The New Scholarship and Roster Limit Rules in College Basketball Starting 2025

[WildcatWally-77]

1. Roster Limits and Scholarships:
Beginning in 2025, D1 men’s basketball teams will be capped at 15 roster spots, and schools will be allowed to offer up to 15 scholarships. However, basketball will be reclassified as an equivalency sport. This means coaches will have the flexibility to divide those 15 scholarships as full or partial awards among their players, tailoring them to their recruiting strategies.
2. Revenue Sharing for Athletes:
As part of the NCAA’s recent settlement, student-athletes will receive up to 22% of the average revenue generated annually by Power Conference schools. For the 2025-26 season, these schools have been informed that this revenue-sharing “cap” will be set at $20.5 million across all sports combined. This means players will have the opportunity to benefit from a portion of their program’s financial success, which is a groundbreaking step for college athletics.
3. Opt-In or Opt-Out:
Schools Have a Choice. Schools will need to make a decision each year about whether to opt into this new system or stick with the current rules. 4. Opt-In Schools:
These programs will adopt the 15-player roster limit and 15 scholarships while participating in the revenue-sharing system. Schools must notify their intent to opt in by March 1 of each year, starting in 2025.
5. Opt-Out Schools:
Programs that choose not to participate in the new system will retain the current model of 13 scholarships and can carry more than 15 players on their roster. However, opting out means they will not participate in the revenue-sharing system, so their athletes won’t benefit from the annual financial distribution.
What This Means for Coaches and Players:
6. This shift is significant for both players and coaches. For players, it opens up new opportunities to earn partial scholarships and receive revenue-based compensation, aligning the financial incentives of schools with the athletes’ performance. For coaches, it adds strategic complexity, requiring decisions about scholarship distribution and whether to opt in or out of the system because of the impending roster limit of 15 total players.

 

[sefleming]

If I understand #1 correctly they can divide the 15 scholarships among 18 players. Is this correct, this allows for walj on in a sense if im understanding this correctly

 

[NociHTTP]

That's quite bold of you, OP. J/K

Mitch says "Nah, we're good".

 

[precipitance]

How are they going to handle non- football schools who don't bring in football money? Seems the cut should be significantly less

 

[bthaunert]

How are they going to handle non- football schools who don't bring in football money? Seems the cut should be significantly less

Schools can share up to 22% of their revenue. If said school brings in $50 million, they would be capped at $11 million that they can give to their athlete through revenue sharing.

Correction - a school can give up to $20.5 million if their 22% of revenue sharing is less than that.

 

[bthaunert]

I’ll give an example of the university I work at and how there is no way that the athletes will get revenue sharing. I work at Illinois State and the current athletic department budget is about $30 million. 71% of that money comes from student fees and institutional support.

In today’s landscape of higher education, I would be shocked if the university gave more financial support via university funds or student fees so that the athletes can make money. And there are more schools like Illinois State than schools like Kentucky.

We are getting ready to see a repeat of 1978 when 1A and 1AA were introduced.

 

[runt#69]

I’ll give an example of the university I work at and how there is no way that the athletes will get revenue sharing. I work at Illinois State and the current athletic department budget is about $30 million. 71% of that money comes from student fees and institutional support.

In today’s landscape of higher education, I would be shocked if the university gave more financial support via university funds or student fees so that the athletes can make money. And there are more schools like Illinois State that schools like Kentucky.

We are getting ready to see a repeat of 1978 when 1A and 1AA were introduced.

very interesting, thank you much for sharing

 

[jeffky]

