There are several layers to the landmark NCAA v. House settlement, and although it won’t be up for final approval until April, some of its effects are already been felt by prospective student-athletes.
The impact of the proposed roster limits across all sports, which comes as the settlement removes caps on scholarships, was immediately felt last month during National Signing Day, with teams telling recruits guaranteed roster spots were no longer available.
Although roster limits will surely be impacting swimming & diving in future seasons, are there other collegiate sports being hit harder by the new guidelines?
Diving deep into the numbers, using research provided by Opendorse‘s Braly Keller, we can take a look at the proposed roster limits across each sport along with the average roster sizes for the 2022-23 season.
PROPOSED ROSTER LIMITS VS AVERAGE ROSTER SIZE (22-23)
| Sport | Proposed Roster Cap | 2022-23 Average Roster Size | Difference |
| Acro & Tumbling | 55 | 38.3 | +16.7 |
| Baseball | 34 | 39.7 | -5.7 |
| Men’s Basketball | 15 | 15.7 | -0.7 |
| Women’s Basketball | 15 | 14.5 | +0.5 |
| Women’s Beach Volleyball | 19 | 17.8 | +1.2 |
| Women’s Bowling | 11 | 8.9 | +2.1 |
| Men’s Cross Country | 17 | 15.8 | 1.2 |
| Women’s Cross County | 17 | 16.6 | +0.4 |
| Women’s Equestrian | 50 | 39.2 | +10.8 |
| Men’s Fencing | 24 | 18.3 | +5.7 |
| Women’s Fencing | 24 | 18 | +6 |
| Women’s Field Hockey | 27 | 25 | +2 |
| Football (FBS) | 105 | 128.2 | -23.2 |
| Men’s Golf | 9 | 9.8 | -0.8 |
| Women’s Golf | 9 | 8.5 | +0.5 |
| Men’s Gymnastics | 20 | 20.8 | -0.8 |
| Women’s Gymnastics | 20 | 20.7 | -0.7 |
| Men’s Ice Hockey | 26 | 28.4 | -2.4 |
| Women’s Ice Hockey | 26 | 25.8 | +0.2 |
| Men’s Indoor Track & Field | 45 | 39.1 | +5.9 |
| Women’s Indoor Track & Field | 45 | 39.9 | +5.1 |
| Men’s Lacrosse | 48 | 50.8 | -2.8 |
| Women’s Lacrosse | 38 | 34.3 | +3.7 |
| Men’s Outdoor Track & Field | 45 | 39 | +6 |
| Women’s Outdoor Track & Field | 45 | 39.9 | +5.1 |
| Rifle | 12 | 6.7 | +5.3 |
| Women’s Rowing | 68 | 57.1 | +10.9 |
| Women’s Rugby | 36 | 38 | -2 |
| Men’s Skiing | 16 | 14.5 | +1.5 |
| Women’s Skiing | 16 | 13.3 | +2.7 |
| Men’s Soccer | 28 | 31.7 | -3.7 |
| Women’s Soccer | 28 | 30.4 | -2.4 |
| Softball | 25 | 22.8 | +2.2 |
| Stunt | 65 | 56 | +9 |
| Men’s Swim & Dive | 30 | 29.2 | +0.8 |
| Women’s Swim & Dive | 30 | 30.7 | -0.7 |
| Men’s Tennis | 10 | 10.1 | -0.1 |
| Women’s Tennis | 10 | 9.2 | +0.8 |
| Women’s Triathlon | 14 | 8.9 | +5.1 |
| Men’s Volleyball | 18 | 21.1 | -3.1 |
| Women’s Volleyball | 18 | 17.3 | +0.7 |
| Men’s Water Polo | 24 | 25.6 | -1.6 |
| Women’s Water Polo | 24 | 22.7 | +1.3 |
| Men’s Wrestling | 30 | 34.7 | -4.7 |
| Women’s Wrestling | 30 | 16.5 | +13.5 |
The data tells us that the roster limits are negatively impacting a few select sports as a whole, while nearly two-thirds (29 of 45) actually had a lower average roster two seasons ago than what the proposed limit will be.
Football is far and away the sport with the biggest roster in the NCAA with an average of 128.2 players on each team in 2022-23, and it will be hit hardest with the proposed limit of 105 meaning more than 23 players will lose a spot per team next season.
Another one of the major college sports, baseball, is also getting hit by losing nearly six roster spots per team, down from an average of 39.7 two years ago to 34.
