|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jul 16, 2024 13:37:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Jul 16, 2024 14:44:49 GMT -5
Since soccer is currently limited to 14 scholarships on the girls side and 9.9 on the boys side, I can see rosters taking a huge cut. Since each player must be paid under the revenue sharing model and Title IX, going from 14 scholarships to some higher number indicates that current roster sizes are not sustainable. The real question that coaches have asked is what happens to walk ons. Coaches are pushing to keep walk on programs across all sports. If they are successful, walk ons (who likely have to waive compensation) will fill out the roster above the 18ish people that are going to be allowed. |
|
|
|
Post by lajolla39 on Jul 16, 2024 16:22:58 GMT -5
If there's less girls spots available coaches will try to get the best to fill those positions.
If there's a limited number of high level talent because there's less college positions available you're going to limit the supply of top players.
Once supply is limited a separate pathway to pro that doesn't involve college will make more and more sense.
|
|
chef
Jr. Academy
Posts: 10
|
Post by chef on Jul 17, 2024 12:27:39 GMT -5
If there's less girls spots available coaches will try to get the best to fill those positions. If there's a limited number of high level talent because there's less college positions available you're going to limit the supply of top players. Once supply is limited a separate pathway to pro that doesn't involve college will make more and more sense. You’re going to see higher level talent spread throughout the mid-major d1 schools. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 17, 2024 12:42:11 GMT -5
Wow. Interesting article(s). Thank you for sharing. We have an up and coming player that is wanting to play in college, and this is valuable information to have going into recruiting season. Once you take this combined with the rising level of international players coming in, it seems it will be even harder to land at a school that will meet what a player is looking for in their choices. I for one, feel they should limit the amount of international players that can be taken in a given year. These opportunities should be given to a majority US citizens first.
|
|
|
|
Post by lajolla39 on Jul 17, 2024 15:37:50 GMT -5
If there's less girls spots available coaches will try to get the best to fill those positions. If there's a limited number of high level talent because there's less college positions available you're going to limit the supply of top players. Once supply is limited a separate pathway to pro that doesn't involve college will make more and more sense. You’re going to see higher level talent spread throughout the mid-major d1 schools. Correct but will they be scholarship players? |
|
|
|
Post by lajolla39 on Jul 17, 2024 15:41:01 GMT -5
Wow. Interesting article(s). Thank you for sharing. We have an up and coming player that is wanting to play in college, and this is valuable information to have going into recruiting season. Once you take this combined with the rising level of international players coming in, it seems it will be even harder to land at a school that will meet what a player is looking for in their choices. I for one, feel they should limit the amount of international players that can be taken in a given year. These opportunities should be given to a majority US citizens first. State Colleges that receive tax payer funding shouldn't be taking any international players. Other than the ones that pay their own way. Private Colleges that do not receive tax payer funding can do whatever they want. |
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Jul 18, 2024 12:59:50 GMT -5
Wow. Interesting article(s). Thank you for sharing. We have an up and coming player that is wanting to play in college, and this is valuable information to have going into recruiting season. Once you take this combined with the rising level of international players coming in, it seems it will be even harder to land at a school that will meet what a player is looking for in their choices. I for one, feel they should limit the amount of international players that can be taken in a given year. These opportunities should be given to a majority US citizens first. State Colleges that receive tax payer funding shouldn't be taking any international players. Other than the ones that pay their own way. Private Colleges that do not receive tax payer funding can do whatever they want. I agree and disagree with the part about international players. For a more robust and well-rounded American player, we need to play with and against those from other countries and different styles of play. What I do agree with is the concept of setting limits on international players, similar to the MLS. The NCAA could mandate that no more than a third of the roster (8 out of 22-24 players) should be international students. Additionally, teams within a conference could trade international slots to other schools, with the stipulation that they also cover the associated costs. After all, this is a business, and adopting the MLS model of trading international slots could be beneficial for college soccer... |
|
|
|
Post by Futsal Gawdess on Jul 18, 2024 13:33:00 GMT -5
This will definitely change the landscape of college soccer. I've always believed that there should be enough scholarships to cover a full squad of 18 players. The current limits of 13.9 for women and 9.9 for men are inadequate and frankly, laughable. A roster of 22 players makes sense, as it allows for full scrimmages in practice, maintains the quality of play, and prevents teams from over-recruiting (hoarding), as seen with some schools bringing in 14/16/20 recruits in one class, seriously. Providing full scholarships to your top 18 players and allowing up to 4 walk-ons with the understanding that they won't receive scholarships could be an effective model. Think of the walk-ons as the practice squad in the NFL, ready to step in when one of the 18 scholarship players is unable to continue due to injury, academic issues, etc. This approach will elevate the level of play across all divisions by distributing talented players more evenly among college teams. Regarding players opting for the professional route, it's often the first choice for those who have the opportunity. College becomes an alternative for those who need to bide their time, improve their skills, or increase their chances of going pro. Currently, for those in the recruitment process, it's important to ensure that colleges truly want you and have a plan for how they intend to use you. Make sure you're asking about their short-range and long-range plans on dealing with the roster and scholarship changes. Sometimes this may mean targeting mid-major programs instead of power 4.5 conferences. Finally, it's great that athletes now have the opportunity to benefit financially from college sports. With the demands of being full-time students and dedicating 20-25 or more hours a week to their sport, athletes deserve to earn a living wage. I think the wage + NIL will help make a better all-around athlete. I see this change as a positive step forward for college athletics... |
|
|
|
Post by olderthandirt on Jul 18, 2024 19:45:41 GMT -5
Just because there may well be fewer players on the top DI teams doesn’t necessarily mean that the players who in today’s world would fill let’s say places 25-30 on the top teams will soon be on mid-major teams. I personally know several players who turned down partial scholarships at mid-major and DII schools to be able to say that they played at a Top 20 DI team (even though they knew when they made the decision that there was almost no chance that they would ever see the field). The players that I am referring to would in all likelihood have just not played college soccer rather than play for a “lesser” school.
