Breaking - SEC to limit men's rosters to 10/35 for XC / TF, respectively

I'm agreeing with those suggesting it isn't a big problem. The athletes impacted the most are those marginal athletes for their D1 school that aren't expected to contribute beyond being a 6-10 runner their first couple years before they maybe develop into someone who will be a solid scorer as a senior. They might have to go to a school a step down the ladder athletically than they would currently. Not everyone will, as some kids just want to have that P4 college experience of going to big games and a "big time" school. Maybe a run club will fill the gap, but if you look at club team results, they are not as good as a good D3 team. For kids that just want to compete, there will be plenty of options to compete (D2, D3, NAIA, Club) while getting a good education, but the search process will be slightly different.

Schools like BYU with larger rosters and issues with post mission fitness might have a situation where they will have 5-7 guaranteed spots base on past performance and fitness and a run club that athletes can earn a spot on the team at he beginning of the season to fill out the roster in xc. Similar with track. BYU will never be a normal situation, there is no other school like it so it isn't useful in comparison.

Graham Blanks and Harvard was brought up, I would guess Harvard and other Ivies will continue to be the same as they have been for a long time with plenty of good individuals, but inconsistent teams on the national level. A great school will always draw the select talented individuals that can excel both athletically and academically. Blanks, Ramsden, Gabby Thomas, etc. would all be unaffected by these changes.

It’s a problem. The SEC is leading here meaning others will follow.

don’t you think every other AD is going to look at this and adopt it? None of them want to do any real work.

There is going to be a kid leave an SEC team for a Big 12 team and they are going to turn around and do the same thing next year.

This is sad news, but what’s the big deal here? Everyone talks about the college running experience being some sacred rite of passage and the only reason that some talented kids even enroll. In reality, far less than 1% of D1 runners get any sort of pro deal after college and only about 5% carry on after graduation to compete on their local roads. Does this really spell doom for elites?

I guess the worry is that people like Schweizer, Coburn, Frerichs and some other late bloomers would not have gone D1.

Article 4 Section 1 ….. Nor shall any change in roster limits result in a reduction in the current number of athletic scholarships permissible under current NCAA Division I rules in any sports.

1. Mid-majors will likely have to cut men's XC and Track in order to afford to keep football.

2. "Permissable" is a tricky word. The NCAA went from scholarship limits to roster limits to reduce their liability when it comes to athlete benefits without making everything a free for all that the P4 would win. Just bescause they can scholarship every roster spot does not mean that they will or have to.

3. If they can no longer game the APR and grad rates with XC/track guys then those sports will cease to be releavent in athletic departments. XC has always been considered safe due to size and investment. That ship has passed. XC is only marginally less likely to be cut than track.

4. Most of the Olympic sports that survive will no longer meet what we all consider as "Division 1" standard. Most programs will be forced to move to regional travel and competition. Even the P4 schools will do this. The Oh State AD litterally said as much. The All XC/and track programs will basically be reduced to D2 levels and below in terms of budget. No more complete wardrobes of gear, and the big magnet meets like Peyton Jordan, florida relays, drake, probably even Penn (but to a lesser degree due to the high school sections.) will no longer exist in their current form. Schools will not have the money to fly everywhere.

5. The positive is that most sports will return to the original intintion of college sports as a means to an end (a degree) and not just the end.

6. This is not the fault of TitleIV, or really even football. We are to blame. We eleveated sports at institutions of higher education to pro-level sports. We paid for the bloated salaries and ridiculus facility arms race with the tickets, gear, and TV packages we purchased. You want to change it.........STOP FEEDING THE BEAST. Otherwise stfu. None of this happens without our hard earned $$$$$.

One of the most accurate descriptions of the situation on this board.

This is what professional sports at the collegiate level looks like. This is what the American society wants.

With regard to #4- this is what I hate. We let the narrative become what whatevre the ADs tell us. My kids HIGH SCHOOL team can afford a kit or 2 (or even 3 for the state meet) and travel. Parents can chip in, fund raise in worst case. Don't even tell me that XC is a drain on finances. Maybe the structure has to change but c'mon they are not flying private jets here.

