The large P5 conferences have surpluses because of football and the TV revenue that the sport generates, but are forced to reduce men’s scholarships because of Title IX. It’s a one size fits all approach to solve a problem. Take a look at the Ivies. They don’t offer scholarships, have football, and well rounded athletic departments. The key is that they don’t offer scholarships.NCAA FBS: 12 games, 85 scholarships.
NFL: 16 games, 53 players.
The NCAA men's soccer scholarship limit is 9.9 scholarships.
They don't even give the entire starting 11 full rides.
EVERYONE but Tulane has women's soccer (aka, a soccer field).
So… the 74 FBS schools without men's soccer could add it tomorrow if they lowered football scholarships to 65, and raised men's soccer to 16.5 scholarship limit.
BOOM. Three NCAA men’s sports just got better:
Football - fewer scholarships means the talent just got spread out more. “You can walk on at Ohio State, or you can take a scholarship in the MAC” is trickle-down talent increase for everyone outside the BCS.
Men’s soccer - more opportunities for scholarships in men’s soccer makes our nation better at the sport. It creates 74 new programs.
And you’ve got between 3.5 (didn’t have men’s soccer) and 6.6 scholarships you can spread out to your other sports.
The idea that Title IX is the reason big schools don't have men's soccer is garbage. The real reason is because they don't want to divert resources from football, because they only really care about winning at football and maybe men's basketball.