Only two out of those 5 are revenue sports. The "year in residence" rule is intended to promote competition between schools whose resources vary wildly. They're trying to avoid what amounts to free-agency in the sports that tend to be "top heavy" (football, basketball, baseball, men's hockey). Otherwise you end up with schools like Alabama or Ohio State being able to poach players from other schools that can't compete with their resources (i.e. G5 schools). By having to sit out a year (absent a waiver, which is a separate can of worms), there's a significant downside for a player who decides to transfer, which mitigates the poaching issue. The rule was upheld by a federal appellate court in June of 2018, so it's extremely unlikely this proposal will go anywhere.