New NCAA Roster Caps: 17 for xc, 45 for Track

Non-full ride scholarships in equivalency sports are 4 years. Full ride scholarships in non-equivalency sports are renewable every year in the current (soon to be old) model.

We are talking about track. Many here don't want to believe that the scholarships are 4 years.

Walk on culture is dead

Great! All these wannabe D1s that school is bleeding for money can’t push this crazy narrative of having 100 member teams with only 5 scholarships to make money.

Does revenue sharing have to be across all sports? Or can you pick and choose sports. It seems absurd that non revenue sports would get any revenue share. The scholarship itself is a gift from the football team already.

The average XC rosters are 15 men and 20 women today.

Yes it is all sports.

I have some old code I've used to look at rosters I the past. I cleaned it up a little and did a quick pass. I have a ton more but need to do some work to make it understandable, but here's the 23-24 TF MENS Rosters from the following schools' websites:

Abilene Christian 40
Air Force 61
Akron 37
Alabama 56
Alabama State 20
Arizona 38
Arizona State 30
Arkansas State 44
Army West Point 81
Auburn 58
Bethune-Cookman 32
Boise State 20
Brown 50
Buffalo 47
Butler 39
California 58
Campbell 36
Central Arkansas 45
Charlotte 65
Cincinnati 38
Coastal Carolina 41
Colorado 54
Colorado St. 59
Colorado State 59
Columbia 49
Coppin State 21
Duke 35
East Carolina 27
Eastern Illinois 52
EKU 34
FIU 23
Florida 55
Fresno State 19
Furman 27
Georgia 37
Gonzaga 35
Harvard 49
High Point 72
Hofstra 21
Houston 57
Houston Baptist 25
Idaho 29
Illinois State 53
Incarnate Word 46
Indiana 45
Indiana State 63
Iona 26
Kansas 59
Kansas State 17
Kennesaw State 43
Kent State 51
La Salle 24
Lamar 40
Lipscomb 25
Long Beach St. 50
Louisville 29
Loyola (Ill.) 19
Maryland 22
McNeese State 35
Miami (Fla.) 69
Miami (Ohio) 52
Miami 26
Michigan 55
Michigan State 59
Mid. Tenn. State 26
Minnesota 37
Miss State 36
Missouri 42
Mount St. Mary's 71
MTSU 26
N. Carolina A&T 40
NAU 51
NC State 40
New Orleans 18
North Carolina 50
North Dakota St. 53
North Texas 54
Northeastern 55
Northern Arizona 51
Northern Iowa 54
Northwestern St 29
Northwestern St. 29
Notre Dame 38
Oklahoma 42
Ole Miss 33
Oral Roberts 36
Oregon 56
Penn 53
Pittsburgh 30
Portland 50
Prairie View 37
Princeton 70
Purdue 29
Rhode Island 63
Rutgers 54
Sam Houston St 50
San Francisco 16
SE Louisiana 35
South Alabama 42
South Dakota 55
South Florida 35
Southern Illinois 36
Southern Miss 33
Southern Utah 56
Stephen F. Austin 47
TCU 44
Tennessee St. 32
Texas 52
Texas A&M 56
Texas Southern 29
Texas State 35
Texas Tech 60
Troy 47
Tulane 25
Tulsa 29
UC Davis 28
UCLA 37
UL-Lafayette 49
UMass Lowell 87
USC 34
UT-Arlington 51
UTEP 26
Villanova 49
Virginia Tech 58
Wake Forest 29
Washington 37
Washington St. 49
Weber State 44
Western Kentucky 35
Wichita State 46
Wofford 31

House was a swimmer so seemingly so

I did some quick math based on Weak Runner's data above. This is an oversimplification of what will happen, but if you assume that every program on Weak Runner's list with fewer than 45 athletes rostered will have the same number of athletes going forward under the new rules, and that every program with more than 45 will have exactly 45 athletes rostered going forward:

• The total number of roster spots available at these programs drops by 602 (11.0%) from 5481 to 4879
• The average number of rostered athletes at these programs drops from 42.2 to 37.5 (a drop of 4.6 athletes per team--doesn't add up due to some rounding)
• For the total number of available roster spots not to drop there would need to be 14 programs with full (45 athlete) rosters added or 17 programs with the new anticipated number of athletes (37.5) added

Potential caveats/errors:

• I don't think the above list includes all DI programs, so this isn't based off a comprehensive data set (which means the total numbers listed above are low, and also, if these programs aren't representative, that the average numbers could be off, too)
• I would argue this is a best-case scenario, as this doesn't account for dropped programs or reduced rosters due to the new restrictions (both, according to many smart people I've heard talk, distinctly possible outcomes)
• This focuses on DI men's track only, and doesn't account for programs reclassifying to other levels (or the possible creation of other levels?) or non-NCAA competition opportunities, like NIRCA and clubs, that may expand
• Obviously, the above data is men's-only, so this math/these conclusions apply to men's track only; while the pressures on women's programs will likely be different, similar math would obviously be worth doing for women's programs, too

Full spreadsheet visible here:

docs.google.com

Men's T&F Roster Changes

Sheet1 School,23-’24 Men’s T&F Roster Size,New Rules Roster Size,Lost Spots San Francisco 16,16,16,0 Kansas State 17,17,17,0 New Orleans 18,18,18,0 Fresno State 19,19,19,0 Loyola (Ill.) 19,19,19,0 Alabama State 20,20,20,0 Boi...

