Some decisions are final already, and will greatly impact Women's NCAA Gymnastics.
Women's gymnastics has been protected as a headcount sport, but in the future all NCAA sports will be "equivalency" sports. The headcount protection led to D1 NCAA women's gymnastics teams offering 12 spots, fully funded. In the future, women's gymnastics teams can offer scholarships to 20 athletes instead of 12, but gymnastics will have to fight with other female sports at their schools for a share of the entire female-allocated Title IX financial aid pool. Applying this logic and understanding equivalency sports today, gymnastics teams will offer stars full scholarships, but most of the team will be offered partials.
Because gymnastics requires 6 athletes per event, there is little incentive to grow rosters to 20. Walk-ons increase budgets by at least $30,000 per athlete, per year. With 22% of future athletic department money being paid to athletes instead of into the athletic department budget, there is even less money in the overall pool to fund team sports. Expect fewer team retreats and less team-sponsored meditation sessions.
NCAA Women's gymnastics loses incredible amounts of money. No program (?) is profitable and many lose high 6 figures or more every year. Now that there is no headcount protection for gymnastics, it's financially smarter for colleges to fund scholarships on female teams that earn money or break even. Thinking practically, a school can choose to fund scholarships for its inexpensive female lacrosse team that wins national championships instead of its expensive women's gymnastics team that does not qualify to regionals. Unlike the past, now gymnastics, lacrosse and maybe ultimate frisbee each contribute equally to Title IX parity. Just look at what happened to Men's NCAA Gymnastics for a scary roadmap of the future.
The upcoming Revenue split is governed by Title IX, but it is unlikely to be considered "Financial Aid." For that reason, even though Revenue Share must be treated equally between men and women, the allocation may end up legitimately favoring big-name talent. Trickle down to athletes 6-12 on a gymnastics roster is unlikely.
The best path for rank-and-file athletes is either for universities to agree on a core payment system for all athletes or for the athletes to individually harness NIL to pay their tuition and extras. Universities can now facilitate NIL arrangements which does more to help NCAA rank-and-file roster athletes than star athletes. This is a loss for private sector startups, but a win for athletes.
Although it doesn't look great for gymnastics, the only way women's sports could be starved to death is if Revenue Share is allowed to be treated like wages earned. Under simple economics, if a star football player gets 5% of the Revenue Share and the entire collective of female athletes shares 5%, gymnastics will suffer. This approach is legally possible, but risks years and years of litigation. By settling, the NCAA and universities have signaled a desire to end the cycle of litigation. Each wants the other (and the Department of Labor or Congress) to set the standard, but no one is signaling they want to be the adjudicator and stick their head up to get sued. Litigation at this level easily costs $120,000 per month.
Pulling it all together, it will be difficult to earn a spot at an NCAA gymnastics team until not only the Revenue Share split standards are decided, but also until colleges look hard at their budgets to best recoup their lost 22%. I can't complain because star athletes will earn what they should have been paid all along. Rank-and-file athletes will need to do more work to get funding, but the possibilities of NIL are literally endless.