Example: Alabama had a losing conference record. Disqualifying for me. Saint Louis was better than the many worse RPI programs that received bids and who lost early. And so on. Football four programs often won’t play the good non football four programs H&H. Move goalposts to top 50 wins when they can’t get top 50 games. NCAA Tourney entry should be much higher for football four in my opinion. Look at FSU this weekend. Swoop in and land Xavier’s best player. Her choices out of high school in order were 1) Saint Louis 2) Xavier 3) Minnesota (too far) 4) Kentucky (ghosted her) That’s it: A player who decided to stay home and live at home during college. But when FSU $$$ comes calling, Tallahassee doesn’t seek so far. Deck is already stacked so they can miss multiple times in recruiting but still land players . Let’s elevate the entry point for football four. Let’s make it more fair for those that aren't.
has become a sidebar here but okay... Don't want to sound patronizing to @Strandy but you seem to be complaining about what the NCAA has become these days. Sorry to inform you, but the ship has sailed. It's the golden rule, those with the gold rule. More than ever. There aren't going to be a lot of reforms out there about sharing the wealth and "saving the little guy" in college sports or in higher ed generally. It's as competitive as ever and if you don't have the 20M in revenue share and good nil, you can't compete in D1 easily at all, not for titles. Good enrollment/campus budget is also super helpful. Schools are having to compromise their educational mission even more to just pay attention to sports dollars. Always been true to some degree but the gulf is growing - disparity is the word I think? Same old question really - get a degree from a school like the Ivies, or Patriot, or Big East knowing you can only win an NCAA game or two. OR try for the P4 and be able to win more games and maybe go pro for a bit. Back to the portal, IMHO- the only reason the Xavier to FSU transfer makes sense is if she is just crazy hungry to win NCAA games or she wants to be a pro (and bp can sell both). I don't know her but hope she is a sure thing to play a lot at FSU. She now has to go to a state school... in Florida.
I'm wondering if the top transfer players have agents who are telling them their value as a professional player will be greater if they are on a national championship team. @Eddie K , what do you think?
Couldn't agree more with @Eddie K. All of these rules including what is going on in the transfer portal is about satisfying and serving the whatever you want to call the 4 conferences. The NCAA settlement was mostly about the top 5% of college athletes getting paid and wasn't about what happened below that level. While it would certainly benefit some, it was well known it would adversely effect certain athletes and sports (last I saw, 6 tennis programs have been cut with Arkansas garnering most of the headlines). Charlie Baker told AD's from smaller conferences that, yes, these non-P4 schools were disproportionally paying into the NCAA Settlement, but it was the cost of doing business and the small schools have benefited from the big schools money. Deal with it was the message. Back to the transfer portal, those numbers continue to tick up. According to the NCAA website that tracks portal data (https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2022/4/...vision-i-student-athlete-transfer-trends.aspx) we had 1300 in the portal last year. A rough estimate I saw has about 1600 in the portal with an increase on grad transfers this year. Too early to know the comparisons on how many find new homes and what impact, if any, 5 for 5 has.
I'd imagine if you're not a "known entity" (YNT regular, etc.), then transferring to a program like FSU would bring visibility that Xavier and many other programs cannot offer.
It's not true for any other sport. Not really sure why it would be true for soccer. Now, playing against consistently better opposition, game in and game out, probably matters.
