Tre Holloman explores options for 5th-year after stops at Michigan State and NC State

Tre Holloman, a 6-foot-1 guard who has played for both Michigan State and NC State, is looking for a new team for his fifth year of NCAA eligibility, according to a report published Monday. The matter is tied to the growing group of college basketball players pursuing an extra season through litigation in California state court, a process that has kept many roster plans unsettled across the offseason.

Holloman’s path began in East Lansing, where he spent his first three college seasons at Michigan State before transferring to NC State. At NC State, he averaged 9.2 points per game and 2.1 assists per game, while also establishing himself as a steady outside scoring option. The report adds that he shot 40 percent from three-point range on four attempts per game, a combination that helps explain why guard depth and perimeter creation remain his most visible calling cards.

The interest around Holloman is not limited to one school, the report says. It places Cincinnati and St. John’s among the programs listed as potential options as he weighs whether to move again or remain within the orbit of his current situation. For teams looking to improve backcourt balance, a guard with Holloman’s production profile is the type of addition that can raise both shot-making and ball movement without requiring a team to rebuild its entire offensive identity.

From a roster-building standpoint, a fifth-year guard becomes especially valuable because it is a ready-made piece for a mature rotation. Holloman’s scoring and assist numbers, even without a claim about his exact role by position on future rosters, suggest a player who can contribute in multiple ways: catch-and-shoot spacing, pick-and-penetrate support, and secondary playmaking. That versatility can matter during summer planning when coaches try to anticipate minutes distribution before games begin.

The legal backdrop also adds a layer of uncertainty for every program involved. Because Holloman is part of a broader group pursuing an extra year of eligibility through court action, any “decision” still depends on how that process develops and what eligibility determinations ultimately allow. In other words, schools may pursue discussions while keeping scholarship and roster flexibility in mind, knowing that the timing and outcome of eligibility matters can be decisive.

Cincinnati and St. John’s, as named in the report, represent two different recruiting and roster challenges within Division I basketball. Each program’s interest in an experienced guard like Holloman suggests a desire to strengthen the perimeter and stabilize the backcourt, particularly if they are targeting playmaking and perimeter scoring from the guard position. For Holloman, the next move could also shape how quickly he finds a defined role, because fifth-year decisions often come with a strong emphasis on fit and immediate impact.

What to watch next is straightforward but not immediate. Holloman’s team choice likely will depend on the status of eligibility proceedings, as well as on how actively interested programs are able to finalize plans for the upcoming season. If the court process moves forward and eligibility becomes clearer, the pace of recruiting decisions around Holloman and other similarly situated guards should quicken. Until then, discussions like the ones highlighted in the report may remain fluid.

For fans, Holloman’s situation is a reminder of how offseason basketball is increasingly intertwined with eligibility and roster rules that extend beyond ordinary transfer windows. His next stop, if it happens, could set the stage for a season where his outside shooting and guard playmaking are used as core tools rather than supplemental skill sets. The decision also carries a personal stakes element for a player who has already demonstrated he can produce efficiently from the perimeter in a high-level conference environment.