Reply to 28 Rosters Spots/28 Scholarships for NCAA Women's Soccer

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "28 Rosters Spots/28 Scholarships for NCAA Women's Soccer"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I thought this gave a good explanation of where things stand in terms of paid scholarships and recruiting.

https://www.soccerwire.com/soccer-blog/why-the-ncaas-increase-in-scholarships-wont-prevent-roster-shrink-in-college-soccer/[/quote]

I don't understand - this article says all players need full scholarships? Reqlly?[/quote]

The article is wrong.  All players won't be getting full rides.  Ridiculous.[/quote]

This is a good explanation of the expanded scholarships, written from an MSU perspective, but it still applies:

"The important details include $2.8 billion dollars in back pay for current and former athletes (mostly football and men's basketball players) dating back to 2016 (paid out over 10 years) and, more significantly, revenue sharing with current athletes, with schools paying their athletes up to 22% of certain inventory (media rights, sponsorships and tickets sold) — which, for the 2025-26 school year, will total close to $22 million for each of the power five conference schools, Michigan State included. There will also supposedly be new NCAA oversight with third-party NIL deals, though we'll see whether there is any teeth to that enforcement. There is some recent legal resistance to the settlement, but, as it stands, this is what’s coming. And, in some form, where it’s headed regardless.
...
Football will go from 85 scholarships to 105 allowed, men’s basketball from 13 to 15 (women’s basketball is already at 15), men’s ice hockey from 18 to 26, women's volleyball from 12 to 18, baseball from 11.7 to 34, softball from 12 to 25, wrestling from 9.9 to 30 and so on and so forth.

There are two big caveats here. First, no school can afford all of these extra scholarships. They’re not just free things to give out. Athletic departments pay that tuition. [b]Secondly, and what’s been underreported, is that a portion of each school’s revenue-sharing cap is tied to the number of scholarships it currently has in each sport. For every scholarship you add, without taking one away, it cuts into a portion of that nearly $22 million in revenue a school can share with athletes, up to $2.5 million. For example, if MSU added 20 football scholarships, two in men’s basketball and eight in hockey, the cost of those scholarships — roughly $30,000 per scholarship for in-state tuition — would be taken out of the money it could pay athletes. [/b]"

https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/sports/columnists/graham-couch/2024/08/17/msu-football-the-biggest-story-in-college-sports-is-flying-under-the-radar/74806933007/

My guess is that the push will be to maximize the amount of direct payment money available to football which will mean more direct-payments to female athletes to comply with title IX. but not a lot more scholarships; football already has 85 and teams will prefer giving the 10th guy on the roster 10 or 15k more rather than giving the 86th guy a scholarship [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics