Contributor: The Nerd
Since our founding, the Nerd team has strongly encouraged high school athletes to extend their athletic careers into college. In fact, years ago we wrote an article at this link that gives advice on the factors that each athlete should consider when selecting a college program. Unfortunately, recent developments at the Division 1 level could soon reduce the number of opportunities available for XC and T&F athletes.
The NCAA has been a defendant in a number of lawsuits filed by current and former D1 athletes who allege that the NCAA is unfairly restricting their income-producing capabilities. As part of a proposed settlement (the 'House settlement') to these lawsuits, the NCAA and the Power Five conferences (Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Big 12, Pac-12) representing 68 Division 1 universities are about to agree to a set of conditions that will reshape the number of scholarships and roster spots allowed for each sport offered by those schools. Yahoo Sports has posted an article at https://sports.yahoo.com/historic-house-ncaa-settlement-leaving-hundreds-of-olympic-sport-athletes-in-peril-125238713.html that provides a general overview of the proposed settlement.
In general, the House settlement accomplishes three major things: (a) it increases the amount of compensation available to athletes, (b) it increases the number of allowable scholarships in nearly all sports, and (c) it effectively moves the current the name-image-likeness (NIL) compensation system from outside the university's control to inside the university's control. Those are good things, right? For the revenue-producing sports, the answer is probably 'yes.' For non-revenue-producing sports like swimming, golf, gymnastics, cross country and track and field, it seems like the answer is a resounding 'no.'
A few basics about the proposed House settlement:
As of now, the House settlement only applies to Power Five schools like Nebraska, Iowa State and Tennessee. It doesn't automatically apply to D1 schools such as Creighton, UNO and South Dakota. However, if a school chooses to adopt the revenue sharing scheme and/or higher scholarship limits for even one sport, then all of the sports at that school would be subject to the roster limits of the House settlement. For example, let's say Creighton felt it needed to adopt the House terms in order to effectively compete for recruits in baseball. If so, then every other varsity sport at Creighton would be limited to the House-mandated roster limits.
Currently there are no roster limits for cross country or track and field teams at any collegiate levels. In D1, programs can offer a maximum of 6 women's scholarships and 5 men's scholarships if the college only has a cross country program, and 18 women's scholarships and 12.6 men's scholarships if the school has both XC and T&F.
The House settlement dictates that Power Five cross country teams will be limited to 17 roster spots per gender and those schools can offer up to 17 full scholarships, while track and field teams can have a roster of up to 45 athletes and offer up to 45 full scholarships. Any cross country athletes competing in track would have their roster spots and scholarships count against the 45/45 allotment for the track team. This doesn't mean that cross country teams are going to fund another ten scholarships per gender; while they could do so, few programs have the budget to accomplish it.
The House settlement has yet to be confirmed by the judge presiding over the case. However, many observers expect the settlement terms to go into effect in August 2025.
Over the past month I've been talking with a number of in-the-know people in and around Nebraska who are keen observers of D1, D2, D3 and NAIA athletics, and it's hard to be optimistic about what's ahead of us.
The SEC makes the first move
The first comments from these individuals in early October was 'not sure how it will impact us.' However, by late October their collective viewpoint had changed to 'this could be the beginning of the end for Olympic sports in college.' Why the change? On October 25th multiple news outlets reported that the SEC planned to set its roster limits at 10 for cross country and 35 for track and field. The XC roster limit seems ridiculously low given that most D1 conference meets allow for nine or ten competitors per team while seven athletes race at NCAA regionals. The immediate reaction shared by several of my sources: how will a D1 coach manage to have seven healthy runners for NCAA regionals if he or she can only start with a roster of ten?
The impact on distance runners during the track season may be just as significant. Let's say that the ten distance runners on the roster at a SEC school also compete in track. That leaves just 25 roster spots for sprinters, mid-distance and field athletes. Some D1 programs currently have over 25 athletes in just the field events and as many as 85 total T&F athletes, so there will be some serious cutting in the SEC. Until now, some strong programs have been so deep that their goal was to have three or four of their athletes to place in the same event at the conference meet; in the future those schools may may only enter one or two competitors in those events. Keep in mind that there are up to 19 different events at most major conference meets, and schools are generally limited to bringing 28-32 athletes to the conference meet. When a track roster is limited to 35 or 45 athletes, it may be tough to find 32 healthy and competitive athletes to spread among those 19 events.
The more likely scenario in the SEC is that all 10 distance runners won't be on the track roster. The schools may take the three or four best distance athletes and sit the rest. For example, we wouldn't expect to see 10 distance runners on the track team at a program like Florida that is traditionally strong in sprints and field events. If you're a distance runner who wants to compete all year, the Power Five conferences could become a lot less attractive.
The SEC's 10/35 rule, if adopted, will result in deep cuts. For example, as of November 11, the Tennessee T&F program had 60 men listed on their roster while its cross country team had 27 women on their roster.
What's next?
While the SEC is the only conference to announce stricter roster limits than the 17/45 included in the House settlement, several observers expect the Big Ten to align with the SEC's limits. Both conferences aspire to be the leaders in collegiate sports, so don't be surprised to see them mimic each other's changes. If two conferences commit to the lower limits, look for the other Power Five conferences to follow to 'safeguard the integrity of sports.' That will be the first round of roster cuts. The second round of cuts may happen when the Power Five schools look for additional ways to increase funding in their revenue-producing sports. The low-hanging fruit will be to eliminate roster spots from their Olympic sports offerings.