Sounds like only the powe

1. Roster Limits and Scholarships:
Beginning in 2025, D1 men’s basketball teams will be capped at 15 roster spots, and schools will be allowed to offer up to 15 scholarships. However, basketball will be reclassified as an equivalency sport. This means coaches will have the flexibility to divide those 15 scholarships as full or partial awards among their players, tailoring them to their recruiting strategies.
2. Revenue Sharing for Athletes:
As part of the NCAA’s recent settlement, student-athletes will receive up to 22% of the average revenue generated annually by Power Conference schools. For the 2025-26 season, these schools have been informed that this revenue-sharing “cap” will be set at $20.5 million across all sports combined. This means players will have the opportunity to benefit from a portion of their program’s financial success, which is a groundbreaking step for college athletics.
3. Opt-In or Opt-Out:
Schools Have a Choice. Schools will need to make a decision each year about whether to opt into this new system or stick with the current rules. 4. Opt-In Schools:
These programs will adopt the 15-player roster limit and 15 scholarships while participating in the revenue-sharing system. Schools must notify their intent to opt in by March 1 of each year, starting in 2025.
5. Opt-Out Schools:
Programs that choose not to participate in the new system will retain the current model of 13 scholarships and can carry more than 15 players on their roster. However, opting out means they will not participate in the revenue-sharing system, so their athletes won’t benefit from the annual financial distribution.
What This Means for Coaches and Players:
6. This shift is significant for both players and coaches. For players, it opens up new opportunities to earn partial scholarships and receive revenue-based compensation, aligning the financial incentives of schools with the athletes’ performance. For coaches, it adds strategic complexity, requiring decisions about scholarship distribution and whether to opt in or out of the system because of the impending roster limit of 15 total players.

Thanks for the information 👍

 

[FltDoc]

Hard to wrap your arms around all of this...

Guess we're gonna' have to see what the powerhouse football schools, vs elite bball, vs some schools that do both well (Maybe TX, ALA, FLA, etc.) decide to do...

 

[ukbb2003]

1. Roster Limits and Scholarships:
Beginning in 2025, D1 men’s basketball teams will be capped at 15 roster spots, and schools will be allowed to offer up to 15 scholarships. However, basketball will be reclassified as an equivalency sport. This means coaches will have the flexibility to divide those 15 scholarships as full or partial awards among their players, tailoring them to their recruiting strategies.
2. Revenue Sharing for Athletes:
As part of the NCAA’s recent settlement, student-athletes will receive up to 22% of the average revenue generated annually by Power Conference schools. For the 2025-26 season, these schools have been informed that this revenue-sharing “cap” will be set at $20.5 million across all sports combined. This means players will have the opportunity to benefit from a portion of their program’s financial success, which is a groundbreaking step for college athletics.
3. Opt-In or Opt-Out:
Schools Have a Choice. Schools will need to make a decision each year about whether to opt into this new system or stick with the current rules. 4. Opt-In Schools:
These programs will adopt the 15-player roster limit and 15 scholarships while participating in the revenue-sharing system. Schools must notify their intent to opt in by March 1 of each year, starting in 2025.
5. Opt-Out Schools:
Programs that choose not to participate in the new system will retain the current model of 13 scholarships and can carry more than 15 players on their roster. However, opting out means they will not participate in the revenue-sharing system, so their athletes won’t benefit from the annual financial distribution.
What This Means for Coaches and Players:
6. This shift is significant for both players and coaches. For players, it opens up new opportunities to earn partial scholarships and receive revenue-based compensation, aligning the financial incentives of schools with the athletes’ performance. For coaches, it adds strategic complexity, requiring decisions about scholarship distribution and whether to opt in or out of the system because of the impending roster limit of 15 total players.

#1 doesn’t seem to make sense. If the roster cap is 15, why or how would you divide 15 scholarships?

 

[UKfan215]

How or does this new rule effect NIL? Will athletes only be able to receive money from this new revenue sharing plan? Or will they still be able to receive money from these various collectives too? If the new rules mean a max of $20.5 million can be spent by a single school across all sports (basketball, football, baseball, softball, volleyball, both men and women, by the time that $2.05 million is divided up, the players won't be getting much, especially at programs that also feature football. That would leave programs in conferences like the SEC, Big 10 and ACC at a serious disadvantage to programs in the Big East that are basketball only.

 

[bthaunert]

How or does this new rule effect NIL? Will athletes only be able to receive money from this new revenue sharing plan? Or will they still be able to receive money from these various collectives too? If the new rules mean a max of $20.5 million can be spent by a single school across all sports (basketball, football, baseball, softball, volleyball, both men and women, by the time that $2.05 million is divided up, the players won't be getting much, especially at programs that also feature football. That would leave programs in conferences like the SEC, Big 10 and ACC at a serious disadvantage to programs in the Big East that are basketball only.

This is separate from NIL.

 

[UKfan215]

This is separate from NIL.

Thanks for the reply. This is all very confusing for me.

I guess this revenue sharing might mainly be for the purpose of benefitting athletes that don't participate in the big money sports of football and basketball then? I don't imagine the kids who play baseball, softball, volleyball, golf, tennis and other non-revenue generating sports get peanuts from NIL. Maybe this will ensure they at least get a little something, though it would be little indeed.

