I don’t have any information specifically about Missouri. But I do know that the trend for P4 schools is to give less to non-revenue sports to be able to give more to football. At an SEC school, football is king.
1 Like
I don’t know how things are going to turn out obviously as this is all quite dynamic, but I would think that at schools with strong/well-funded NIL collectives that some of the non-revenue sport athletes may make more money from the NIL collective than from scholarship $. (Revenue sport athletes may also make a lot from the NIL collective, in addition to their relatively high scholarships.) More questions for recruits to be asking coaches.
My understanding is the collectives go away under the proposed format. I don’t know who that works/what it means in practice.
Unfortunately men’s and women’s teams are facing very different realities.
2 Likes
The proposed settlement between the NCAA and the House of Representatives for the House v. NCAA case would allow NIL collectives to continue operating in a variety of ways, including:
- Absorbed by athletic departments: Collectives could become in-house marketing agencies that manage revenue sharing.
- Third-party deals: Collectives could continue to pursue third-party deals for athletes that don’t count toward the 22% revenue sharing cap.
- Outside of athletic departments: Collectives could continue to operate outside of athletic departments.
- New rules: The settlement would limit boosters to making fair market value payments for NIL. It would also enforce current NCAA rules that ban third-party pay-for-play and payments used as recruiting inducements.
- Outside arbitrators: Outside arbitrators would determine if rules were violated.
The settlement would also:
- Allow institutions to pay student-athletes directly
- Allow schools to share $20 to $23 million annually in revenue to athletes
- Require the NCAA and its conferences to pay $2.8 billion in back damages to former athletes
- Usher in new roster limits for every sport
- Enforce disputes through arbitration
Some say that NIL collectives are likely to continue in some form, even though others have questioned their necessity.
1 Like
I also thought like above that collectives will still exist, but who knows in what form. And schools that don’t opt in to revenue sharing can still have collectives. I also don’t know if the collectives disband where those millions of $ go. So many questions 
Fair market value is the key limiter for XC athletes and NIL under the settlement.
I’m with those who are skeptical that more resources will flow to XC programs in the SEC.
Track is big in the SEC. XC is not. Aside from a few schools like Arkansas and Alabama I doubt any SEC schools currently commit more than a couple scholarships to XC, if that.
Having said that, I wouldn’t generalize from the SEC to other conferences. XC is big among many former pac-12 and big 10 schools, so the approach will probably be different in the big 10 going forward.
3 Likes
Hers a good article about NIL under the proposed settlement. Hoping it’s a gift article
The P4 school I referenced earlier that has eliminated XC scholarships is a Big 10 school.
1 Like
That’s interesting. I had schools like Wisconsin, Michigan, Oregon, Washington, etc. in mind. Those that have generally funded distance pretty well. But I guess that doesn’t necessarily mean they will going forward.
1 Like
The football rosters will actually be smaller (120 down t 105) but the number of scholarships allowed will increase (85 to 105), although the 85 limit has been all over the place during covid, with redshirting and transfers and grad students getting other scholarships.
I think football taking more scholarships won’t be an issue. If the schools give out 20 more football scholarships, they may have to give out 20 more scholarships to women athletes.
It concerns me that men’s teams are being cut (and have been for the last 10 years with men’s swim teams and XC/track being dropped at several schools). This also causes cuts to the funding for women’s teams. When the schools only have a women’s team, that team then is responsible to the upkeep to the fields and facilities, equipment, shared transportation, etc. Most women’s basketball teams play in a big arena because there is a men’s team that needs a big arena. If the men’s team disappears, the women’s team will be playing in the small practice gym.
This is exactly why they are cutting down men’s xc and not women’s. By eliminating 7 roster spots and potentially all of the scholarships, that is anywhere from 7-17 scholarships for XC that can now be allocated to football. But one thing is for sure is that they won’t be giving 10 full rides to the men on the XC team. Which is what was assumed to be the situation upthread.
Again, SEC is a football conference, first and foremost.
3 Likes
Men’s sports will obviously take the brunt of the financial restructuring.
To reach compliance with Title IX back in the day my D1 university cut men’s archery, cross country, gymnastics, indoor track, outdoor track, swimming and wrestling all at the same time.
2 Likes
Does anyone have thoughts on the impending House v. NCAA decision in regards to roster spots for 2025s?
Have you read this review of the recent meeting with Judge Wilken and responses to that?
Wilken did suggest grandfathering in roster limits, but seems both parties don’t like that. I’m not sure if Wilken can make them grandfather roster limits (I think she probably can’t, but I’m not an attorney.)
2 Likes
Yup. That’s what I’ve been reading and wondering if other 2025 XC/TF recruits are feeling nervous.
1 Like
I think everyone involved in NCAA athletics is feeling nervous!
Any insights for flyer1993 @politeperson?
2 Likes
I’m really disappointed that it seems like “grandfathering” is off the table. Seeing the 300+ women in the transfer portal for swimming and diving is heartbreaking.
3 Likes
Also not an attorney, but not even sure the House settlement settles anything but the current law suit so the attorneys can get paid. Any ‘limits’ agreed to are just that agreements, but what happens when a college decides that they want to offer 125 football scholarships? Or spend more than $20m on NIL? There are no enforcement mechanisms. And if there were, sounds like restraint of trade. The only way to stop the madness is collective bargaining or Congressional action.
All athletes other than Football and basketball (men’s and women’s) should be nervous. Men’s non-rev teams will get cut first. To stay ‘safe’, a team will have to raise money to become endowed.
3 Likes
My D 2025 is set to join a Big 10 cross country/track team this fall and wondering how likely that is…
This was from the NCAA Q&A (https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/governance/d1/legislation/2024-25/Dec2024D1Gov_PhaseTwoInstSetQuestionandAnswer.pdf)
Question No. 15: When must schools be in compliance with new roster limits?
Answer: Beginning in the 2025-26 academic year, for fall sports, schools must be at or below the roster limits prior to the first date of competition that counts for championships selection in the relevant sport. For winter and spring sports, schools must be at or below the roster limits not later than December 1 or the first contest that counts for championships selection in the relevant sport (whichever is earlier).
[Note: additional requirements related to roster limits (e.g., whether a particular student-athlete must be included on a team’s roster) are being developed.]
2 Likes