SPORTS LOSING ROSTER SPOTS (V. 22-23)
| Sport | Proposed Roster Cap | 2022-23 Average Roster Size | Difference |
| Football (FBS) | 105 | 128.2 | -23.2 |
| Baseball | 34 | 39.7 | -5.7 |
| Men’s Wrestling | 30 | 34.7 | -4.7 |
| Men’s Soccer | 28 | 31.7 | -3.7 |
| Men’s Volleyball | 18 | 21.1 | -3.1 |
| Men’s Lacrosse | 48 | 50.8 | -2.8 |
| Men’s Ice Hockey | 26 | 28.4 | -2.4 |
| Women’s Soccer | 28 | 30.4 | -2.4 |
| Women’s Rugby | 36 | 38.0 | -2 |
| Men’s Water Polo | 24 | 25.6 | -1.6 |
| Men’s Golf | 9 | 9.8 | -0.8 |
| Men’s Gymnastics | 20 | 20.8 | -0.8 |
| Men’s Basketball | 15 | 15.7 | -0.7 |
| Women’s Gymnastics | 20 | 20.7 | -0.7 |
| Women’s Swim & Dive | 30 | 30.7 | -0.7 |
| Men’s Tennis | 10 | 10.1 | -0.1 |
SPORTS GAINING ROSTER SPOTS (V. 22-23)
| Sport | Proposed Roster Cap | 2022-23 Average Roster Size | Difference |
| Acro & Tumbling | 55 | 38.3 | +16.7 |
| Women’s Wrestling | 30 | 16.5 | +13.5 |
| Women’s Rowing | 68 | 57.1 | +10.9 |
| Women’s Equestrian | 50 | 39.2 | +10.8 |
| Stunt | 65 | 56.0 | +9 |
| Women’s Fencing | 24 | 18.0 | +6 |
| Men’s Outdoor Track & Field | 45 | 39.0 | +6 |
| Men’s Indoor Track & Field | 45 | 39.1 | +5.9 |
| Men’s Fencing | 24 | 18.3 | +5.7 |
| Rifle | 12 | 6.7 | +5.3 |
| Women’s Indoor Track & Field | 45 | 39.9 | +5.1 |
| Women’s Outdoor Track & Field | 45 | 39.9 | +5.1 |
| Women’s Triathlon | 14 | 8.9 | +5.1 |
| Women’s Lacrosse | 38 | 34.3 | +3.7 |
| Women’s Skiing | 16 | 13.3 | +2.7 |
| Softball | 25 | 22.8 | +2.2 |
| Women’s Bowling | 11 | 8.9 | +2.1 |
| Women’s Field Hockey | 27 | 25.0 | +2 |
| Men’s Skiing | 16 | 14.5 | +1.5 |
| Women’s Water Polo | 24 | 22.7 | +1.3 |
| Women’s Beach Volleyball | 19 | 17.8 | +1.2 |
| Men’s Cross Country | 17 | 15.8 | +1.2 |
| Men’s Swim & Dive | 30 | 29.2 | +0.8 |
| Women’s Tennis | 10 | 9.2 | +0.8 |
| Women’s Volleyball | 18 | 17.3 | +0.7 |
| Women’s Basketball | 15 | 14.5 | +0.5 |
| Women’s Golf | 9 | 8.5 | +0.5 |
| Women’s Cross County | 17 | 16.6 | +0.4 |
| Women’s Ice Hockey | 26 | 25.8 | +0.2 |
On paper, swimming & diving teams aren’t being affected significantly, as their average roster size from the 2022-23 season is very similar to the new limit of 30 per team.
However, zooming in, some teams will obviously be affected more than others. The average men’s roster size in 2023-24 was approximately 26, but the Florida Gators, for example, had 41 men on their team. The average women’s roster was closer to 33 athletes, so women’s teams will be required to cut an average of three athletes next season, and it will be a lot more for some.
Looking at other Summer Olympic sports, men’s wrestling, soccer, volleyball and water polo are all expected to lose more than one roster spot per team, while for the women, soccer and rugby are the two sports hit the hardest.
According to ESPN, football, baseball and women’s soccer will all need to shed more than 1,000 athletes from their Division I ranks if the settlement goes through.
As outlined by Keller on X, if we take out football, the average roster size change is an extra 2.3 spots per team. More than a third of the 62 total roster spots being lost come from football, while there are 140 roster spots being added.
