Might be internet exaggeration, or perhaps I misunderstood what I read, which is why I framed it as "from what I have seen" and "may have." I didn’t know much about DSA, so down the Google/AI rabbit hole (a side effect of too much time at a desk). You definitely seem to have better intel, as I couldn't find an official list identifying DSA players by name or total counts for any sport.
Most of what I found was speculative. The takeaway seemed to be that there are no hard limits on how many players can be given DSA status on a sports team. Since the roster size didn't seem to limit the ability to "hand out" status, it implies a soccer team of 35 could have theoretically named all 35 as DSA, or none at all.
Maybe it's just conspiracy theories, but much of what I read focused on how well-funded sports programs might use DSA to maintain bloated rosters as the NCAA mess unfolds, with some comments directly targeting Ole Miss, WSU, and other soccer and sports programs undergoing coaching changes or rebuilds. The implication was that while most schools are being reasonable, naming maybe roughly 10%, or less in sports like football, some rebuilding or P4 programs in "lower roster" sports like basketball, soccer and volleyball might push DSA status to 30% or more, funding available if needed. In soccer terms, that’s carrying 10 DSAs on a 30 player roster. There was also discussion about DSA status being used for pending player releases to help them move without impacting the active or the move-to roster creating a specific player benefit, or even coaches using the status to "motivate" players to enter the portal. Again, my rabbit hole understanding could be wrong, but that was the gist that stuck with me.
Since neither WSU nor Ole Miss is in the Big Sky, the exact numbers don't impact Montana directly in soccer, and my math was really just a baseline. The broader intent to think about is whether DSA status creates a competitive advantage and adds even more pressure to the portal, for soccer or any sport, especially if overused or misused, and then how Montana's lack of DSA status players may limit Montana. It feels like another potential mess for athletes and coaches, courtesy of the NCAA.
I do have one question for you (or anyone else who might know): Was there a specific focus on seniors for DSA assignment, or did I misread your reply? Seniors seem like the group least likely to need it given their limited remaining eligibility. It seems far more useful for underclassmen, especially at well-funded programs where a larger "protected" group could be carried, funded, utilized, and evaluated over time.
By the way, NorcalGrizzy, I just saw your reply - much cleaner than my comment, thanks! Who knows, maybe we're all wrong, but it certainly gives us something to think and chat about!