 

[bthaunert]

Thanks for the reply. This is all very confusing for me.

I guess this revenue sharing might mainly be for the purpose of benefitting athletes that don't participate in the big money sports of football and basketball then? I don't imagine the kids who play baseball, softball, volleyball, golf, tennis and other non-revenue generating sports get peanuts from NIL. Maybe this will ensure they at least get a little something, though it would be little indeed.

Think of this like pro sports. Let’s take the NBA as an example. In the NBA, there is a salary cap. But it’s up to each individual team to determine who is going to make what on their team to stay within the salary cap. In the NCAA, it’s up to each individual school to determine what sports get what money. A lot of the projections show that football will get 75%-80% of the revenue for their players, men’s basketball will get 10%-15% and the remaining 10% will be divided among the remaining sports with baseball and women’s basketball getting the majority. This is definitely about the major sports and not about the minor sports.

Also in the NBA, players can have their own endorsement deals with shoe companies, etc. There is no cap and it varies from individual to individual. This is NIL in college.

So, the revenue sharing, is going to be pretty similar in the power conferences. You might see a little bit of a difference at a school like UK that might give a larger percentage to basketball than say a school like Mississippi State. But that means less for football.

The biggest thing is that now, UK will have $22 less million a year in their operating budget than they normally have because that money will now be redirected to athletes as a part of revenue sharing. Athletics departments are going to have to make major cuts, reduce salaries in the future, etc in order for all of this to work.

Hope that helps!

 

[BGCATFAN2012]

Yeah everyone have a good time sorting all this shit out. It's buy a title just like NBA and KENTUCKY is gonna have a hard time keeping up. Crazy thing is Oscar Tshiebwe is the only player that has put numbers worth paying for in the last 3 years. Pay the guys a bunch of money to score 11 points and 3 turnovers when games matter is a shit show in the making. Wish it was more minutes played and + minus time on the floor. So say the budget is 7 million for LOUISVILLE and then they backdoor another 5 who's watching this mess and keeping the books because it's as trustworthy as the drug dealer at the convenience store. Good luck Mark Pope

 

[bthaunert]

Yeah everyone have a good time sorting all this shit out. It's buy a title just like NBA and KENTUCKY is gonna have a hard time keeping up. Crazy thing is Oscar Tshiebwe is the only player that has put numbers worth paying for in the last 3 years. Pay the guys a bunch of money to score 11 points and 3 turnovers when games matter is a shit show in the making. Wish it was more minutes played and + minus time on the floor. So say the budget is 7 million for LOUISVILLE and then they backdoor another 5 who's watching this mess and keeping the books because it's as trustworthy as the drug dealer at the convenience store. Good luck Mark Pope

I’m hoping the new 3rd party clearinghouse for any NIL deal above $600 operated by Deloitte gets some semblance of true NIL in college athletics and not pay for play. But I’m not optimistic.

 

[UKfan215]

I wonder what happens with the NIL collectives? It seems these new rules would eliminate them providing funds directly to players, i.e. "pay for play". So will these collectives simply disappear or will they find workarounds? What happens if say, the collectives divert the $$$ to businesses in which to purchase NIL services with? I would imagine they will somehow find a way to keep the $$$ flowing and the best atheletes will still be making $2 million or more from NIL when all is said and done.

 

[bthaunert]

I wonder what happens with the NIL collectives? It seems these new rules would eliminate them providing funds directly to players, i.e. "pay for play". So will these collectives simply disappear or will they find workarounds? What happens if say, the collectives divert the $$$ to businesses in which to purchase NIL services with? I would imagine they will somehow find a way to keep the $$$ flowing and the best atheletes will still be making $2 million or more from NIL when all is said and done.

Yeah….one would hope it would turn back into true NIL, but we all know that is probs ly not going to happen. While the collectives might not exist in their current state, they money will keep coming and they will find a new way to make sure the players get it.

 

[sefleming]

If I understand this correctly if team had 18 million nil money they can give 15 players 1.2 million or 18 players 1 million each

 

[RobEStacy]

Schools can share up to 22% of their revenue. If said school brings in $50 million, they would be capped at $11 million that they can give to their athlete through revenue sharing.