•Avg Roster Size Change: +1.7
•Avg Roster Size Change (minus FB): +2.3
•Tot Roster Spots Added: +140
•Tot Roster Spots Lost: -62
•Most Added: Acro & Tumbling (+17), W Wrestling (+14), W Rowing / W Equestrian (+11)
•Most Lost: Football (-24), Baseball (-6), M Wrestling (-5)— Braly Keller (@BralyKeller) October 25, 2024
There could be an overall reduction of close to 10,000 roster spots in Division I, according to ESPN, if all of the sports that are gaining roster spots (relative to the previous average) don’t actually get any bigger and stay the same.
The roster limits were determined in the summer, as the commissioners of the Power conferences met in late June to compare roster numbers gathered from their members before they met with NCAA lawyers in early July to negotiate the final roster limits.
Steve Berman, the co-counsel of the plaintiffs’ attorney Jeffrey Kessler, told ESPN they were hoping for roster sizes to be as big as possible and were pleased where the final numbers landed.
“I think what we’ve negotiated is fair because on the whole more athletes are going to get more money than before in those sports,” Berman said.
The NCAA v. House settlement was granted preliminary approval in October and will be up for final approval in April 2025.
Are there rules allowing “exhibition or junior varsity” status for athletes. Obviously non scholarship.
I know some teams like swimming have swimmers that don’t compete in scoring events but train with the team.
Colleges still have them swim at the meets as no scoring members.
It seems like there’s going to be a loophole as described here, allowing ‘club representation,’ but you won’t be able to move athletes up and down at-will throughout the season.
https://swimswam.com/roster-cuts-may-limit-varsity-spots-but-one-college-swimming-program-might-have-a-solution/
“Football hardest hit” — how will they survive on only *105* full ride scholarships and many millions in cash salaries. Cry me a river.
They aren’t all on scholarship. And if it weren’t for the football teams generating revenue, most swim programs wouldn’t exist. Quit whining.
Rowing is nuts. That’s insane. Think about trimming these crazy sports like rowing and equestrian. If you’re 2x next closest sport that’s a problem
Forgive my ignorance, but why is the proposed roster cap at 50 for women’s equestrian? Do equestrian teams typically have lots of members? Do they count the horses and grooms?
Yes, huge roster. A&M has 53, for example.
I don’t have an exact answer, but I do have a few educated guesses. Equestrian riders are pretty highly specialized, so riders aren’t generally doing multiple events. So there are four events in a competition (fences, flat, horsemanship, reining), five per event in a dual competition gets you to 20 on your scoring roster.
I think there are a lot of overlaps with rowing. One is that there is a ton of developmental space on the roster. The other is in the unique economics. Someone in rowing (there’s a huge rowing scene here in Philly) explained to me once that rowing has gigantic rosters in part for development, and in part because… Read more »
I’ve seen you mention Philadelphia a few times in recent months. Are you living there full time now? When did you leave Austin, and for what reasons (if you feel like sharing them)?
Good wishes!
Swimswam’s token rower here:
100% correct on rowing. Also, at the division 1 level, the championships are contested as 2x8s and 1×4
So just on the potential conference and NCAA scoring roster, you have 20 rowers + 3 coxswains + 3 spare rowers/coxswains. Then you end up with one or two extra 8s full of developmental rowers as it’s usually a highly developmental sport at the collegiate level. Some programs might even save room for a novice 8 as that can be contested at some championships. So it’s pretty easy to see how quickly roster spots get taken up. However, very few of these athletes actually get scholarships or get large ones if they do, solely because a decent number… Read more »
This is a very misleading article. Some sports will only have 90% scholarship athletes and 10% walk on and not go to the max. Some maybe only go scholarship athletes.. Also two new worlds will exist. D1 with top 60 teams and D1A with rest of D1 teams
Will this create a trickle down effect in college swimming? For example, the slowest ~5 swimmers at top 10 schools getting forced out and going to slightly slower schools and so on?
It will to some degree.
It won’t be a perfect trickle down, because at some point there will be a few stop gaps, like if a school isn’t a signatory to House, they might not be capped at 30, or some swimmers will choose to not swim in college rather than swim the next tier down. But we’re already seeing some of that – 2025 commits who lost their spots at SEC or Big Ten schools have recommitted to D1 mid-majors.
Not just mid-majors…
For men’s spots, is it 30 for all of NCAA and then 22 for the SEC specifically? Or are there hopes SEC will go up to 30 as well?
The 30 is the most that is allowed for schools under the settlement – and it’s still not clear if that will bind every NCAA D1 school (right now, it doesn’t seem like it will – schools can opt out of the settlement sometimes).
Anything below that is up to schools or conferences.
What conferences besides the SEC will go 22 on men? ACC?