Agents are mucking things up, big-time. They are actively seeking out schools that will offer more NIL money than what the player is getting now. This to a large degree is now driving the transfer market, at least in major sports. There are reserve P4 BB players, averaging 5 points a game, seeking $1 million for a year of play. It's all absurd. The fact that colleges/universities don't have antitrust exemptions is absurd. Judges have told the NCAA that the business violates antitrust laws, the assumption being that college athletics operates like a conventional business. Of course it does not. As former ND women's basketball coach Muffet McGraw said a few days ago, "college athletics is broken." There are virtually no rules. This got started a long time ago when FB and BB black athletes, or activists for them, started shaking their fists and declaring that the student-athletes were being exploited while everyone else got rich off of football money. It is patent nonsense. Nobody got rich as most major-college athletic departments lose money because the FB money must support practically the entire athletic department operation--including all other sports but basketball, and there are a lot of them. That's the irony of the House lawsuit: the guy was a freakin' swimmer at Arizona (or Az state). Without FB money, there would have been no swimming program at his college (or any other) in the first place. I played an SEC sport, on scholarship, and we considered ourselves the luckiest guys on campus--and we were. This new ethos of entitlement for the student-athletes, of pretending that being a college athlete is some sort of hardship that demands that that players being paid and coddled in every way, is comical.
I think this is spot on. You can put up big numbers in a smaller conference, but can you do it at a higher level against stiffer competition that will also be going pro? Takes some of the doubt away for pro scouts.
I think most of us agree on this - If you want to go pro, the upper level P4s are where you should probably be, unless you are already a top 20 or so (YNT pool) player that might go pro directly. If you want a great college education while playing competitive d1 soccer on some scholarship, Xavier/Big East is a great choice, esp if you like Jesuits... I would guess the transfer in question is thinking pro potential. BUT it is an interesting ROI question, will her life-long earnings be the same with a Xavier degree vs an FSU degree and 4-5 years of avg NWSL salary? Maybe it's worth it but really good 25 year olds "retire" from the NWSL every year to then use that degree... Did she have an agent? BP at FSU basically is an agent. I agree with the WBB coach comments and example(s). Agents are unscrupulous and unregulated and all over FB and BB kids, but not sure how many top WS prospects are employing them as there just isn't a big payout...
This is a conversation I had with my D (degree vs. Pro dream). She was recruited by IVY schools which would all but guarantee a nice job post undergrad but…lots of library, study hall and classroom time or chase the dream at a P4 while realizing its not likely to pay off in dollars long term. Everyone is different, I supported her chasing her dream. Nothing worse than being mid thirties with 2 kids and a cooperate job wondering what could’ve been. Life is about experiences as much as bank accounts.
don’t expect any antitrust exemption for college sports. No USA leagues at any level have antitrust exemption but Baseball, and that’s an accident of history not likely to be repeated when a 1922 court decision deemed baseball “local"and not interstate commerce, a view not likely to pass muster in the modern world. Baseball almost lost their exemption until they instituted free agency after Congress passed the 1998 Curt Flood Act, which allowed MLB players to sue under antitrust laws. the exemption is still in place for broadcasting and franchise relocation.
Looking at list of colleges with kids in portal, seems like Colorado State has had a lot recently? Any intel as to why? Coaching change or other issues? They've had a really nice run since Coach Hagen took over a few years ago and joining the Pac 12 is a nice lift from Mountain West as well. Just seem strange..
Many football four programs are living off of the few that are actually good. Many football four programs are bad or mediocre. .
This is true of course. Not that it matters to women's soccer recruits. But a good number of P4 programs wouldn't win the smaller conferences that play in their regions. Oregon, Maryland, Syracuse, BC, Miami, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Arizona, Utah, Kansas State, Cincinnati, Ole Miss, Missouri, Auburn, Florida and several others off top of my head. In all fairness, a few of these programs have recently changed coaching staffs, so maybe that changes. But based on recent history
The point is ALL of those P4 programs are enjoying FB TV revenue and get a conference payout. MD got 59 Million in 2025 with currently avg to terrible FB and MBB teams. But ALL sports enjoy that revenue stream on a P4 campus and very few mid-major schools come even close. Of course, regardless of any WS success. I do wonder if JMU and Tulane got a big boost from making the 12-team CFP. Wonder if it was what they expected as you could argue, that is the best they could expect in terms of FB revenue. Typically it also means nearly all their good players and coaches leave then for P4 teams. Cignetti at Indiana was at JMU...until the P4 dollars came calling... "Show me the money" (one of my favorite movie scenes btw)
Let’s not forget that many in P4 are currently making major staffing cuts. Maryland included, who is eliminating ~150 jobs as they have a $104m reduction in state funding. Additionally, a hiring freeze was also implemented.
