Men's Volleyball Scholarships After the House Settlement

Men’s college volleyball scholarships were always different from women’s college volleyball scholarships — and the June 2025 House v. NCAA settlement has reshaped them further. This guide walks through the historical structure, what the settlement changed, and what families should be asking coaches in this transitional period.

Every program’s scholarship situation is different. The framework below describes the rules; the conversation with each coach will tell you how the rules apply at their specific program.

The historical structure: equivalency, not headcount

For decades, NCAA Division I men’s volleyball was an equivalency sport with a financial aid limit of 4.5 scholarships per program. Division II men’s volleyball was also an equivalency sport at the same 4.5 level.

In an equivalency sport, scholarship dollars are divided across the roster at the coach’s discretion. A program could choose to give one full scholarship and several partial scholarships, or spread the 4.5 equivalencies across the entire roster as smaller awards. There was no fixed roster cap, so programs typically carried 20 to 25 players — most of whom were on partial scholarships, with a significant number on no athletic aid at all.

This structure had real consequences for how families navigated recruiting:

• Most men’s volleyball recruits did not receive full scholarships. A “scholarship offer” in men’s volleyball historically meant some percentage of cost-of-attendance — often a meaningful percentage for top recruits, smaller percentages for others.
• The remainder of any cost was covered by family contribution, academic merit aid, need-based aid, federal aid, or other forms of support.
• Walk-on opportunities were a legitimate, well-traveled pathway. Programs needed players, and not every roster spot could be funded with the 4.5-scholarship limit.

Why men’s volleyball was different from women’s volleyball

The contrast with women’s volleyball at NCAA D1 is striking. Women’s D1 volleyball was historically a headcount sport with a financial aid limit of 12 full scholarships. In a headcount sport, each scholarship was either full or it didn’t count — coaches couldn’t subdivide.

The result: women’s D1 volleyball typically had 12 players on full scholarships and additional walk-on players who received no athletic aid. Men’s D1 volleyball typically had 20-25 players sharing the equivalent of 4.5 scholarships among themselves.

This difference was rooted in Title IX considerations, the relative size and economics of the two sports, and historical NCAA legislative choices. It produced two very different scholarship cultures even though both sports were organized within the same NCAA framework.

What the House Settlement changed

The House v. NCAA settlement, approved by the court on June 6, 2025, fundamentally restructured college athletic financial aid. The key changes:

Scholarship caps eliminated for opt-in schools. Division I institutions that opt into the settlement no longer have sport-specific scholarship limits. They may offer athletic financial aid to any and all student-athletes on their roster, up to the new roster cap.

Roster caps introduced for the first time. In place of scholarship limits, each NCAA sport now has a roster cap. The new roster cap for men’s volleyball is 18 players. This represents a significant reduction from the typical pre-settlement roster size of 20-25 players.

The new model means a smaller roster, but more potential scholarship dollars. A program that previously carried 22 players with 4.5 equivalencies in scholarships could, under the new model, carry 18 players with up to 18 scholarships’ worth of aid — meaning a substantially higher percentage of the roster can now be on meaningful athletic financial aid.

Schools choose how to fund within the new framework. The settlement allows up to 18 scholarships per men’s volleyball program — but it doesn’t require schools to fund all 18. Each institution decides how many scholarships to fund and at what level (full, partial, or none). Some programs may fully fund 18 scholarships; others may fund significantly fewer.

Grandfather provisions protect existing student-athletes. Athletes who were on rosters or who had been recruited prior to April 7, 2025, may be exempted from the roster limits at their original institution as “Designated Student-Athletes.” This was added to address concerns that the immediate roster reductions would cut current athletes from their teams.

USA Volleyball CEO John Speraw has spoken publicly about the tension between the new 18-player roster cap and the historical roster sizes that men’s college volleyball programs traditionally maintained.

Opt-in versus non-opt-in schools

The settlement’s terms only apply to schools that opt in. Schools from the five defendant conferences (the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, and SEC) are automatically bound by the settlement. Schools from non-defendant conferences must affirmatively choose to opt in.

The opt-in decision is institutional, not sport-by-sport. A school either opts in for all its NCAA sports or it operates under pre-settlement rules. Most major men’s volleyball programs play in conferences that include or are aligned with defendant conferences in some way, but many do not — and the opt-in patterns vary.

For families, this means the same recruiting conversation can have very different answers depending on which school you’re talking to. A school that has opted in operates under the 18-player roster cap and potentially has up to 18 scholarships to distribute. A school that has not opted in continues to operate under the pre-settlement 4.5-scholarship equivalency framework, with no specific roster cap.

This is one of the most important questions to ask coaches in the current period. We’ll return to it at the end of this guide.

Scholarship reality by division

The post-settlement scholarship landscape varies significantly across divisions:

NCAA Division I (opt-in schools): 18-player roster cap; up to 18 scholarships allowed, though programs may choose to fund fewer. Walk-on opportunities are reduced compared to the pre-settlement era because the roster cap leaves fewer “non-scholarship” spots.

