|
|
Post by digbigvolley22 on Nov 19, 2024 18:26:13 GMT -5
One area that I think people aren’t talking a lot about is community college. Your going to see more kids that want to play volleyball go the community college route to save some money and play.
The downside to this is that you’re probably going to see even less kids make the jump from community college to D1 as a result of the roster limits. For some 2 years at community college is all they will get.
|
|
|
|
Post by 513vb on Nov 21, 2024 15:06:38 GMT -5
Outside of California, and mostly SoCal at that, there are only a small handful of community colleges with MVB across the rest of the country. Maybe that has an opportunity to grow, but right now it is not set up to handle an influx of kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by MonroeClark90 on Nov 21, 2024 16:45:49 GMT -5
I assume this will also have an impact on the Transfer Portal. I know there are kids out there that went to smaller schools in hopes of getting on a D1 radar in time. This is going to make that option much harder to come by.
|
|
|
|
Post by cosmo on Nov 21, 2024 19:14:37 GMT -5
I assume this will also have an impact on the Transfer Portal. I know there are kids out there that went to smaller schools in hopes of getting on a D1 radar in time. This is going to make that option much harder to come by. I feel like that could go both ways though. With the 18 player limit pushing towards every player being game-ready, why not target transfers with a couple years of experience in them, ready to hit the ground running over 17-18 year olds who will need a redshirt season and a couple off-the-bench years to become impact players. Use lower ranked schools as a training ground, then the transfer portal to take the players once they’ve got the necessary experience under their belt to make an impact. (Yes there are quite a few freshman, especially with growing international recruiting who come in ready to start, but that’s rarely a full lineup’s worth.) |
|
|
|
Post by staticb on Nov 21, 2024 20:36:05 GMT -5
Will there still be D1 programs that don't cut down to the 18 person roster size? It is not confirmed but reports are the roster limits will apply to every D1 schools and every sport. This will be confirmed in 2025 I thought that teams had to "opt in" to the settlement for this to apply to them. Which means teams could not opt in and keep their roster sizes, but I'm guessing t affects their scholarship limits too. More important than the roster cuts is that some schools could offer more scholarships if they wanted to. |
|
|
|
Post by spikemaster123 on Nov 22, 2024 5:18:28 GMT -5
It is not confirmed but reports are the roster limits will apply to every D1 schools and every sport. This will be confirmed in 2025 I thought that teams had to "opt in" to the settlement for this to apply to them. Which means teams could not opt in and keep their roster sizes, but I'm guessing t affects their scholarship limits too. More important than the roster cuts is that some schools could offer more scholarships if they wanted to. Would it be up to the specific team to opt in or a school wide decision? |
|
|
|
Post by vbc1 on Nov 22, 2024 6:19:30 GMT -5
I thought that teams had to "opt in" to the settlement for this to apply to them. Which means teams could not opt in and keep their roster sizes, but I'm guessing t affects their scholarship limits too. More important than the roster cuts is that some schools could offer more scholarships if they wanted to. Would it be up to the specific team to opt in or a school wide decision? The entire athletic department is grouped into the decision. If an AD says they are opting in to the revenue sharing, then all of the sports are grouped into that decision. Individual sports cannot opt out if that is the case. |
|
|
|
Post by OuchMyBack on Nov 22, 2024 8:10:58 GMT -5
Would it be up to the specific team to opt in or a school wide decision? The entire athletic department is grouped into the decision. If an AD says they are opting in to the revenue sharing, then all of the sports are grouped into that decision. Individual sports cannot opt out if that is the case. Initially it was reported that a school had the opportunity to opt into revenue sharing and that decision would impose the roster limits. I've heard from several people (on the internet) that have been in touch with lawyers representing athletes in some capacity and they have stated that every school, every sport, right now is going to have to abide by the roster limits. Makes sense to me that the NCAA doesn't want limit one schools roster size and let others carry as many as they want as that would probably generate another lawsuit. |
|
|
|
Post by vbc1 on Nov 22, 2024 11:16:51 GMT -5
The entire athletic department is grouped into the decision. If an AD says they are opting in to the revenue sharing, then all of the sports are grouped into that decision. Individual sports cannot opt out if that is the case. Initially it was reported that a school had the opportunity to opt into revenue sharing and that decision would impose the roster limits. I've heard from several people (on the internet) that have been in touch with lawyers representing athletes in some capacity and they have stated that every school, every sport, right now is going to have to abide by the roster limits. Makes sense to me that the NCAA doesn't want limit one schools roster size and let others carry as many as they want as that would probably generate another lawsuit. Not sure who your sources are, but that's not entirely true. While it is true that DII/DIII/NAIA programs will not have roster limits, if you are a DI program, and your school opts in, you have up to (not guaranteed) 18 scholarships, but can only have 18 on your roster total. If your