Many more than this. How many football four programs make the NCAA Tourney every year? How many make the NCAA Tourney 2nd weekend every year? Not a ton.
quick count…I think your narrative was supported up until about 2 years ago. NIL/rev share and the portal in its modern usage has changed the game. Your sentiment used to be true, it’s not anymore. Conference realignment, redone media rights deals, and the death of the pac have also played their role. 2025: ~35 p4 teams, 28/32 teams in the second round were p4. Of the 4 non p4, only 2 beat p4. So the only power conference teams that lost to non p4s were Lipscomb to Mississippi state (wait until you hear hear where the Lipscomb coach went) and Memphis over Illinois. 2024: ~37 p4 teams. 28/32 in the second round were p4. Of the. 4 non p4, 3 beat p4 teams. St. Louis beat Kansas, Santa Clara beat byu (byus first year as a p4), UCONN beat Rutgers. 2023: ~29 p4 teams, only. 21/32 teams were p4. The non p4 won. 6 games over p4 teams (1 being byu in their last year as a non p4.) they also won 2 2nd round games over p4 teams ( again one being byu) 2022: ~32 p4 teams, 22/32 teams were p4. The non p4 won. 6 1st round games and 2 2nd round games over p4.
I personally know a girl who left as a senior to go to a legit championship contender in the winter portal. When I inquired on how it happened so fast.... there was a agent working the portal stuff before she officially entered. Her goal is to play professionally as well. So if it's happening for her, I have to think it's happening for others.
Can anyone with access to the portal numbers share which schools have been hit the hardest? I'm just curious. I agree with someone above it seems like Colorado State had a bunch. I know Ole Miss had a bunch, but that was a coaching change and many other schools with coaching changes have gone through that as well. Just wondering.
Here is a table that runs from 2013 to the present, showing the numbers for the Autonomy (Power 5) conferences (i.e., includes the Pac 12 prior to 2024) and for the Other conferences. It shows the numbers of NCAA Tournament at large selections per year. Based on the table, here is a chart that gives a picture of the trend over time. As you can see, there's been variation over the years. Also, note the low R-squared values, which suggest that the trend line is not a great fit with the data, meaning it may not mean as much as it appears to mean. I would say that based on these data, it's a little premature to reach firm conclusions.
There are 67 football four/marketing 4 programs. They are not all making the NCAA Tourney every year, even their good or best programs. Out of those 67, how many have made the NCAA Tourney EVERY year in the past 10 years? A handful? Out of 67.
well, there’s 64 spots, so, you’re right all 67 aren’t getting in. Especially when 27 are reserved for non p4 champions. better question: how many p4 programs haven’t made NCAA’s in the last 4 years? There’s definitely a few. Not a handful. making a national tournament every year for 10 years seems like a ridiculously high standard across any sport, especially college women’s soccer. truly not sure there’s any non p4 that makes it every year for 10 years if they played in a p4 league. Are there any that have made it every year for 10 years in the league they’re in? St. Louis, Georgetown would be the only two possibilities I can think of, and I’m guessing they’ve had 1-2 years they’ve missed. I guess I’m not sure the point you’re trying to prove. Are their poor, underachieving, historically bad p4s? Yes. Increasingly less? Yes. Is it largely tied to funding? Yes. do I think, in 2026, the non p4s are getting the short end of the stick? Not really. Other than conference tournaments being an extremely American way to pick a national tournament qualifier rather than regular season winner, leaving out some deserving teams. not a supporter or proponent of RPI, but also hard to convince me many non p4s can compete in women’s soccer now.