What NCAA DI XC/Track Program is getting cut next?

I think we are going to see an absolute cataclysmic change in college sports in the next decade. I posted this on another thread, but private equity is currently exploring how they could monetize college football. Thoughts are the revenues could exceed the NFL. Probably something along the lines of licensing the names from the universities, paying players as employees etc. Basketball could be next in line. Seems like it could cut the NCAA out as they are pretty much already cut out of the BCS playoffs. Will be curious to see how this would impact non-revenue sports. Would there be a requirement to pay non-revenue athletes under this model? Would this actually help ease title IX if football if perhaps carved out in this model? Maybe this would be good in the long run. But maybe it just allows universities to deemphasize minor sports more.

It may also force the NCAA to reform rules for participation in each division as well. Right now a team has to sponsor a certain number of sports in D1 to participate in D1 football or basketball. For non-football and basketball D1 sports, lower division schools are allowed to have 1 D1 program which is how you have a school like D2 Clarion participating in D1 wrestling. So, you end up with a bunch of very small schools that want to play D1 basketball and instead of having all of their other sports at the D2 or 3 level they have a bunch of horrific programs that shouldn't be anywhere near D1. Allowing schools more leeway in spreading sports among the different divisions could help sustain programs as well.

Who knows exactly how this will shake out but it's going to be interesting especially if you are only watching from the sidelines.

I do have contact/attachment to UCLA and I am telling you what I know. You may not like it or want to hear it. My connection isn't a football alum, it' some one who actually knows what's happening.

Lafayette sponsors 23 sports so there is enough room to cut both mens and womens full XC-TF programs.

They are prioritizing football, basketball and lacrosse. They would love to put a turf field over their existing, but 20 year old, outdoor track.

They simply don't have the funds to support 23 sports moving forward. They are toast.

Lehigh hosts the Paul Short XC Invitational, one of the biggest high school and college races in the nation. They host several high school conference and state meets as well. Their indoor track hosts about 10 large high school meets each year.

The money from those meets provides most of their operating budget and pay for coaches. They also get over $100k per year in donations from alumni.

Cutting track doesn't save any money. If their title IX numbers are bad, then they might look at track. But at the moment their title IX numbers are good.

Maybe. But if they're managing to support all those sports now. What's going to change so that they can't support that many in the future? I'm not arguing that they won't drop sports. I just keep seeing all these dire predictions but not a lot of particulars.

Unless you’re talking with the AD you don’t know. The Football Alum are more filled in then the current cross country and track coaches will ever be. Don’t hate the messengers.

I am actually talking with someone who knows... and not a football alum who thinks he knows.

UCLA isn't dropping XC.

And who is hating anyone? Just setting things straight for you.

You must be an assistant coach or friends with one. I’m sorry you’re hearing online before your boss or friend tells you. I’m not in California , but extremely well connected to big alum for a good reason with the people who actually contribute to UCLA. I was told they are cutting out the fat and cross country was fat. This new AD is swimming and needs to make football donors happy and make it look like he’s doing something.
If you think you know more than me then you should move on and ignore this post. Trust me I’m not offended. I just know what’s really going down. If it makes you feel any better no donors are happy with Martin Jarmond either. He’s treading water to make the donors happy.

FYI- I’m also not a distance runner. I was an average DI 400m runner in college. I became a hobby jogger 5k - 10k runner who visits the message boards to keep connected to the sport.

Good luck

I guess we'll see! Cheers!

Every athletic department that cut track had previously been "managing to support" all of their current sports until one day they couldn't.

If you want to be good at football and lacrosse, you need to pump millions of dollars into those programs. The AD will determine it's better to cut a sport that's getting last place in the conference and reallocate those resources to produce a winning football, lacrosse, and basketball team.

The track coach is complaining that the track needs to be resurfaced and it's going to cost $500k? For a little extra, they can tear down the track and put in a turf field so lacrosse will have their own practice field (which opens up more time on the football field for football).

Thanks. That makes sense. But this particular thread is connecting an impending move by Power Four conferences out of the NCAA with a massive cutting of cross country and track programs and possibly non revenue sports teams in general because schools that want to try to stay competitive with the big time places and will need to find more money to put into their own programs in hopes of doing that.

If we're talking about, say, Temple, making massive cuts I get the connection. They play 1A football. Lafayette doesn't. I don't see how a Power Four breakaway affects their athletic programs. If you tell me they may drop cross country and track because they're going to finish either second or third in PL basketball this year and they think a bit more money can get them into first, yeah, that makes sense to me. But I can't really figure out why a dramatic change at the highest level of 1A football is going to have drastic consequences for non revenue sports at places playing 1AA football or not playing football at all.

Again, I'm not arguing with people claiming there will be such dire consequences. I'm asking. So I'll push this one step further with you. Imagine that it turns out that there is no Power Four Football breakaway and that the decade ends with the structure of big time NCAA football looking pretty much like it does right now but with expanded playoffs. Will Lafayette still drop either cross country, track, or both, in your opinion?

Lehigh's recent coaching changes are like "tell me you're cutting men's track without telling me you're cutting men's track" They can still host xc meets and hs meets, the track staff has nothing to do with the hs meets and only the xc staff has anything to do with Paul Short.

Specifically MEN'S track-they're making room for women's wrestling

Thanks. Maybe I'll give up on this thread soon but the starting point here is that it's going to be disastrous for track and cross country when the P4 schools break away from the NCAA and play football on their own. Everyone who's posting here about the possible imminent demise of cross country and track on this thread (unless I'm missing seeing a post or two) is talking about programs that in danger now. I'm sure you know much more than I do about what's going on at Lehigh but when you talk about the likelihood of track being dropped there you're saying it's to make room for women's wrestling and not because schools like Penn State won't be playing football in the NCAA. That's worth knowing but what I'm trying to figure out here is how what goes on in the athletic departments of the fiftyish biggest time football playing schools can affect what goes on in the athletic programs of schools not playing 1A football.

It's because they're all about to be forced to pay every student-athlete $30k a year by law. So not only does the back up kicker get $30k a year...but so does the random Title IX fodder who you let walk on to the team because she has good grades and counts 3 times if you toss her a t-shirt...but soon the school is going to have to pay her $30k a year as well. Where's that money coming from?

So, everyone here is focused on Division 1 and that's understandable.However, a lot of athletes may simply attend Division 3 universities instead, where scholarships and the like are simply not a thing..is it good for the sport? No, but maybe not being associated with D1 or the NCAA entirely is ultimately a good thing.

I’m hearing Dartmouth and UCLA are dropping Cross-Country next fall.

Lafayette is never going to need to pay any student athlete $30k a year. The court decisions so far have not allowed schools to put any sort of organized restrictions on what athletes can earn from things like NIL money. But nothing forces a school to pay anything if it doesn't want to.

The mid-american is probably on the chopping block. I would assume buffalo will go bye-bye soon.