There have been other developments beyond the House settlement that will impact D1 athletes. On October 9th, the NCAA announced that it was ending the National Letter of Intent program effective immediately. Athletes will now sign binding financial aid agreements with the school of their choice, and they're prevented from competing for another school until that financial aid agreement is voided. One local source said that this new financial aid agreement process should simply be called 'one-year contracts.' If an athlete performs well, a coach will renew the financial aid agreement for the following year, or the athlete might find themselves being recruited by higher profile schools. If the athlete performs poorly - particularly at schools with strict roster limits - there's a good chance the coach will terminate the financial aid agreement at the end of the academic year to make room for a better athlete. Don't be surprised if more XC athletes spend time at three universities simply for the opportunity to exhaust their four years of college eligibility.
With stricter roster limits, there will likely be fewer D1 opportunities for the 'project' athletes who could develop from a redshirt freshman athlete to a varsity contributor by their senior year. Similarly, there will no longer be high-level distance programs who sign 5-12 athletes per year and then wait to see who develops into a conference-level performer. In the future those programs will sign 3-6 athletes per year, with the additions skewed towards older athletes who have proven themselves at smaller colleges or on the international stage. Some schools have already moved that direction: at the recent WAC meet, all eight of New Mexico's male finishers were international athletes. Similarly, it appears the top nine male finishers in the recent NCAA D1 Midwest XC regional were international athletes. The shift towards older signees leaves fewer D1 opportunities for high school seniors.
That should set off the domino effect. Consider this scenario. The sixth-fastest recruit (a 4:10 miler) at North Carolina ends up signing with Coastal Carolina, Marshall or Butler. A 4:15 miler loses his offer from Coastal Carolina and ends up signing with a D2 or Juco school. The 4:22 miler who would have signed with the D2 school a few years ago starts looking at D3 and NAIA opportunities where he can eventually make his school's varsity team.
In the end, the reduction of roster spots at the D1 Power Five colleges will end up increasing the talent level at every other collegiate division. Unfortunately, it's conceivable that the House-related financial pressures placed on revenue-producing sports may become so great that D1 colleges began cutting entire Olympic sports programs to balance the athletics budget.
Thankfully, fewer D1 roster spots doesn't necessarily mean that collegiate XC/T&F participation will fall. Many NAIA schools rely on sports programs to drive enrollment, and two Nebraska-based coaches told me that they think the local NAIA programs have plenty of roster space to accommodate more athletes. I've gotten similar feedback regarding opportunities at D2 and D3 programs, although it's still unclear how D2/D3 programs will be impacted by athletes cut from or not recruited by D1 programs.
Opportunities?
When the House era begins next year, it will be interesting to see which universities fully fund their XC and T&F programs. With Phil Knight's significant financial backing, Oregon's XC program could be poised to take advantage of the increased scholarships and greater financial flexibility. However, colleges that don't opt into the House settlement could conceivably take advantage of no roster limits to build competitive teams. For example, the Ivy League schools don't offer athletic scholarships but there is no shortage of brainy athletes who want to attend Harvard, Yale or Penn. Could they use a depth advantage to build track teams that could compete at the national championship? Could a Summit Conference school like South Dakota State rise to national prominence in this way?
Despite the roster limits, there will continue to be opportunities for the most elite high school runners. However, with so few recruiting spots to fill, those athletes may be required to verbally commit early in their senior season and possibly during their junior season. Starting next year, it will be increasingly unusual for a D1 coach to patiently wait until March or April for a senior to commit. I would expect Power Five teams to have all of their recruits locked in by mid-October.
Explore your options
We're not as optimistic about the future of D1 Olympic sports as we were a few months ago, and we expect to see a declining number of D1 running opportunities for Nebraska high school athletes as schools shift their recruiting emphasis towards older and international athletes. Consequently, it's imperative that aspiring collegiate XC and T&F athletes expand their search to include D2, D3, NAIA and JUCO colleges. We've always encouraged students to pick the college that would be their first choice even if they stopped competing, and that advice will be even more relevant in the future.
Finally, here's the irony of the proposed settlement. The named plaintiff, Grant House, was a swimmer at Arizona State. Instead of enriching fellow swimmers, his lawsuit may accelerate the decline of Olympic sports at the collegiate level. He won the battle but lost the war.
******
First published at www.preprunningnerd.com by Jay Slagle on November 17, 2024. If you find an error, shoot us an e-mail at jayslagle@hotmail.com and we'll get it fixed.
Like this coverage of the Nebraska cross country scene? There's more of this at www.preprunningnerd.com. Check out the Blog tab for our frequent stories and the Results tab for every Nebraska high school meet we can find. If you want to see meet photos or just need to kill a few hours on social media, follow us on Twitter and Instagram @PrepRunningNerd or on Facebook at www.facebook.com/preprunningnerd.
Finally, if you think runners, jumpers and throwers are the best things on earth, you'll enjoy our two most popular articles. In 2018 we published "The Runner with the Broken Heart" about a high school boy who finished last in nearly every race he ran. In 2022 we published, "The Fall and Rise of Emmett Hassenstab," a story about a high school triple jumper who became a quadrapalegic after a swimming accident.