school opts out (which some are doing), then you do not have a roster limit but you are still locked at 4.5 scholarships to divvy out. I too have heard there are some lawsuits coming from young athletes, but these are moreso the ones that are already on DI rosters, and are being cut only because the program has to get to that 18 limit by next season (2026). It is quite possible that there will be some younger athletes (still in high school) that might have a lawsuit of their own with regards to limiting rosters for future recruits, but this will fall on deaf ears as the NCAA's response will be: If you are not good enough to make a DI roster, than that is no fault of the school or the NCAA. This new roster limit rule will affect many programs around the country, which is a real shame. Many coaches are hoping that the NCAA has a heart, and will let programs graduate their existing rosters to get to the 18 limit in a more humane way. Not too sure that will happen, however. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Nov 22, 2024 11:19:11 GMT -5
The entire athletic department is grouped into the decision. If an AD says they are opting in to the revenue sharing, then all of the sports are grouped into that decision. Individual sports cannot opt out if that is the case. Initially it was reported that a school had the opportunity to opt into revenue sharing and that decision would impose the roster limits. I've heard from several people (on the internet) that have been in touch with lawyers representing athletes in some capacity and they have stated that every school, every sport, right now is going to have to abide by the roster limits. Makes sense to me that the NCAA doesn't want limit one schools roster size and let others carry as many as they want as that would probably generate another lawsuit. This is essentially, althought not technically, correct. The ability to opt-in is related to the additional revenue sharing provisions. The roster limits were not tied directly to that option, but were part of the larger framework of implementing the settlement. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Nov 22, 2024 11:41:35 GMT -5
Initially it was reported that a school had the opportunity to opt into revenue sharing and that decision would impose the roster limits. I've heard from several people (on the internet) that have been in touch with lawyers representing athletes in some capacity and they have stated that every school, every sport, right now is going to have to abide by the roster limits. Makes sense to me that the NCAA doesn't want limit one schools roster size and let others carry as many as they want as that would probably generate another lawsuit. Not sure who your sources are, but that's not entirely true. While it is true that DII/DIII/NAIA programs will not have roster limits, if you are a DI program, and your school opts in, you have up to (not guaranteed) 18 scholarships, but can only have 18 on your roster total. If your school opts out (which some are doing), then you do not have a roster limit but you are still locked at 4.5 scholarships to divvy out. I too have heard there are some lawsuits coming from young athletes, but these are moreso the ones that are already on DI rosters, and are being cut only because the program has to get to that 18 limit by next season (2026). It is quite possible that there will be some younger athletes (still in high school) that might have a lawsuit of their own with regards to limiting rosters for future recruits, but this will fall on deaf ears as the NCAA's response will be: If you are not good enough to make a DI roster, than that is no fault of the school or the NCAA. This new roster limit rule will affect many programs around the country, which is a real shame. Many coaches are hoping that the NCAA has a heart, and will let programs graduate their existing rosters to get to the 18 limit in a more humane way. Not too sure that will happen, however. The settlement language explicitly eliminates all scholarship limits. From the settlment language: Section 1. Elimination of NCAA Division I Scholarship Limits. All NCAA Division I athletic scholarship limits will be eliminated. The NCAA may adopt Division I roster limits which are subject to revision by the Defendants as permitted by this Injunctive Relief Settlement. Appendix B to the SSA sets forth the roster limits which the NCAA has currently chosen to adopt that apply to Member Institutions that choose to provide or facilitate payments or benefits to student-athletes as permitted by this Injunctive Relief Settlement, including but not limited to incremental scholarships permitted by Article 3, Section 3(b). All athletic scholarships will be equivalency awards. Defendants agree that any changes to NCAA Division I or conference rules on roster limits shall not result in the loss of an athletic scholarship for any then-current studentathlete receiving an athletic scholarship. 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 sport. Member Institutions each maintain the right to unilaterally reduce the number of sports, the roster size, and/or the number of athletic scholarships available to student-athletes of any sport. Conferences each maintain the right to unilaterally reduce the number of sports Member Institutions within their respective conferences are required to offer, the number of sports sponsored by the conference, and/or the roster limits within their conference, subject to the limitations noted above that reductions in roster limits will not result in the loss of athletic scholarships for then-current student-athletes and that any change in roster limits shall not result in a reduction in the current number of athletic scholarships permissible under current NCAA Division I rules in any sport |
|
