The departure of NCAA coaches from smaller teams, particularly in sports like volleyball, has become an increasing concern. Many coaches are leaving due to inadequate funding, including low salaries, limited resources for training and competition, and lack of investment in sports technology. This exodus threatens the stability and competitiveness of small NCAA programs. This analysis explores the trends, challenges, and recommendations for addressing this issue.

Trends in NCAA Coach Departures

Salary Disparities: Coaches of smaller NCAA programs often earn significantly less than those in major revenue-generating sports like football and basketball, leading them to seek better-paying opportunities at higher levels or in the private sector. According to a 2022 NCAA report, the median salary for head volleyball coaches in Division I can make as much as $57,000 annually, while football coaches in the same division earn an average of $2.7 million.

Source: ZipRecruiter, 2025

Technology & Resource Gaps: The lack of investment in sports technology—such as performance tracking, injury prevention tools, and video analysis—puts smaller programs at a disadvantage, making it harder to retain talent. Research shows that less than half of NCAA Division II and III programs have access to advanced analytics software used in athlete performance optimization.
Increased Competition from Club and Professional Leagues: Many coaches are opting for club teams, professional leagues, or overseas opportunities where compensation and resources are better. For instance, the number of volleyball coaches in the United States has increased, with over 52,700 currently employed according to zippia.com. Additionally, the projected job growth rate for volleyball coaches is 20% from 2018 to 2028, with approximately 48,800 new jobs expected over the next decade, according to zippia.com
Post-Pandemic Budget Cuts: Many athletic departments reduced their budgets due to financial strains post-pandemic, disproportionately affecting non-revenue sports. Reports indicate that over 60 NCAA programs across various divisions have been eliminated since 2020, most of them from Olympic and non-revenue sports, according to sources like ESPN, Business Insider and Sports Illustrated.
Rise of NIL and Transfer Portal Influence: With student-athletes in major sports benefiting from NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) deals, funding priorities have shifted, leaving smaller sports with fewer financial resources. A survey found that the majority of university athletic directors prioritize NIL efforts for football and basketball, often at the expense of other sports.
Small NCAA teams have limited tech budgets, relying on parents’ donations to fund it. The real state of the NCAA market, particularly for smaller programs like volleyball teams, reflects a significant gap between top-tier and lower-tier institutions when it comes to technological resources. Many smaller NCAA teams are operating with tight budgets, often relying on the generosity of parents' donations to fund key elements of their performance and training tools.
Video analysis systems, crucial for breaking down game footage and refining techniques, typically cost between $5,000 to $7,000. These budgets are often insufficient for teams looking to keep up with technological advancements, and coaches are forced to work with limited or outdated equipment.
As a result, some teams may not have access to the same level of analytics and performance insights that larger programs enjoy, putting them at a competitive disadvantage.

Additionally, wearables, which are increasingly being used to track players' biometrics, movement, and recovery, are also a significant investment for these programs. For a wearable system it can really be as low as $200 per player per year (taking into account cost of licensing per year and spreading out the hardware cost. Granted, if you go with a more expensive system that number rises to upwards of $1,500. With such a limited budget, teams are often only able to purchase a small number of wearables, meaning not every player benefits from personalized data and feedback.

This limited access to technology impacts training efficiency and injury prevention efforts, with smaller teams unable to maximize performance through advanced tools. The reliance on parental donations highlights the financial strain on smaller programs, forcing them to prioritize basic needs over more cutting-edge technologies, which could otherwise provide a competitive edge.

Challenges for NCAA Teams

Recruitment & Retention Issues: The inability to offer competitive salaries and resources makes it difficult to attract and retain high-quality coaching staff. A study found that a growing portion of Division II and III volleyball coaches consider leaving their positions within the next three years due to financial constraints.
Player Development Concerns: Limited technology and facilities hinder athlete performance and development compared to better-funded programs. Schools with less funding often lack strength and conditioning coaches or dedicated nutritionists, key components of elite athletic development.
Lack of Institutional Commitment: University administrations often prioritize revenue-generating sports, leaving smaller teams with fewer financial and structural supports. The vast majority of NCAA athletic department funding in Power 5 conferences is allocated to football and basketball, leaving smaller sports underfunded.
Decreasing Team Morale & Performance: High coach turnover disrupts team dynamics and continuity, affecting performance and recruitment. A survey of NCAA athletes found that more than half of players in underfunded sports reported feeling disengaged due to unstable coaching situations.
Long-Term Program Sustainability: If funding issues persist, some smaller programs risk being cut entirely, reducing opportunities for student-athletes. Since 2020, a growing portion of Division II schools have cut at least one varsity sport due to financial constraints.

Recommendations for NCAA Teams

Increased Institutional Investment: Universities should allocate more funds to support salaries and technology for smaller sports to ensure their sustainability.
Leveraging Alumni & Booster Support: Establishing dedicated fundraising campaigns and seeking donor contributions specifically for smaller sports can help bridge funding gaps. For instance, Stanford University successfully reinstated multiple cut programs after raising over $50 million from donors. In fact, Forbes highlighted that the alumni group "36 Sports Strong," which includes prominent athletes like Andrew Luck and Julie Foudy, had secured over $50 million in pledges aimed at saving the 11 sports programs, with the goal of making them self-sustaining, according to Forbes. ESPN noted that, as of early April 2021, the 11 sports had a combined $23 million endowment and had received about $50 million in pledges to support their future.
Partnerships with Tech Companies: Collaborating with sports technology firms to provide discounted or sponsored performance tracking tools can improve training quality.
Expanding NIL Opportunities to Non-Revenue Sports: Creating NIL initiatives that promote smaller sports can generate additional funding and visibility. Recent trends show that female athletes, particularly in volleyball and gymnastics, have increasing NIL marketability. For instance, during the first 12 months after NIL regulations were implemented, female gymnasts averaged $7,054 per deal, surpassing the average transaction value for all athletes, which stood at $1,815, according to businessofcollegesports.com. Additionally, female athletes constitute 52% of the top 100 college stars with NIL deals, averaging 3.5 endorsements each, compared to 2.5 for male athletes, according to sportspro.com.
Advocacy for NCAA Policy Adjustments: Encouraging NCAA governance to implement policies that ensure more equitable funding distribution across all sports programs. The NCAA could consider revenue-sharing models that allocate a percentage of Power 5 media rights deals toward Olympic sports.
Enhanced Marketing & Community Engagement: Promoting smaller sports through digital marketing, social media campaigns, and local community outreach can increase attendance and sponsorship opportunities. Programs that actively engage their communities see an increase in fan attendance and merchandise sales.

Conclusion The loss of NCAA coaches from smaller programs due to lack of funding is a pressing issue that threatens the integrity and competitiveness of collegiate sports. Addressing this challenge requires a multifaceted approach, including better financial support, innovative partnerships, and policy adjustments. By taking proactive steps, NCAA institutions can improve retention, enhance athlete development, and ensure the long-term viability of smaller sports programs. If these measures are not taken, we could see a continued decline in opportunities for student-athletes and a weakening of the NCAA’s commitment to broad-based collegiate athletics.

Share

You may also like:

The Upside Newsletter

📈 Upside Analysis: The Tough Reality For…