If the school opts in... They have to do 22% (up to 20.5) if it's less than 20.5, they have the option to give more. So if 22% is only 13m, they have to give that amount. The school can give more and reach the 20.5 cap. If 22% is above the cap, say 35m. They are limited by the cap, and can't exceed 20.5. It's supposed to increase by 3-4% every year. Capping out around 30m

 

[catlogic15]

🤯

 

[bthaunert]

If the school opts in... They have to do 22% (up to 20.5) if it's less than 20.5, they have the option to give more. So if 22% is only 13m, they have to give that amount. The school can give more and reach the 20.5 cap. If 22% is above the cap, say 35m. They are limited by the cap, and can't exceed 20.5. It's supposed to increase by 3-4% every year. Capping out around 30m

Thanks for that correction!

 

[UKfan215]

If I understand this correctly if team had 18 million nil money they can give 15 players 1.2 million or 18 players 1 million each

This is all super confusing, but from what I've learned (in this thread and through external reading this evening), NIL is and will remain essentially unlimited. But it will go from the current pay to play to something more resembling the original intent of NIL. Want to give a player $1.2 million? Fine. Get 2,000 businesses to each donate the $600 limit in order to use that player's Name, Image, Likeness. I have a feeling the collectives will simply divert the money they collect to this purpose. I imagine every business out there from your biggest corporations down to lemonade stand owners will be contributing to NIL going forward (wink, wink).

The revenue sharing and scholarship issue is unrelated to NIL. From what I understand, college basketball teams will have a maximum of 15 full scholarships. Walk-ons will be eliminated. That said, the scholarships can be divided in a way to allow for a total of up to 18 players on a roster. Some of them just won't be getting full scholarships.

Revenue sharing will be what schools can directly pay to athletes. Football will get most of this, since they have far bigger teams. Men's basketball will get the next largest amount. All other sports will receive what remains, which will probably only be about 10% of the total pool. The cap for revenue sharing will be a max of 20.5 million and this won't go to any specific sport but will be divided among all sports the school participates in, though the lion's share will go football and men's basketball.

NIL is still the big driver. Revenue sharing will be peanuts compared to what NIL will deliver. NIL will just have to be managed in a different way now so that everything appears legit, rather than collectives simply handing out millions of $$$ directly to athletes. Now they'll have to get creative. LOL.

As for scholarships, I really don't even see a purpose to continue offering them to the revenue sports (football and men's basketball). Between the money from NIL and revenue sharing these kids will be pulling in, why would they need a damn scholarship? LOL.

 

[AJG-15]

This will explain the moves towards big East on coaching side.

 

[bthaunert]

This is all super confusing, but from what I've learned (in this thread and through external reading this evening), NIL is and will remain essentially unlimited. But it will go from the current pay to play to something more resembling the original intent of NIL. Want to give a player $1.2 million? Fine. Get 2,000 businesses to each donate the $600 limit in order to use that player's Name, Image, Likeness. I have a feeling the collectives will simply divert the money they collect to this purpose. I imagine every business out there from your biggest corporations down to lemonade stand owners will be contributing to NIL going forward (wink, wink).

The revenue sharing and scholarship issue is unrelated to NIL. From what I understand, college basketball teams will have a maximum of 15 full scholarships. Walk-ons will be eliminated. That said, the scholarships can be divided in a way to allow for a total of up to 18 players on a roster. Some of them just won't be getting full scholarships.

Revenue sharing will be what schools can directly pay to athletes. Football will get most of this, since they have far bigger teams. Men's basketball will get the next largest amount. All other sports will receive what remains, which will probably only be about 10% of the total pool. The cap for revenue sharing will be a max of 20.5 million and this won't go to any specific sport but will be divided among all sports the school participates in, though the lion's share will go football and men's basketball.

NIL is still the big driver. Revenue sharing will be peanuts compared to what NIL will deliver. NIL will just have to be managed in a different way now so that everything appears legit, rather than collectives simply handing out millions of $$$ directly to athletes. Now they'll have to get creative. LOL.

As for scholarships, I really don't even see a purpose to continue offering them to the revenue sports (football and men's basketball). Between the money from NIL and revenue sharing these kids will be pulling in, why would they need a damn scholarship? LOL.

A slight correction on paragraph 2 about scholarship limits in basketball. Teams can still have walk-ons. They just must fall within the roster limit. You can't fill your roster limit with scholarship players and have walk-ons. I imagine most programs will have 12-13 guys on scholarship and not fill the entire roster with scholarship players. 15 guys on scholarship is just way too many, and this means more money to each scholarship player if you're viding it among 12 players instead of 15 players. You see this on the women's side of the house. They have 15 scholarships available, but most teams don't fill all of those scholarships.

