Sports Editor
Imagine a world where universities pay their athletes directly. A world where there are no longer scholarship limits, but simply roster limits. A world where NC State and the majority of institutions would no longer run their sports teams, but contract a private entity to do so.
It sounds extreme, even absurd, considering college athletics’ bedrock of amateurism: athletes play for scholarships while universities profit from the revenue they generate. That’s how it has always been. Yes, name, image and likeness have allowed athletes to make money from sponsorships and third-party collectives, but the universities are still barred from direct payments to players.
While college sports have remained mostly static for the past century, the preliminary approval of the House v. NCAA lawsuit in October threatens to upend college athletics. Even a university like NC State that prides itself on being exceptional in all 18 of its Division I sports — evidenced by four straight top-25 finishes in the Learfield Directors’ Cup standings — will have tough decisions to make starting in the 2025-26 academic year when the rules in the lawsuit are projected to take effect.
“The prediction will be that we have put unprecedented levels of economic pressure on the sports,” said Duke Professor of Law Paul H. Haagen.
The pressure Haagen is referring to applies to high school athletes, college athletes, coaches and executives. At the high school level, the recruitment process is changing. A change from scholarship limits to roster limits would result in fewer opportunities for high school athletes to advance to the next level. Revenue sharing — where student-athletes would be paid directly by universities — could strain institutions financially, forcing athletic departments to seek new funding sources and potentially leading to the demise of select Olympic sports.
This, in turn, could force schools like NC State to evaluate sports that don’t generate revenue and decide if it’s worth it to keep funding them or not.
“You look at college sports, the majority of them are big losers,” said Clemson Executive Senior Associate Athletic Director Kyle Young. “You wouldn’t run a business the way we run college sports, and so ultimately, my hope is we don’t get 100% business-focused, because if we do, [baseball head coach] Elliott Avent may still have a job at NC State, but it may just be [men’s basketball] coach Kevin Keatts and [football] head coach Dave Doeren that still have programs to run. I don’t think anybody really wants that in college athletics.”
Shifting from scholarship limits to roster caps
One of the most visible impacts of the lawsuit is the shift from scholarship caps to roster limits. Currently, most sports have a cap on scholarships but allow more athletes on the roster than the number of scholarships. With the preliminary approval of the lawsuit, the rule changes are set to take effect at the start of the 2025-26 academic year. Scholarships would become unlimited, but roster spots would be capped for each sport, reducing the overall number of athletes per roster.
This change could significantly reduce opportunities for high school athletes hoping to play at the collegiate level — an estimated 6% of high school athletes go on to play NCAA level sports, a number projected to shrink.
NC State Athletic Director Boo Corrigan predicted the University would go from its current 550 roster spots to somewhere between 480 and 490 spots under the new rule.
Alyssa Turner, a senior at Holly Springs High School, is set to attend Purdue University next fall. However, Purdue was not Turner’s first choice or even her first scholarship offer. Turner committed to Clemson a year earlier with the promise of a partial athletic and partial academic scholarship.
“My dad played football and soccer [at Clemson], so I’ve grown up wanting to go there,” Turner said. “They have a good soccer program and the importance of athletics is big there, so it was always a good option for me.”
Clemson contacted Turner on June 16, 2023, the second day coaches were permitted to begin reaching out to high school sophomores and offered her a spot on the team.
Due to the roster limit provision in the House v. NCAA lawsuit, Clemson anticipated a roster cap of 28 for women’s soccer beginning in the 2025 season, suddenly putting Turner’s dream out of reach. Clemson’s women’s soccer team was projected to be well over that cap, with Turner and 10 other recruits set to join the team in 2025.
Unfortunately for Turner, her commitment unraveled. When Clemson offered her the scholarship, the landscape was different. As it will be for many high school student-athletes, Turner was caught in a system evolving faster than her plans.
“That was really emotional for me, especially just because that was my dream school,” Turner said. “It was kind of taken away from me for something that’s [not] in my control.”
This scenario could become more common at Clemson and other universities.
“I can’t speak to that specific instance, but that is absolutely going to be an issue for the kids coming out of high school right now,” Young said. “There’s going to be some squeezing, there’s going to be fewer opportunities for those kids coming out of high school, even opportunities that have been promised, because when they were committed, the world was different.”
Like Clemson, NC State is home to many Olympic programs that have historically excelled in the ACC and nationally, such as wrestling, swimming, soccer, gymnastics and cross country.
Currently, NC State wrestling has 31 athletes on its roster, but the implementation of roster limits would cap the program at 30 spots next season. Like wrestling, most sports at NC State would be losing spots.
NC State wrestling coach Pat Popolizio thinks the 30 spots his roster would be capped at is a fair number, but understands the impact it would have on high school athletes.
“You’re eliminating five guys who maybe never would have saw the light of day at a program like NC State, but they bring a ton of value outside of the competition side of things,” Popolizio said. “A lot of sports probably lost some roster spots, and those kids are never going to get that opportunity to wrestle [Division I], let alone here at NC State. So that’s an unfortunate side of things.”
