People seem to forget that the big programs were already able to fill their bigger rosters in equivalency sports like track with the few scholarships they had. For example, look at NC State women's XC. They list 20 women on their XC roster and most of them were top performers in HS. They attracted those women under the current scholarship limits and now will have to cut 3 athletes eventually. Do the math. Many of those state champions decided to go to NC State without a full ride scholarship; it helps that NC State has generous merit scholarship for out of state students and XC kids tend to be smart. Either way, there are 3 less athletes at NC State. This is not just at NC State. I counted Penn State has having 27 women on their XC roster and 62 men on the track and field roster. I counted Florida track men as having 60 on their roster (women were only 40 in full disclosure). A few predictions:
1- There will be vast cost savings even at big schools to cover the 20 mil plus and 20 extra scholarships in football (also note that the previous roster limit in football was 125 but football is not an equivalency sport so it was all or nothing meaning as many as 40 walk-ons). The money has to come from somewhere so don't expect plenty of schools to cut sports or at least greatly reduce (not expand) expenditures. These roster limits are actually a way to bake-in cost savings across the board; outfitting, feeding, coaching, traveling across the country with a big team is costly scholarship or not. Any notion of a net increase in scholarships across D1 in track and XC is just a pipe dream; maybe some schools will do it but more will decide to cut or go to a no scholarship model.
2- The big schools will rarely recruit fresh out of h.s. in sports like track. The small conferences will be a feeder conferences for the big 5. Why spend your money (which you weren't actually spending) on a risky bet when you can attract a known commodity? This was already happening due to the new transfer rules and will only be accelerated by these roster limits.
3- It might actually make for a much more level playing field and I predict that schools like Harvard will suddenly be competing for national titles. Plenty of schools have decided to continue to offer track and XC despite losing money as a whole. They will suddenly see an increase in young talent available as the big school will have far fewer slots. Of course, the big 5 will just swoop in a take many of them after those schools have developed them ...
This whole thing was drawn up with ZERO regard for any non revenue sport especially the equivalency sports like track. This also shows where the priorities are so I fear we will ultimately see far fewer track and XC programs being offered. This is about preserving the cash cow of football and basketball. Note that of the 2.77 billion in back pay 83% will go to athletes in football and basketball. Like the stupid conference realignment. That is all that matters.