It will be interesting to see how the money is divided in men's basketball and football. I have a feeling we might see a tiered system. I don't think the #1 player on the football team and the worst guy on the football team are going to get the same amount of revenue sharing. Or on the men's basketball side, I don't think Oweh and Perry should get the same amount. This is why both basketball and football need to have a true GM (like Luck at Stanford) as basically a pro sport GM to figure out who is going to get what within the budget they are allotted.

 

[SkyPrince1]

A slight correction on paragraph 2 about scholarship limits in basketball. Teams can still have walk-ons. They just must fall within the roster limit. You can't fill your roster limit with scholarship players and have walk-ons. I imagine most programs will have 12-13 guys on scholarship and not fill the entire roster with scholarship players. 15 guys on scholarship is just way too many, and this means more money to each scholarship player if you're viding it among 12 players instead of 15 players. You see this on the women's side of the house. They have 15 scholarships available, but most teams don't fill all of those scholarships.

It will be interesting to see how the money is divided in men's basketball and football. I have a feeling we might see a tiered system. I don't think the #1 player on the football team and the worst guy on the football team are going to get the same amount of revenue sharing. Or on the men's basketball side, I don't think Oweh and Perry should get the same amount. This is why both basketball and football need to have a true GM (like Luck at Stanford) as basically a pro sport GM to figure out who is going to get what within the budget they are allotted.

Player amounts are at the discretion of the school/coach.
Same with the split of revenue sharing to the different programs.
UK's percentage to mens basketball will probably be the highest in the conference.
I've heard you can still expect lawsuits over title 9 with the revenue split.

 

[bthaunert]

Player amounts are at the discretion of the school/coach.
Same with the split of revenue sharing to the different programs.
UK's percentage to mens basketball will probably be the highest in the conference.
I've heard you can still expect lawsuits over title 9 with the revenue split.

Yep, I'm aware that it's all the discretion of the university. I'm more curious about the approach and how they will determine the value of each individual player, rather then just dividing everything evenly amongst the players. If I was in charge at UK, I would probably do the following:

Football - average $182,222 per player - $16,400,000 based on 90 players (80% of budget)
Basketball - average $182,222 per player - $2,186,000 based on 12 players (10% of budget)
Women's Basketball - average $42,700 per player - $512,000 based on 12 players (2.5% of budget)
Baseball - average $15,000 per player - $512,000 based on 34 players (2.5% of budget)
Remaining sports - $1,000,000 split among the remaining 350 athletes

As for Title IX, I am sure there will be lawsuits. I don't think they will win. Title IX states that they need equal opportunities, but that expenses don't need to be divided equally. Women's basketball expenses are $6.8 million and men's basketball expenses are $17.4 million. Women's basketball brings in $300,000 in revenue in a $190,000,000 budget. Based on that last number alone, they have no shot to get a larger share of revenue sharing.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Why do I have a feeling Kentucky is going to play this by the book and other schools aren't?

And what the hell is a partial scholarship?

This is why we need a president of basketball operations or a GM.

 

[Fox2monk]

Yeah….one would hope it would turn back into true NIL, but we all know that is probs ly not going to happen. While the collectives might not exist in their current state, they money will keep coming and they will find a new way to make sure the players get it.

If we do 15% to our Bball team that will give us 220k more each player is guaranteed by playing here. That’s a nice bonus on top of NIL. Preferably I hope we do about 25% to give us an edge especially for role players we could nab.

 

[bthaunert]

If we do 15% to our Bball team that will give us 220k more each player is guaranteed by playing here. That’s a nice bonus on top of NIL. Preferably I hope we do about 25% to give us an edge especially for role players we could nab.

Being an equal fan of both sports, I hope that the average per player is the same for football and basketball.

As for the 15%, that's only about $65,000 per player more than a school that gives 10% would give. The revenue sharing is not going to differentiate between programs too much except for the potential of the Big East schools allocating much more to basketball bc they don't have football. The NIL will still be the main player in all of this.

 

[fadkins82476]

If I understand #1 correctly they can divide the 15 scholarships among 18 players. Is this correct, this allows for walj on in a sense if im understanding this correctly

15 roster spots. Walkons still take a roster spot.

