Former Pros Slam University of Arkansas Decision To Drop Tennis Programs: “This Is a Travesty”

The University of Arkansas announced Friday it is eliminating its men's and women's tennis programs after 76 years, becoming the latest — and most visible — casualty of the new financial reality in college athletics following last year's House v. NCAA settlement.

Athletic Director Hunter Yurachek said the decision came down to resources: Arkansas simply cannot afford to fund tennis at the level required to compete in the SEC. The school spent $2.35 million on its two tennis programs last year — 14th out of 15 public SEC institutions — while football programs in the conference are reportedly preparing to spend upwards of $40 million on roster construction under the new revenue-sharing model.

The reaction from the tennis world was swift and fierce. Former world No. 8 John Isner, a product of American college tennis, called it "a travesty" on social media: "The post-NIL college landscape is out of control. Flat out ruining college sports and now a very proud men's and women's program is being cut altogether because of all this BS. Never thought I'd see the day where an SEC school eliminated tennis."

International Tennis Hall of Fame inductee Patrick McEnroe connected the decision to a broader debate about international players in college tennis, arguing the sport is "in the crosshairs" of the new financial environment.

Arkansas is not alone. Since the House settlement was signed in June 2025 — a $2.576 billion deal allowing schools to pay athletes directly — 32 Division I Olympic sports programs have been cut, including seven tennis programs. Louisiana Monroe dropped women's tennis, Washington State cut track and field, and St. Francis demoted 22 teams to Division III.

Current tennis athletes at Arkansas will retain their scholarships through the end of their eligibility. New recruits will be offered releases to play elsewhere.

What This Means For You: Arkansas tennis didn't fail — the economic model failed it. The House settlement was designed to compensate athletes who were denied fair pay, a legitimate goal. But the cost is being borne by student-athletes in minor sports who had nothing to do with the lawsuit and everything to lose from its resolution. If your kid plays an Olympic sport in college, their program may already be on the chopping block.