NIRCA will get bigger, d2 and 3 teams will get bigger. Its not the end of the world.

Biggest difference is that football players are now minor league athletes, not student athletes (unless they just want a degree - prob 5% or so study stem).

Travel is a budget killer. My kid is at a D2 school on the West Coast. They traveled back east for an XC meet a few weeks ago. Airfare, lodging, vehicle rental, and food for 16 athletes and two coaches ran about $12K for an overnight trip (fly Friday morning, return Saturday evening). Track would run even more with larger numbers of travelers plus equipment shipping. It makes financial sense to revert to a regional model and just eliminate conference championships for some of these bloated and far flung P4s.

My son's team flies on chartered jets frequently. You don't seem to understand how much money is spent on a track and cross country program. Scholarships are $1M. Salaries are $1M. Travel is $1M.

You do understand that your son's team is the exception, not the norm, right? There are very few P4 schools that are chartering, and those that have in the past will have to fly commercial to keep their budget within limits

I don't believe that programs will cut their budgets. I predict that they will remain about where they have been.

This is what our athletic department is doing.

We will have roster limits but no increase in budget. We are still doing 12.6 scholarships for the men, but now we just have less people on the roster. Kind of works out okay in the end.

This is accurate. Operational budget is the biggest money monster of any prgram not in the P4. Even small college NAIA, D2, and D3 programs budgets be anywhere from 30K (difficult to do anything with) up to 100k+ for XC. Add in coaches salaries and the fact that those potential scholarship spots on the rosters could be used to help scholarship the last 10 football guys. Can schools afford it......some can, but why would they want to fund it. There is no updside now. Dont forget that the athletic department also has to fund up to 20 million towards player salaries. Even mid majors are going to have come up with something to pay football players if they want to be relevent at all. They will be counting every nickel.

Agreed with both of your posts. Spot on.

The only thing I will add is that in the end everyone is responsible for this result... even they SAs. They have taken advantage of the pendulum swinging past equilibrium (which I might add is what any of us would do) and the end result will not be good for many future SAs.

We are going towards a system where many minor sports will be clubs. They will have to raise their own funding. Some clubs will be great at it others will not. There will be reduced opportunities for many but it is what it is. You know what they say... change is the only constant if life.

The relevant clear example right now is Olympians Rooks and Corrigan at BYU. Maybe they would still have gone D1, but neither would have had a spot at BYU and the training environment and coaching to become steeple Olympians.

D1 isn't the holy grail that the legends claim, certainly as it goes from the thought-free corners of this site. Dakotah Lindwurm didn't need to go D1, among countless others like Pat Porter and Mark Conover. UMKC doesn't have football, so there's no reason to believe Frerichs wouldn't have found a space there at any point. Coburn ran at NCAAs as a true freshman, wound up their 3rd scorer in XC by the end of the season. No danger that a top flight D1 program wouldn't identify her talent if all had the proposed SEC roster caps. And so on. Just look at all the transfer portal movement in recent years, there will certainly be avenues for so-called late bloomers to get to programs where they can enhance development further.

The sky is not falling in, folks.

Exactly right. For all the people who peaked as D1 all-Americans, there will still be plenty of slots for them going forward. For the rare few who wouldn't get recruited and could have developed and peaked as D1 all-Americans, you can still have a rich and ambitious college experience in D2 and can even go D1 through the transfer portal far easier than would have been the case even a decade ago. There will also be many programs at D1 FCS schools that will have space for more "late bloomer" developmental types. Sure, there might be a shrinking going on, but it's more of cutting off the bottom 10% that weren't exactly contributing meaningfully. Our best athletes will overall have an improved model and more rewarding environment with resources more focused on them.

You don't seem to understand that as D1 programs eliminate spots or programs, those athletes move downstream to another school. UMKC will get much better athletes in a few years.