The Future of Olympic Sports in the NCAA’s New Financial Landscape

College sports are undergoing a subtle yet transformative change. On October 7th, a preliminary settlement was approved that brings budget adjustments and roster caps to certain NCAA sports, including SEC track and field. With a final decision set for April 7, 2025, these developments are poised to reshape the landscape of collegiate athletics in ways that reach far beyond the surface.

One notable change is the SEC’s decision to limit men’s cross country rosters to 10 athletes and track and field rosters to 35, well below current averages. At first glance, this may seem like a mere administrative adjustment, but it signals something deeper. As colleges face new financial constraints, Olympic sports are increasingly at risk, with questions looming over how and if they’ll survive in a world where funding priorities often favor revenue-generating programs.

A critical factor in this shift is the ongoing debate around revenue sharing with student-athletes. While many support the idea, pointing to the transformative effect of NIL rights in 2021 that enabled athletes to earn from their personal brands, there are broader implications. For many schools, particularly those without profitable sports programs, revenue sharing introduces financial trade-offs. Programs like football and basketball, which bring in the highest revenue, could thrive, while less-profitable sports like track and field, swimming, and gymnastics may face serious budget reductions.

Why should we be concerned? This issue is more than a financial dilemma; it’s about the values embedded within college sports. Track and field, for instance, is one of the NCAA’s most diverse sports, with a significant representation of minority athletes. Cuts to these programs affect not only athletic and educational opportunities but also the life-changing experiences that sports provide. As an athlete, I’ve seen how deeply these experiences shape individuals—building discipline, resilience, and community in ways that few other activities can.

The impact of revenue sharing on Olympic sports raises a fundamental question: How can we preserve these programs that have long provided developmental and growth opportunities for so many? While we recognize the economic power of major sports, protecting Olympic sports is essential to ensuring that the NCAA’s mission extends beyond profit. It’s about keeping space for athletes to grow, compete, and excel, regardless of the sport they pursue.

In an era of change, we must consider the real costs of these financial shifts and ask ourselves what kind of college sports landscape we want to create for future generations.