Will the New NCAA Roster/Scholly Rules Increase or Decrease Parity?

[BAC]

There's much commentary about how the transfer portal and NIL are reducing parity.  But will the two big NCAA rule changes next year cut the other way?  I'm talking about (1) a 30-man roster limit, and (2) scholarship cap increases from 9.9 to up to 30.

I'm not sure. I think it could increase parity, but depends on how the roster limits are implemented, and how much scholarships increase -- and by who.  I'm curious to see how the latest portal activity plays out.  It may even reduce parity.  What do you think?  Here's my half-baked thoughts.

First the 30-man roster caps. 

In theory, some of those athletes in the portal could be guys who think they might not make the roster cut where they are, so they want to go to a program where they will.  That increases parity, as in theory they're going to a less competitive program. 

On the other hand, I recall the "roster caps" of the Title IX days, where the coach would just create a separate "club team" and put the excess wrestlers on there, even though they all continue to practice together and no one knows the difference.  Is that going to be what happens here?

If so, then I doubt the roster caps will actually translate into roster cuts. It doesn't hurt parity, but won't help it either. 

Second, the increase in scholarship limit. 

In theory, some of those athletes on the portal could be guys who will easily make the roster cut, but don't have a full scholarship (and aren't making much/anything in NIL).  I could see them going to a less competitive school which may not have the donor bucks for NIL, but does have the newfound ability to grant a full scholarship.  If so, that helps parity.

But is that really how this plays out?  I think that may be wishful thinking on my part. 

Truth is, some of the less competitive D1 schools don't offer 9.9 scholarships as it is, so they sure won't be able to increase beyond that.  The schools most likely to be able to increase their scholarship offerings are probably the ones who are already the big dogs with NIL money.  That means it'll actually hurt parity, as it'll make it easier for them to hoard wrestlers, including non-starters. 

For example, if the big-dog schools suddenly grant full rides to all or almost all 30 guys who fall within the roster cap, then just like that, those non-starters with new scholarships will have no incentive to transfer for a better scholarship. Take a guy like Joe Sealey, who (presumably) isn't getting a full ride and isn't apt to start next year, but could likely get a full ride (or close to it) elsewhere.  Before the rule change, he might choose to get a full ride (NIL considerations aside), but now he may end up sticking around, since now PSU can offer him a full ride despite not starting.

Overall?

I dunno.  My hunch is net harm to parity as I'm guessing colleges can circumvent the roster caps, and that it will be only the bigger schools with already-strong teams that can meaningfully increase their scholarship offerings.  

[Elevator]

Its the wild wild west as all participants see how all the changes (30 roster and scholarship increases, NIL, portal rules) plays out.  The wrestling has looked strong and I doubt that it will decline.  I doubt that the economics of collegiate wrestling at a high level will decline. 

So perhaps overall good for collegiate wrestling even though it is not clear if or how parity as such will be increased or decreased?   

Also, B1G teams in the top half might measure parity or favorable parity in a way that is different than teams from the bottom half or from teams of the ACC, Big 12, Ivies, EIWA, etc.  What are measures of favorable parity?  # of NQ's, Round of 12, AA's, NCAA finalists, Champs?  Dual meet success?  Lots of ways to measure competitive sucsess and not the same for all programs or wrestlers.  

[Wrestleknownothing]

With regard to scholarship limits, that was really put in there for football. So any school that is now going to give 85 (I think) football scholarships is not going to have money left over to increase wrestling scholarships. If anything, they may need to decrease them. The way to do it then, is for alumni to endow wrestling-specific scholarships, ala Notre Dame before the shenanigans. That I could see happening.

[Ragu]

What schools are realistically offering more than 20 scholarships? Maybe I’m wrong but that seems a bit ridiculous 

[BAC]

12 minutes ago, Ragu said:

What schools are realistically offering more than 20 scholarships? Maybe I’m wrong but that seems a bit ridiculous 

I agree, but I think it could make a difference at the margins. 

If Facundo goes to Cael and says, "I don't mind if I'm not starting or don't get NIL bucks but I'm only getting a 1/3 scholarship and I really want to at least get my education paid for," I would expect Cael will now have the pull to get those extra scholarship dollars, whereas he was capped at 9.9 before.

I suppose it could work the other way too.  Some schools aren't in the business of pushing NIL deals, but they have huge endowments, and could grant extra scholarships without hurting their bottom line.

Of the two scenarios, I suspect the Facundo example is the more likely way this plays out.

[BAC]

30 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

With regard to scholarship limits, that was really put in there for football. So any school that is now going to give 85 (I think) football scholarships is not going to have money left over to increase wrestling scholarships. If anything, they may need to decrease them. The way to do it then, is for alumni to endow wrestling-specific scholarships, ala Notre Dame before the shenanigans. That I could see happening.

Yeah, I'm probably kidding myself if I think the new rules will result in more wrestling scholarships.  Most of the literature to date is saying what you're saying -- namely, that Olympic sports will have their funding cut or be eliminated altogether to free up funding to the moneymaker, football.

An article from a few months ago:

Roster limits in college small sports put athletes on chopping block while coaches look for answers | AP News

 

[CHROMEBIRD]

Although equivalency scholarships will still be allowed, it sounded early on like the opt-in schools were thinking about paying rostered athletes but not offering schollies, as though it was a one-or-the-other business decision. At the time, I thought it could screw over kids who receive a salary that is less than an equivalent athletic scholarship, since the money will be taxable.

A pretty interesting thing about the House Settlement is that if athletes will become salaried employees of their schools, then their pay and NIL collective contracts should all become publicly available information, at least for public schools. Theoretically, anyone will be able to look this stuff up online or request the info.

[Seanyd]

11 minutes ago, CHROMEBIRD said:

Although equivalency scholarships will still be allowed, it sounded early on like the opt-in schools were thinking about paying rostered athletes but not offering schollies, as though it was a one-or-the-other business decision. At the time, I thought it could screw over kids who receive a salary that is less than an equivalent athletic scholarship, since the money will be taxable.

A pretty interesting thing about the House Settlement is that if athletes will become salaried employees of their schools, then their pay and NIL collective contracts should all become publicly available information, at least for public schools. Theoretically, anyone will be able to look this stuff up online or request the info.

Tons of NCAA athletic departments receive government subsidies from their universities. Which would  make these athletic departments financials public, correct?

[CHROMEBIRD]

2 minutes ago, Seanyd said:

Tons of NCAA athletic departments receive government subsidies from their universities. Which would  make these athletic departments financials public, correct?

Athletic Department employees at public universities are public employees. You can look up the salaries of coaches and staff at state schools right now. I expect with the adoption of pay-to-play that athletes' salaries will become public in the future.

Edited March 27 by CHROMEBIRD