I don’t have a better prediction than those that have appeared earlier, but I suspect that there will be quite a few unexpected results of the change.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 19, 2024 13:43:34 GMT -5
State Colleges that receive tax payer funding shouldn't be taking any international players. Other than the ones that pay their own way. Private Colleges that do not receive tax payer funding can do whatever they want. I agree and disagree with the part about international players. For a more robust and well-rounded American player, we need to play with and against those from other countries and different styles of play. What I do agree with is the concept of setting limits on international players, similar to the MLS. The NCAA could mandate that no more than a third of the roster (8 out of 22-24 players) should be international students. Additionally, teams within a conference could trade international slots to other schools, with the stipulation that they also cover the associated costs. After all, this is a business, and adopting the MLS model of trading international slots could be beneficial for college soccer... This is what I was going for in my post. Limits. |
|
|
|
Post by ncsoccerparent on Jul 22, 2024 13:29:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 23, 2024 11:11:42 GMT -5
Wow. This just made recruiting even crazier... and seemingly harder. regardless of D1 or D2, with a trickle down effect potential. |
|
|
|
Post by ncsoccerparent on Jul 24, 2024 12:35:53 GMT -5
Yahoo!Sports article today says number of baseball scholarships will increase from 12 to 34; softball scholarships will increase from 12 to 25, volleyball will increase from 12 to 18. Nothing mentioned about soccer.
|
|
|
|
Post by roki12 on Jul 24, 2024 13:36:57 GMT -5
Can someone break this down as it pertains to women’s soccer? So does every athlete now get a scholarship? Does everyone now get revenue sharing? Or is this just the power 4 schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccergirlz on Jul 24, 2024 15:02:47 GMT -5
Can someone break this down as it pertains to women’s soccer? So does every athlete now get a scholarship? Does everyone now get revenue sharing? Or is this just the power 4 schools. My understanding is that it will be on a school by school and/or conference by conference basis. I spoke to a D1 college coach this weekend at a mid-tier school. They said they expect to hear something in the next 3-4 weeks on the roster limits. I know lots of numbers being tossed around but they had heard 28 as the number, with one specific p4 conference lobbying for 30. As for scholarships, it will be the school or conference on how many they will fund. The coach I spoke with was concerned on how their school was going to fund more than currently allocated as they are not P4. Bottomline....no one knows for sure as it is all speculation at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 24, 2024 15:15:07 GMT -5
Yahoo!Sports article today says number of baseball scholarships will increase from 12 to 34; softball scholarships will increase from 12 to 25, volleyball will increase from 12 to 18. Nothing mentioned about soccer. Those are huge jumps, almost double or triple the current amount? I don't see how they could do that, but that's JMHO. IF that is the case, I don't see why soccer wouldn't see at least a marginal bump. I have heard rumor that some smaller sports could be on the chopping block, so maybe this is where they will generate that increase in the spots named here. I'm talking about stuff like fencing, high dive, etc. It's definitely an unsettling time for non-revenue sports in general, including soccer. |
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Jul 24, 2024 17:36:07 GMT -5
This is where revenue generating, revenue neutral and revenue drains will have a huge impact on numbers
|
|
|
|
Post by roki12 on Jul 25, 2024 7:40:48 GMT -5
For most other sports the rosters are increasing but for soccer decreasing? Is that correct?
