Fighting Roster Limits in House v NCAA settlement

Thank you. Yes, I agree with you that lawsuits will continue unless carve out laws are passed. I also agree that if conferences impose roster limits it would be less of an anti-trust problem. I wonder if the SEC will still implement their roster limits if the settlement doesn't go through. I guess we will find out what the future of college sports will be later in April.

Sounds like your daughter needs to prepare for her next stage in life. Be prepared to become a regular student or transfer to a D3 school.

It is just sad that 10,000 student athletes will have to make that choice as well when it really isn't necessary. It isn't as easy as you make it sound. I know that many students will not be able to afford to stay at their colleges and just be a regular student. I know some from other sports losing their Alston money which is half of their athletic scholarship money. Figure in the food they were provided, medical and other benefits and the amount can be enough to make the school they are at unaffordable when they lose that money and benefits. Moving to another school so you can continue to run can also be financially difficult. Many times required classes aren't the same and will need to be retaken and they will be required to take on that added financial burden and extra time to graduate. I know that D3 does not give athletic aid. Hopefully they have the grades to get enough merit money to make it a financial fit. D2 gives athletic and merit, so for some that might be a financial fit. However, you still will need to retake classes if you are in the middle of getting your degree. Also, does the school offer your degree? My daughter is a Biosystems Engineering major and not many schools carry her major. Yes, if the settlement goes through she will continue as a student at Tennessee because of her major, the connections she has made there, and she truly just loves UTK. It will be a cluster f once all these kids hit the portal. I feel badly for the high school recruits that will have offers pulled so their college can scoop up more experienced athletes or current athletes in other divisions that may no longer get a chance on their team with the new transfers coming in.

I expect the SEC will still implement roster limits because that is how they will be able to control costs. (btw, they don't care about creating an even playing field for smaller schools... roster limits are only about cost savings for them.)

First, you have greatly exaggerated the amount of aid. Scholarships are not being pulled. And second, the money for Alston and food and medical comes from somewhere. It isn't dropping out of sky. You have this entitled attitude. Millions of college students don't receive those benefits.

I am not acting entitled. I am just pointing out the facts that it isn't so easy as to stay where you are and to transfer. I am also not greatly exaggerating. I have talked to many parents and stutdent athletes in golfing, swimming, cross country, track and field, gymnastics and football and that is the reality for MANY of them. Yes, kids will keep their scholarships if they stay, but many times that is just a small amount compared to the Alston money paired with benefits. These are always marketed to the student athletes as a scholarship package. I don't understand your comment that the money comes from somewhere. Obviously it does but I never said it didn't.

It is not easy to transfer, and the financial impacts for some students will be significant.

But, the sport is moving toward professionalism. If a scoring XC team is 5, with 2 holding place and the rest removed from team results, do you need more 17? Do you really need more than 10? If you are going into a 3rd or 4th year as a distance runner at an SEC school and you have not represented your team as a "top 5" athlete at the XC Championship, you are probably never going to. You have to move on.

For sure, coaches will now pivot to "ready made transfers" and it will be cut throat to keep a spot...that is the price of professionalism as the DI level (which pays the bills on all the benefits you outlined.

But, this is essentially how every other sport already operates; you have a roster and that is that.

Even for football, some schools are saying "screw 105, that is too expensive. Why do we need more than 85?" which demonstrates DI is not a free ride. If you don't see the field, you will be pushed out.

These roster spots aren't killing our sport. Most D1 schools don't even have 17 distance runners on their men's roster anyway. At my school, we actually gained 5 new athletes because our administration decided to allow us to max it out now. Sounds like my coach is cutting about 3 women to get down to 17 but those 3 women suck anyway.

For track we're allowed 45 on both sides when we usually have about 35. So we have to go recruit 10 more athletes on both sides. Our coach is kind of mad because the administration expects him to add athletes and he's worried it's too late in the year to bring in a large amount of quality. Some of the athletes getting a roster spot will definitely not deserve it.

No AD wants to add distance runners. Your coach is very confused.

A smart AD, at a mid major program, will typically be more than fine with adding some walk on distance runners, within the cap. A lot of smaller DIs do at least consider enrollment in the current environment.

Said ADs may not add to the budget to accommodate the additional runners, but that is a different issue.

I would like someone to expound on this, and it is rarely talked about.

For example, Morgan State, an HBCU just opted in. In their press release, they make references to now being able to offer MORE opportunities in Olympic Sports. It seems that prior to this settlement they had self imposed roster limits (due to Title 9?) I don’t know the reason. But last year they only had 20 men on the track roster and 5 on the XC roster. Numbers are similar this year. So, does it mean that now they have opted in, they can increase numbers?

Why would an AD want more skinny runners while the coach is "mad" about it? All it does is add work for the department.

How is XC moving toward professionalism? 7 run in a meet, always about 4-5 that are nursing an injury and 5-6 new recruits each year for development. Some work out and some don't. That's why more than 17. If you kick out development (no more new hs recruits) and only use transfers and international, then yes you can do just 17. With this new model, you are guaranteeing that a runner will have to transfer in their 3rd or 4th year of school after developing at another division. Does not sound like a model that cares about the "student" athlete as the NCAA claims to do.

The revenue sharing cap and the roster caps were not collectively bargained. Many class members will be disadvantaged, meaning the attorneys did not provide a beneficial settlement to all class members. This will open up the NCAA to further litigation by athletes who lose their roster spots, showing the NCAA can't get out of its own way. The Trump admin probably won't go after title IX issues since the DOE is self destructing.

What a poop show. This settlement only benefits the top football and basketball players, oh and the lawyers of course.

Lol seems like you're the one who is confused. This is literally what our AD met with the team and coach about. We are at 12 distance men and adding 5 new guys next year on top of the two we graduate. 7 total. This is actually happening and it's not that crazy or confusing.

To my knowledge we aren't getting a budget or scholarship increase. Same amount of money for both and my coach can continue to spread it around however he pleases.

He's not "mad" like stomping around being angry. He's annoyed the administration waited until March to tell him the roster numbers and now they expect him to have those spots filled for 2025. There are some top athletes left, but he has to play catch up in recruiting to sign anyone decent. He's "mad" that the athletes he may have to roster now aren't going to be as talented as they could be if he had been adding athletes since the fall. He doesn't want to add anyone that may be cut in a year even though the school told him he "has" to fill those spots out

mom, he means professionalism in college sports...SAs getting paid (which is what we are dealing with)

as for the ncaa caring about the SA. that's done with now, if it was even ever the case

Why would an AD want more XC runners?