tradition or rule. football* (like lacrosse) is a single semester sport, so you can get away with having someone sit out a semester and retain eligibility. i don't know when we last did it for football, though. wrestling (like hockey) spans the semesters but wrestling (unlike hockey) doesn't have as much riding on early season success and its effect on computer rankings.

could be a way cornell adjusts to the new rules to stay competitive.

* i guess if we made a run to the FCS final it wouldn't be but if the cost of getting to the championship is playing short a player or two in the title game, so be it.

It's a rule: https://cornellbigred.com/sports/2024/8/7/athletic-eligibility-and-compliance.aspx

Fifth Year/Medical Hardship
Student-athletes have eligibility for no more than four (4) seasons of intercollegiate athletic competition in any sport, which ordinarily must be used within five (5) calendar years from their first full-time matriculation at any collegiate institution. However, under Ivy League rules student-athletes are ordinarily expected to use their eligibility during their first four years of enrollment. The Ivy League does not allow "redshirts" (i.e., sitting out a season of competitive play to extend eligibility). If you are enrolled at Cornell and medically able to participate during your season, you are considered to have used a season of eligibility regardless of whether you compete. In limited circumstances (i.e., medical hardships, leaves of absences) there are exceptions to this rule. If you are considering a 5th year, please consult the Compliance Office for more information on the process and to assess whether you qualify for a 5th Year Waiver.

[rss77]

Note the crazy lawsuit by the former SU men's lacrosse players suing for an extra year of eligibilty.

[BearLover]

Note the crazy lawsuit by the former SU men's lacrosse players suing for an extra year of eligibilty.

And they're going to win the case. And Spallina et al are probably going to be back on Syracuse next year. Good luck to Cornell competing with that. This is not one of those BL crying wolf scenarios: this is actually an incoming disaster with respect to our hopes of competing nationally. We will have little realistic hope of winning a national championship under the 5-for-5 eligibility rule, which will benefit every school except for the Ivies.

https://cnycentral.com/sports/college/courts-hand-ncaa-loss-on-five-year-eligibility-rule-spallina-others-could-return-to-su

[stereax]

Note the crazy lawsuit by the former SU men's lacrosse players suing for an extra year of eligibilty.

And they're going to win the case. And Spallina et al are probably going to be back on Syracuse next year. Good luck to Cornell competing with that. This is not one of those BL crying wolf scenarios: this is actually an incoming disaster with respect to our hopes of competing nationally. We will have little realistic hope of winning a national championship under the 5-for-5 eligibility rule, which will benefit every school except for the Ivies.

https://cnycentral.com/sports/college/courts-hand-ncaa-loss-on-five-year-eligibility-rule-spallina-others-could-return-to-su

Well good thing we won last year then!

[BearLover]

Note the crazy lawsuit by the former SU men's lacrosse players suing for an extra year of eligibilty.

And they're going to win the case. And Spallina et al are probably going to be back on Syracuse next year. Good luck to Cornell competing with that. This is not one of those BL crying wolf scenarios: this is actually an incoming disaster with respect to our hopes of competing nationally. We will have little realistic hope of winning a national championship under the 5-for-5 eligibility rule, which will benefit every school except for the Ivies.

https://cnycentral.com/sports/college/courts-hand-ncaa-loss-on-five-year-eligibility-rule-spallina-others-could-return-to-su

Well good thing we won last year then!

True!

[marty]

Note the crazy lawsuit by the former SU men's lacrosse players suing for an extra year of eligibilty.

And they're going to win the case. And Spallina et al are probably going to be back on Syracuse next year. Good luck to Cornell competing with that. This is not one of those BL crying wolf scenarios: this is actually an incoming disaster with respect to our hopes of competing nationally. We will have little realistic hope of winning a national championship under the 5-for-5 eligibility rule, which will benefit every school except for the Ivies.

https://cnycentral.com/sports/college/courts-hand-ncaa-loss-on-five-year-eligibility-rule-spallina-others-could-return-to-su

Am I the only reader wondering if you've got a list of the times you did cry wolf? - though I think a better analogy might be "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

And in other news I've appreciated your current change in tone. Thank you.

[Ken711]

Courts side with NCAA denying the 5th year of eligibility.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49682102/court-halts-order-denies-extra-year-eligibility

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the NCAA a stay Friday morning in an order that reverses the federal judge's decision that previously opened the door for all athletes who started college in the 2022-23 academic year and played for four consecutive seasons to return for a fifth season. NCAA chief legal officer sent a letter to schools Friday afternoon saying that the association's eligibility rules were back in effect.

"The Tenth Circuit's decision to stay the preliminary injunction issued by a Colorado federal district court judge in Wisne permits Division I to return to the status quo before the district court intervened," wrote Scott Bearby, chief legal officer for the NCAA. "Effective immediately, the age-based eligibility rules will be implemented as the Division I membership intended."

[BearLover]

So we have one more season before we're at a big disadvantage. Hurrah!

[Ken711]

So we have one more season before we're at a big disadvantage. Hurrah!

I think this will end up being a permanent ban on 5th year eligibility.

[BearLover]

So we have one more season before we're at a big disadvantage. Hurrah!

I think this will end up being a permanent ban on 5th year eligibility.

How do you figure?

[marty]

So we have one more season before we're at a big disadvantage. Hurrah!

I think this will end up being a permanent ban on 5th year eligibility.

I don't think so. The rule that is being allowed was a one year NCAA decision for the purpose of being fair to incoming freshmen.  It will not apply after this year if the NCAA is successful with the 5 year crap they are imposing.

The NCAA's Division I board of directors decided in June that their new rules would not apply to outgoing seniors, saying that an influx of unexpected veterans returning to campus would unfairly take opportunities away from incoming freshmen who had already signed to play with their new schools before the rule change was made. Since then, at least a dozen different groups comprising more than 100 total outgoing seniors have sued the NCAA in federal and state courts. They have all asked judges to provide them with restraining orders that would allow them to play again this coming year.

Friday's decision is related to a federal lawsuit led by Northern Colorado basketball player Brock Wisne, who argues that the NCAA is violating antitrust law by preventing him from playing a fifth season. The Wisne case was the only eligibility lawsuit that was a class action case, which means that the judge's decision in his case applied to all athletes who had just completed their fourth season in the last four years. On July 31, a federal judge granted all athletes a blanket order that would allow them to play in the upcoming season. Friday's order overturns that ruling.

[BearLover]

Yes, 5-year eligibility is here to stay and those who can't benefit from it will get left behind.

I'll let someone else comment on Cornell lacrosse's freshman class since I prefer positivity.

[TimV]

It seems to me there is at least the possibility that the 5 for 5 won't be so bad for us. The roster spots on non ivy teams will fill. The talent is plentiful and  will distribute as it always has. 

Ivies need to promote the value of the degree and the network. Then treat the available 5th year as a bonus - an opportunity to get a different lacrosse experience. A choice of sorts, to play another year someplace new or move on to professional school or life in general.

NIL and other dollars is the bigger threat.