Link:docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GOg708...

Because of woke title IX equity, there’s a proposal that to play “real” football a school will have to give over 50% of student athletes, per gender, $30000 per year

Here is some EADA data, this is from 2022 but does give you an idea of what programs have to probably make cuts. This is a program's combined number xc/indoor/outdoor. So the new combined maximum number would be 107 (17+45+45). Keep in mind, 1 person cut would count as "2" if the did indoor and outdoor or "3" if they did xc/indoor/outdoor.

The smaller schools that have to cut the most female athletles are vulnerable for getting their men's programs cut IMO.

Women's programs with a combined number above 130 in 2022:

University of Vermont 218
Sacred Heart University 209
Bucknell University 200
Oklahoma State University-Main Campus 191
Utah Valley University 189
Liberty University 175
South Dakota State University 174
Michigan State University 172
University of Iowa 168
Cornell University 166
Texas A & M University-College Station 164
Brigham Young University 163
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor 158
California State University-Fullerton 157
University of Nebraska-Lincoln 152
Lehigh University 149
Oregon State University 148
University of Oklahoma-Norman Campus 148
Brown University 147
Marist College 145
University of South Carolina-Columbia 145
Utah State University 145
Columbia University in the City of New York 144
University of California-Los Angeles 144
University of Wyoming 143
Florida State University 141
North Dakota State University-Main Campus 141
Ohio State University-Main Campus 139
Lafayette College 136
Dartmouth College 135
Elon University 135
University of North Carolina at Charlotte 135
University of Massachusetts-Amherst 134
Yale University 133
Princeton University 132
University of Arkansas 132
Delaware State University 131
Rider University 131
Illinois State University 130
Pennsylvania State University-Main Campus 130
University of South Dakota 130

Men's programs over 130 from 2022:

University of Massachusetts-Lowell 208
Cornell University 172
University of North Carolina at Charlotte 164
Grand Canyon University 160
Utah Valley University 156
Saint Joseph's University 156
Mount St. Mary's University 155
High Point University 154
Sacred Heart University 153
Bucknell University 153
Princeton University 151
South Dakota State University 150
Texas A & M University-College Station 149
Southern Utah University 148
Rider University 146
George Mason University 145
Duke University 144
Illinois State University 143
University of Virginia-Main Campus 143
Lehigh University 141
Harvard University 141
Monmouth University 140
Youngstown State University 140
Boston University 138
Yale University 134
University of Pennsylvania 134
University of Nebraska-Lincoln 132
Rutgers University-New Brunswick 132
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 132
University of Colorado Boulder 132

I don't think this will change things as much as people think. In sports like football and basketball, virtually anyone who isn't in the top rotation will transfer our. Alabama is not going to get the all the top players (anymore than they have) because players want playing time.

Unsure what you are saying. The new rules cut roster sizes by 20. Alabama will have fewer guys. That means that a larger percentage get playing time..

One thing to remember, schools do not have to abide by this if there is not rev sharing, etc... A place like West Point will still have a very large number. Other FCS and G5 school will do the same. (Correct this is not complete. Just over 100 schools represented here.)

I have heard some schools will have a JV or club roster of walk-ons, not officially on the team. I am not 100% sure how this will play out.

As a former D1 walkon, this hurts. I went to a large state schools on an academic scholarship. Chose the school because it was the best value. Likely didn’t deserve it based on my HS resume but ended my career as a team captain, scholarship recipient, and scorer on the conference team in XC before graduating.

I think this will definitely push more athletes like me to D2 and D3 schools, but the problem with D2 and D3 schools is that they are usually much smaller and in many cases much more expensive. Many of the D2/D3 schools in my state are liberal arts colleges that don’t offer programs like engineering.

College athletics is totally sold out. I hope that some local clubs will develop to give more athletes opportunities to continue their development.

Maybe the XC guy will train for marathons in the spring. If they only run xc and don't run track I can see these people rod racing for cash while the other distance runners are tied up in their track season. Natural progression post college is straight to the roads and marathoners, or maybe even trail running

I think the 602 athletes can be absorbed by Naia, D2, and 3. A lot of programs in the lower divisions struggle to fill a roster.

Athletes are prohibited from accepting prizes.