 

[bthaunert]

Why do I have a feeling Kentucky is going to play this by the book and other schools aren't?

And what the hell is a partial scholarship?

This is why we need a president of basketball operations or a GM.

I think Mitch will follow the 75%-80% to football, 10% - 15% to basketball and the rest to the other sports. That would pretty much be playing it by the book.

Partial scholarships don't make sense to me either. If you have a roster limit and the scholarship limit matches that, then there are no partial scholarships. Prior to next year, most sports had partial scholarships (baseball had 12 to divvy up as an example).

 

[Fox2monk]

Being an equal fan of both sports, I hope that the average per player is the same for football and basketball.

As for the 15%, that's only about $65,000 per player more than a school that gives 10% would give. The revenue sharing is not going to differentiate between programs too much except for the potential of the Big East schools allocating much more to basketball bc they don't have football. The NIL will still be the main player in all of this.

No doubt but the schools who can afford to give will lower the pool of suitable schools for players who wanna make a lot of cash. Still the same as now, but it puts the P5 schools at a huge advantage In D1 because that’s base pay.

 

[bthaunert]

No doubt but the schools who can afford to give will lower the pool of suitable schools for players who wanna make a lot of cash. Still the same as now, but it puts the P5 schools at a huge advantage In D1 because that’s base pay.

Absolutely. It makes an even larger divide between power conferences and mid majors.

 

[FtWorthCat]

I’ll give an example of the university I work at and how there is no way that the athletes will get revenue sharing. I work at Illinois State and the current athletic department budget is about $30 million. 71% of that money comes from student fees and institutional support.

In today’s landscape of higher education, I would be shocked if the university gave more financial support via university funds or student fees so that the athletes can make money. And there are more schools like Illinois State than schools like Kentucky.

We are getting ready to see a repeat of 1978 when 1A and 1AA were introduced.

It seems likely that split will include basketball this time, correct? So instead of 325 D1 programs, we would be down to about 75.

 

[bthaunert]

It seems likely that split will include basketball this time, correct? So instead of 325 D1 programs, we would be down to about 75.

NIL and transfer portal is what's making that split more and more. This will obviously have an impact, but NIL and the transfer portal were already wrecking havoc on mid majors imo.

 

[HogFan2012]

The only correct part of that as of now is #1.
Hearing starts today and after the judges rulings it will probably be slaped with a injunction and taken to a higher court.

Edit and no it will only affect the schools money, the NIL is a collective.

House Settlement Approval Hearing Set for April 7: A Brief Primer

The settlement approval hearing in In re College Athlete NIL Litigation, No. 4:20-cv-03919 (N.D. Cal.) is set for April 7, 2025. Commonly known as the “House Settlement,” the pending resolution…

www.crowell.com

 

[FtWorthCat]

The more professional it gets, the more I start to lose interest. I had less interest in football this year than ever. However, I am much more interested in the "non-revenue" sports now than I ever have been before. I was starting to lose interest in men's basketball some until Pope came, and I love that we have some Kentucky kids coming in now.

 

[bthaunert]

The more professional it gets, the more I start to lose interest. I had less interest in football this year than ever. However, I am much more interested in the "non-revenue" sports now than I ever have been before. I was starting to lose interest in men's basketball some until Pope came, and I love that we have some Kentucky kids coming in now.

I act like I won't care as much, but I still do. I just really don't pay attention to the offseason nearly as much as I used to with the portal, NIL deals, etc. But once they are the field/court, none of that comes into play for me. I still want them to win just as much.

 

[UKSanders]

Why do I have a feeling Kentucky is going to play this by the book and other schools aren't?

And what the hell is a partial scholarship?

This is why we need a president of basketball operations or a GM.

I think Mitch will follow the 75%-80% to football, 10% - 15% to basketball and the rest to the other sports. That would pretty much be playing it by the book.

Partial scholarships don't make sense to me either. If you have a roster limit and the scholarship limit matches that, then there are no partial scholarships. Prior to next year, most sports had partial scholarships (baseball had 12 to divvy up as an example).

Partial scholarships already exist in many sports. A coworker of mine has a daughter on the UK swim team. The swim/dive team historically has had to choose how to divide up the scholarship money for their athletes, and only the most elite swimmers have full scholarships at most schools.

That's why for most sports it is really beneficial to be a strong student as well b/c they can offset the athletic scholarship with academic scholarships and grants.

If I am not mistaken, baseball has done this as well.