‘It could further weaken the Olympic sports’
Although there would be fewer spots in almost every sport, teams could give out more scholarships than before. Almost every sport would see an increase in the scholarships they’re allowed to give — zero sports would see a reduction in this category.
At the same time, if NC State were to use the extra 20 scholarships allotted for football, it would have to comply with Title IX and either take away scholarships from other male athletes or give more to female athletes.
This puts NC State in an interesting predicament — does it go all in on its revenue-generating sports like football and men’s basketball, offering scholarships equal to roster spots and thereby sacrificing scholarships in other sports?
If NC State goes that route, male Olympic sports are projected to suffer the harshest consequences.
“The most pressure lies [within men’s Olympic sports],” Young said. “If you look at the men’s Olympic sports, those are going to have generally bigger rosters than the women’s Olympic sports. Therefore, you’re going to have to remove more male opportunities than you are going to have to remove female opportunities when you move forward with these new roster limits.”
Corrigan noted the challenges NC State will have to face while remaining positive about the overall outlook for every sport the university houses.
“We’ve got to figure out how we’re going to do it,” Corrigan said. “We got to be creative in the way that we approach this, from finding new revenue streams to continuing to grow the pie. Fortunately for us, we’ve got a great relationship with the Wolfpack Club, who have done a wonderful job with us.”
The Wolfpack Club’s mission is to provide private financial support for athletic scholarships and facilities for NC State University by collecting donations from University supporters. Despite Corrigan’s optimism, the reality is these changes would indirectly target Olympic athletes.
“I think it could further weaken the Olympic sports and the providing of those opportunities,” said Timothy Davis, a professor of law at Wake Forest University.
Like most schools, a majority of NC State’s revenue comes from football and men’s basketball. If it comes down to it, those sports would more than likely be prioritized because those programs fund the athletic department. Men’s basketball and football generated over $97 million of NC State’s $113,339,331 revenue during the 2023-24 fiscal year, according to NC State athletics’ annual report.
Sharing revenue and shifting priorities
If NC State opts into student athlete revenue sharing — as it’s expected to along with every other Power Four school — there would be extreme financial pressure on the University regarding decisions around sports that don’t generate revenue.
The goal of revenue sharing is for institutions to reward players with direct compensation rather than athletes relying on third-party NIL deals. A lawsuit was filed by former Division I athletes alleging that current NCAA rules are anticompetitive and violate antitrust laws because schools have exploited student-athletes by generating revenue from them while the athletes receive no compensation.
With revenue sharing, athletes would be rewarded for the money they generate for schools. They would receive a share of the broadcast rights and ticket sales the universities generate.
NC State has never shared its revenue with its athletes, and now it’s estimated that schools would be sharing 22% of their revenue with student athletes instead of it going back to the athletic department.
“I don’t think anyone has the funds to do that right now,” Young said. “Everyone’s trying to figure out how they’re going to manage that — even the big rollers in the SEC and the Big Ten, the conferences that have the biggest payouts — they’re still trying to figure it out.”
Although NC State just had its highest season ticket sales for Olympic sports and surpassed $200,000 in Olympic sports ticket sales for the first time, these programs still don’t generate revenue for the school. And now that at least 22% of NC State’s athletic revenue is expected to be given to student athletes, the University may have to decide if some sports that don’t profit are worth keeping.
“Because certain groups of student athletes will be taking a quarter of the revenues that are generated, there will be less money to pay coaches, trainers, administrators, tutors, people who wash stuff and provide food and all of that; there’ll just be less money,” Haagen said. “And so what will happen if there’s less money? You would expect something. They’ll cut sports, they’ll cut positions, they’ll make bigger demands on the rest of the student body through activity fees. Something has to give.”
Popolizio understands the challenges that NC State would face in determining if a sport is worth keeping or not, but believes he has built a program that is valuable to the University and the city of Raleigh. Last season, the wrestling program sold out seats for three separate wrestling meets. Prior to the 2023-24 season, the program had never sold out an event. Last year’s team also set program records in season tickets, single-game revenue and overall revenue.
“You’ve got to have the right people connected to your program who want to fund scholarships, they want to fund a new locker room,” Popolizio said. “It makes it easier for an administration to know that there’s a reason why they want to keep supporting this because they got a really good backing through alumni and donors.”
In his talks with the athletic department, Popolizio feels confident that his program will be a part of NC State’s future.
“In-house, I feel really good, and I know we’re in a good spot, and we have great relationships on campus and with our administration, and they support us,” Popolizio said. “The momentum that we have, and just the people that are passionate about wrestling in Raleigh and across the state, all that weighs in our favor.”
But other sports that don’t have as much fanfare and financial backing as the wrestling program could see their programs cut altogether. In an August press conference, Corrigan discussed the ramifications of the lawsuit, saying, “We’ve got to do what’s right for NC State.”
So what is right for NC State? Will it try to keep all 18 of its Division I sports and potentially lose money? Or will it cut sports and deal with the public blowback? Corrigan didn’t have an answer to those questions.