NCAA Division I (non-opt-in schools): Pre-settlement structure continues. 4.5 equivalency scholarships, no specific roster cap. Walk-on opportunities continue as before.

NCAA Division II: The settlement primarily affects Division I. D2 men’s volleyball continues under its pre-settlement scholarship framework (also equivalency, also typically 4.5). D2 schools that have Division I sports and opt in for those sports may have different rules for their D2 men’s volleyball team in some cases.

NCAA Division III: D3 programs do not offer athletic scholarships. Financial aid at D3 schools comes through academic merit aid, need-based aid, and federal aid. Top D3 men’s volleyball programs often produce competitive financial packages through these channels — particularly at academically selective institutions where merit-based aid is generous.

NAIA: NAIA schools may offer athletic scholarships. Scholarship limits vary by institution and conference. NAIA financial aid often combines athletic scholarship, academic merit aid, and institutional aid into a single package.

NJCAA: Junior college men’s volleyball programs may offer scholarships at the discretion of the institution. NJCAA scholarship structures are less standardized than NCAA divisions.

What this means for walk-ons and partial-scholarship recruits

The walk-on pathway has historically been a meaningful part of men’s college volleyball. With the new 18-player roster cap at opt-in D1 schools, the number of walk-on spots at those programs has narrowed. This is a real change, and families should be aware of it.

That said, the walk-on pathway has not disappeared:

• Non-opt-in D1 programs continue under pre-settlement rules, where larger rosters and walk-on roles remain part of the program structure.
• D2 programs continue under their pre-settlement framework, with walk-on roles still available.
• D3, NAIA, and NJCAA programs never operated under D1-style scholarship limits, and walk-on pathways at these levels are unchanged by the settlement.
• Even at opt-in D1 programs, walk-on roles exist within the 18-player roster — though they are now competing for one of 18 spots rather than one of 22-25.

For recruits who would historically have been considered for partial-scholarship or walk-on roles at D1 programs, the new framework may shift the realistic targeting. Some recruits who would have been on a D1 roster pre-settlement may find better opportunity at D2 or strong D3 programs. Others may find that opt-in D1 programs now want to fund their scholarship contributions at a higher level than the old 4.5-equivalency math allowed. Both outcomes are happening.

What to ask college coaches

Given the variation in how schools have responded to the settlement, families should ask direct questions of any program they’re seriously considering. Some questions worth asking:

1. “Has your institution opted into the House settlement?” This is the foundational question. The answer determines almost everything else about scholarships and roster structure.

2. “What is your current roster size, and how does it compare to the new 18-player limit?” This tells you whether the program is operating with substantial flexibility or is already at the cap.

3. “How many scholarships are funded for men’s volleyball at your institution this year?” The settlement allows up to 18 scholarships, but each institution funds at its discretion. The number can vary substantially.

4. “What scholarship range are you considering for me?” Honest coaches will tell you a range. Vague answers (“we’ll figure that out later”) deserve gentle follow-up.

5. “Are there Designated Student-Athletes on your current roster?” This tells you whether the program is carrying grandfathered players over the 18-player limit.

6. “What other financial aid is available at the institution?” Academic merit aid, need-based aid, institutional scholarships — these can substantially reshape the total financial picture.

7. “How do walk-on roles work at your program?” If walk-on is on the table, get clarity on what that looks like — playing time expectations, travel rosters, scholarship pathways over time.

These questions are appropriate to ask at any stage of the recruiting conversation. Coaches who recruit transparently will answer them; coaches who deflect them may be signaling something about how they communicate with recruits more generally.

The honest reality of the transition period

The House Settlement was approved in June 2025 and implemented effective July 1, 2025. We are in the early innings of the new system. Programs are still adjusting roster strategies, scholarship allocation philosophies, and recruiting approaches.

What this means for families recruiting now:

• The information you get from coaches today may shift over the next 12-24 months as programs work through the transition. Some programs are still figuring out how to allocate the new flexibility.
• Comparing offers across opt-in and non-opt-in programs requires care. A 50% scholarship at an opt-in school operating under the new framework is structurally different from a 50% scholarship at a non-opt-in school under the pre-settlement framework — even if the percentage looks similar.
• The market hasn’t fully priced the new reality. Recruiting offers that would have been ambitious pre-settlement may now be more accessible at some programs; offers that would have been routine pre-settlement may now be harder to come by at others.
• Cost of attendance still matters. Even a meaningful athletic scholarship typically does not cover the full cost of attendance at private institutions. Families should look at the total cost picture, not just the percentage of athletic aid.

We won’t promise we can predict where this lands. What we can say is that informed families — families who ask the right questions and understand the framework — are in a better position than families operating on assumptions that may be out of date.