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerparent02 on Jul 25, 2024 10:14:15 GMT -5
This is where revenue generating, revenue neutral and revenue drains will have a huge impact on This is why players have to be strong academically. The academic money pays for school. When a coach carries 30 players but 14 scholarships for women, 9 for men, the $ doesn't cover all. Academic awards can or at least make up some of the deficits. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 25, 2024 11:07:46 GMT -5
This is where revenue generating, revenue neutral and revenue drains will have a huge impact on numbers What would you classify soccer as in those categories? Just curious. |
|
|
|
Post by soccergirlz on Jul 25, 2024 14:46:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by atlnoleg on Jul 26, 2024 9:57:27 GMT -5
This is where revenue generating, revenue neutral and revenue drains will have a huge impact on numbers What would you classify soccer as in those categories? Just curious. I'm pretty sure that football and basketball are the only sports that generate revenue at the college level. There are outliers here and there where maybe a baseball, soccer, or other sport is supporting itself based on local popularity, but it's rare. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 26, 2024 10:44:07 GMT -5
What would you classify soccer as in those categories? Just curious. I'm pretty sure that football and basketball are the only sports that generate revenue at the college level. There are outliers here and there where maybe a baseball, soccer, or other sport is supporting itself based on local popularity, but it's rare. I get that and agree. But I was asking, since there were three categories, where soccer falls in that. But I will be more specific, is soccer considered revenue neutral or a revenue drain? |
|
|
|
Post by 04gparent on Jul 26, 2024 10:50:44 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that football and basketball are the only sports that generate revenue at the college level. There are outliers here and there where maybe a baseball, soccer, or other sport is supporting itself based on local popularity, but it's rare. I get that and agree. But I was asking, since there were three categories, where soccer falls in that. But I will be more specific, is soccer considered revenue neutral or a revenue drain? at 99% of the schools revenue drain... |
|
|
|
Post by 04gparent on Jul 26, 2024 10:53:21 GMT -5
I get that and agree. But I was asking, since there were three categories, where soccer falls in that. But I will be more specific, is soccer considered revenue neutral or a revenue drain? at 99% of the schools revenue drain... 99% of the schools dont charge for admission to a game (to generare revenue). They dont have shirt sponsors (to generare revenue). They are just on the take which worked for all these years since title IX was passed... ADs and soccer coaches are going to have to be way more creative to create revenue instead of just depending on Conference money and football donors. |
|
|
|
Post by bogan on Jul 26, 2024 13:07:08 GMT -5
at 99% of the schools revenue drain... 99% of the schools dont charge for admission to a game (to generare revenue). They dont have shirt sponsors (to generare revenue). They are just on the take which worked for all these years since title IX was passed... ADs and soccer coaches are going to have to be way more creative to create revenue instead of just depending on Conference money and football donors. I would expect more expensive soccer camps to sell the dream… |
|
|
|
Post by Upper90 on Jul 26, 2024 15:55:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by lajolla39 on Jul 26, 2024 17:23:05 GMT -5
What a load of BS. He's trying to say increasing the number of players on scholarship would affect potential walk ons. No it won't you went from 80 scholarships to 105. I guarantee if coaches find a promising player they'll find a place for them. Ccoaches don't like that they're losing control of their players and can't keep them under thumb anymore because of the transfer portal. |
|
|
|
Post by newguy on Jul 26, 2024 17:41:21 GMT -5
Portion from The Athletic
Roster limits
An approved settlement would eliminate current scholarship limits in favor of new roster limits. Schools would be permitted to offer as many scholarships per team as allowed by the new roster limits, which include:
• 105 in football (increased from 85)
• 15 each for men’s and women’s basketball
• 34 in baseball
• 25 in softball
• 28 each in men’s and women’s soccer
• 45 each in men’s and women’s track
• 30 each in men’s and women’s swimming
No sports would see a decrease in available scholarships, though scholarships in all sports would move to an equivalency model, meaning partial scholarships could be spread over multiple athletes. Sports like baseball already operated under that model, but this would be a change for head-count sports such as football and basketball that currently can only award full scholarships to individual players. More than 750 new scholarship spots would be available across all NCAA DI-sanctioned sports.
Walk-ons would still be permitted, despite previous concerns that the settlement would eliminate them. Certain details are still being resolved regarding walk-ons, but in all likelihood, teams would be required to remain within the roster limits in-season between scholarship and walk-on athletes. Meaning a football team could not carry 90 scholarship players and 20 walk-ons during the season, because that would eclipse the 105 roster limit.
Non-power-conference DI schools would have to adhere only to the settlement’s stipulated roster limits and other terms of the settlement if they elect to participate in the future revenue-sharing model.
|
|
