Low-revenue sports could be on the chopping block after $2.8 billion NCAA settlement

The proposed $2.8 billion House v. the NCAA settlement could mean painful decisions ahead for collegiate athletic directors nationwide — many of whom are saying the landmark deal to pay college athletes may mean no money for smaller sports like swimming and track.

The proposed deal announced on May 23 would allow NCAA schools to directly pay student-athletes as soon as 2025 while also mandating that universities set aside millions to compensate former student-athletes who were prohibited from signing endorsement deals from 2016-21.

The settlement is subject to approval by Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. District Court of Northern California.

“It’s very likely we’re going to see non-revenue sports get massacred …” Jason Belzer, president of Student-Athlete NIL, told CBS Sports. “It’s going to be tough.”

Decision-makers at universities across the country have said they’ll need to revamp their budgets to account for their new reality. Cuts could be coming.

“We essentially have a new expense category of $21.5 million that we haven’t had previously …” Texas A&M athletic director Trev Alberts said, according to the Houston Chronicle. “This is an entirely new world and tough decisions, tough cuts, things we haven’t done previously are going to have to be contemplated.”

For decades, athletic departments have relied on “revenue sports” — almost exclusively football and men’s basketball — to support their programs.

The ticket sales and TV deals from those sports allowed universities to facilitate less lucrative sports like lacrosse, gymnastics and track.

The House deal would add another expense to be balanced, forcing athletic departments to tighten their belts after decades of mostly unchecked spending.

“We’ve just always had enough increasing revenue to overcome dumb expenses,” Alberts said. “I’ve said it 100 times and I’ll say it again, we don’t have a revenue problem in college athletics, we have an expense problem.”

Paying for football and basketball stars into the future — and retroactively, as the proposed settlement calls for — will intensify that expense problem.

Under the terms of the House settlement, schools will set aside additional funds for past and future athletes. If the agreement is finalized, NCAA member schools will provide “back pay” for former athletes until 2034. There will also be no limit on the number of athletic scholarships a team can offer.

The NCAA plans to cover 40% of the $2.8 billion settlement from its reserve fund. The rest of the money will come from the universities.

Experts worry that small sports could be the first casualty as schools look to cut costs.

“They are in trouble …” Joe Moglia, who holds several advisory roles in Coastal Carolina’s athletics department, said on MSNBC in May. “There’s real concern that institutions may have to get rid of certain sports.”

When universities cut sports, they typically start with smaller programs. Tennis, swimming, gymnastics and track often top the list. These activities boast high price tags without the same revenue as high-earning sports like football and basketball.

“I remain hopeful that a good amount of roster spots remain available. Hopefully, a good amount of scholarships will be available. Hopefully, Title IX remains and you maintain an opportunity for women’s sports,” Noah Henderson, a sport management instructor at Loyola University Chicago, told the Washington Times. “But personally, I think it’s hard.”

Alberts noted that cutting sports was “a last resort.” Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne told AL.com that cutting sports was “the last thing” he’d want to do.

But schools have cut sports before.

Lindenwood and Loyola Marymount had already announced recent plans to kill several athletic programs. Lindenwood cut 10 programs including gymnastics, cycling, women’s swimming, lacrosse and track.

Loyola Marymount, citing concerns about the name, image and likeness landscape, eliminated six programs this year.

Once an athletic program is cut, it’s rare to see it return. Maryland said it couldn’t afford to support sports like swimming and indoor track when it ended support for seven teams in 2012.

In the 2022-23 fiscal year, Maryland’s athletic department received $58.8 million as a member of the Big Ten, the highest-earning conference in the nation. Despite the increased revenue, there have been no indications that Maryland will revive the programs it axed 12 years ago.

University officials refused to comment for this story.

Potentially looming cuts have created a dim future for college golfers, tennis players, swimmers and gymnasts nationwide. Despite the uncertainty around these sports, some in the athletics field see reason for optimism.

NCAA President Charlie Baker said last month the settlement “creates a tremendous opportunity for student-athletes.”

“Maybe this is idealistic but I think that there’s enough money in the pot where we can compensate adequately those athletes who drive in that collegiate revenue and still provide opportunities for non-revenue athletes,” Henderson, the Loyola Chicago instructor, told The Times. “Anytime you lose opportunities for collegiate athletic competition … that’s ultimately a net loss for the country.”