“Believe it or not, I don’t know is an acceptable answer,” Corrigan said.
But it can’t be the final answer. With the rule changes set to take place in less than a year, NC State is very likely to follow suit with the Power Four by opting into revenue sharing — it would put a university at a significant disadvantage if it didn’t.
Popolizio is excited about the possibility of his athletes being compensated for what they provide to the University.
“I think it puts us in a competitive spot to keep guys,” Popolizio said. “The talent that we’ve been attracting here, keep them attracted, and to make sure that the guys who do wonderful things for NC State are rewarded and remain happy and know that they’re going to get taken care of. I think it’s a positive for us.”
While it seems like a win-win situation for NC State and student athletes, something is going to have to give if 22% of the revenue starts going to student athletes and not back to the University.
“The way universities and athletic departments run … they run more like charitable foundations, so you don’t just have $20 million extra lying around each year,” Young said. “Typically, what you bring in is what you spend.”
The pressure to come up with these funds has already become apparent at NC State. Beginning next football season, purchasing season tickets will include a required seat donation to the Wolfpack Club. This is required of anyone who elects to purchase season tickets, except for those who have lifetime seating rights and multi-year license tickets. The same procedure will apply to parking permits. Each Carter-Finley Stadium parking lot will have a required space donation attached to the parking pass.
NC State calls this initiative “Pack Forward,” and its creation is due to the changes the lawsuit projects.
“In the ever-changing landscape of college athletics, the Wolfpack is on an upward trajectory,” the Pack Forward website says. “Because of those many changes, your support is more crucial now than ever. For our teams to continue to compete at their highest level, we need the support of Wolfpack Nation to rise to another level as well. … Pack Forward is a necessary step for NC State Athletics to maintain our success in an ever-changing landscape. This is a challenge to all of Wolfpack Nation with the goal of moving the Pack Forward.”
Revenue sharing would largely impact all institutions in one way or another. It would likely pinch out the less competitive programs and reward the dominant programs. NC State would have to pick and choose where it wants to compete to be able to operate financially.
‘We will see the continued decline of athletic opportunities’
And while football generates the most money for schools, it also costs a lot to operate a competitive team. Even a school like NC State, which has a passionate football fan base, could decide that it’s not worth it to keep the football team.
There have already been talks about creating a “super league” for college football that would include only the best of the best and be separate from the NCAA. There’s a good chance NC State would not be included in that league because it is not a part of the SEC or Big Ten — the two conferences leading these conversations.
“I suspect that the number of schools trying to compete at the highest levels of big-time football is going to shrink substantially,” Haagen said. “I think we’re going to see a separate regulatory body for football, and that, I think, will happen in the not-too-distant future.”
Haagen mentioned that schools could even start specializing in sports. For instance, at NC State, the women’s cross country team had won three straight NCAA Championships from 2021-23, and the University could decide to go all in on that sport by redistributing its funds into that program.
While Haagen said that would be a radical outcome, the lawsuit is going to force schools to look at their athletic programs differently.
“I suspect we will see the continued decline of athletic opportunities,” Haagen said. “At NC State, it might be women’s cross country. NC State’s been really good [at] women’s cross country for a long time; they might feature that and just try to dominate and play [to] their advantage.”
Another extreme change Haagen envisions is that universities could relinquish control of their sports programs, opting instead to let an organization run them as a private entity, contracting with that school.
It would allow those privatized entities to enter into a multi-employer bargaining unit and put their restrictions in a collective bargaining agreement similar to professional sports leagues in the United States. This would allow universities to avoid antitrust cases levied against them due to the collective bargaining agreement.
“We could see that happen and just have these not be public state athletic programs associated with a public school, but it would be a private program,” Haagen said. “That could be the direction the things will go. That’d be a radical change, but it’s possible.”
The changes being made affect all levels of athletics, from high school athletes to college coaches and athletic directors. Changes would not be immediate, but over time, the landscape of college athletics would look entirely different from what it has ever been.
“It’s not like it’s going to be a big bang kind of shift,” Young said. “There’s going to be a plate tectonic type shift, and I think you’re probably going to start seeing it as early as this coming fall. You may see some programs disappear, and you may see some programs just be unfunded or defunded and eventually disappear.”
On the surface, the changes are supposed to have a positive impact on student athletes. For the first time, athletes would get a share of the revenue they produce and more scholarships could be offered. However, the financial pressures attached to revenue sharing could result in the dismissal of many Division I programs that do not generate revenue, and roster limitations would reduce the opportunity to play sports for many athletes.
“It all depends on what the vision or purpose of college sports are,” Davis said. “Is it for entertainment? Is it for athletic opportunities?”
Sports Editor
{{description}}
Email notifications are only sent once a day, and only if there are new matching items.
Your comment has been submitted.
Reported
There was a problem reporting this.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.
Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.
Error! There was an error processing your request.
Top Technician stories delivered to your inbox each Thursday
Your browser is out of date and potentially vulnerable to security risks.
We recommend switching to one of the following browsers:
