When Grand Canyon University announced this week it would discontinue its men’s volleyball program after 17 years, the decision sent shockwaves through a tight-knit volleyball community—and signaled a troubling new chapter for non-revenue college sports. Despite coming off the best season in school history, GCU pulled the plug. Why? The same reason we’re seeing ripple effects across college athletics: money, pressure, and the looming financial overhaul from House v. NCAA.
The decision came suddenly. No warning to players. No press conference. Just an Instagram post with the comments turned off.
And if you think this is the last of its kind, think again.
One of the Best Seasons in Program History—Erased
GCU’s men’s volleyball team had every reason to believe it was thriving. The Lopes went 18-10 this year, reached the MPSF quarterfinals, and in 2024, stunned top-ranked UCLA en route to their first conference title and a Final Four berth. That kind of trajectory should have been a springboard, not a death sentence.
Yet this week, GCU confirmed that the team is finished. The school will convert the sport to a club program, offer support for athletes who want to transfer, and honor scholarships for those who stay. But the message was unmistakable: in the evolving economic model of Division I sports, even winning doesn’t guarantee survival.
The Real Story: Preparing for House v. NCAA
Though GCU didn’t cite it directly, the decision is almost certainly linked to the upcoming implementation of the House v. NCAA settlement. The agreement, still awaiting final approval, will for the first time allow schools to pay athletes directly and significantly expand scholarship opportunities through a shift from scholarship caps to roster limits.
But that increased financial flexibility comes at a steep cost. Programs are now forced to make hard choices: which sports can they realistically afford to support when direct payments, expanded benefits, and NIL pressure stretch already thin budgets?
For GCU, men’s volleyball didn’t make the cut.
University of Hawai‘i head coach Charlie Wade, a three-time Big West Coach of the Year, wasn’t surprised. “It wasn’t if, it’s when,” he told Spectrum News. “This is just the beginning. I will be shocked if over the next two, three years, we don't see more schools cut men’s volleyball.”
A Feeding Frenzy and a Warning Sign
GCU’s exit hit the transfer portal like a thunderclap. With the spring window open, rival coaches immediately circled to see which players might be available. For athletes like junior setter and team captain Jaxon Herr, the emotional whiplash was profound. “It was hard to sleep last night thinking that I won’t be able to come back here next year,” he told reporters.
Herr’s story is especially gutting—an Arizona native who dreamed of playing for GCU since middle school, only to see that dream ended by a cost-benefit analysis that he had no say in.
GCU was the only D-I men’s volleyball program in Arizona. Nationally, there are just 28. Now, there’s one fewer, and five Arizona athletes face a tough decision: stay at a school that no longer sponsors their sport, or uproot their lives again.
The Bigger Picture: Shrinking Departments, Squeezed Sports
Wade was blunt about where things are heading: “You’re going to see athletic departments become smaller because the cost of doing business keeps going up.” And with House v. NCAA reshaping revenue models, universities will be forced to concentrate resources on a few core sports—often football and men’s basketball—at the expense of everything else.
We’re already seeing this trend. Cal Poly cut both its men’s and women’s swimming and diving programs in March. More schools are quietly evaluating their Olympic and non-revenue sports with the same lens GCU used.
In this environment, excellence and community support may not be enough to save a program. Financial calculus, conference alignment, and NIL scalability are becoming the new criteria for survival.
Still Ignoring the Players
Here’s the real tragedy: this could have been anticipated and addressed. But the architects of the House settlement, including the NCAA and conference leaders, continue to operate in a silo. We still haven’t seen any meaningful inclusion of student-athletes in the framework. There’s no clarity on international athlete eligibility, no explanation for the rationale behind roster limits, and no hint of interest in forming a student-athlete-driven collective bargaining structure.
Instead, schools are making preemptive cuts based on a settlement that hasn’t even been finalized. Programs are disappearing, lives are being upended, and athletes are left with questions no one seems willing to answer.
GCU’s decision may not be the last. But it should be a wake-up call. If the NCAA and its member schools truly believe in the future of college sports, it’s time to stop hiding behind closed doors and start engaging with the very people most impacted by these decisions: the athletes. Because without them, there’s no game worth playing.
