In a move that has sent shockwaves through the McGill athletics community, the university has announced that 15 varsity teams will not return for the 2026-27 season. The cuts – a mix of men’s and women’s programs – include badminton (m/w), baseball (m), fencing (m/w), field hockey (w), figure skating (m/w), golf (m/w), lacrosse (w), logger sports (m/w), Nordic ski (m/w), rugby (w), sailing (m/w), squash (m/w), tennis (m/w), track and field (m/w), and volleyball (m). For student-athletes who pour years of sweat, sacrifice, and spirit into their sports, the news is nothing short of devastating.
“It’s heartbreaking to our entire team and all our students,” recounts U3 Varsity Track and Field hurdler Kiara Gilroy. “Being a student-athlete is part of my identity and losing that part of ourselves means losing a piece of who we are”.
Athletics at McGill is more than just competition; it is history in motion. The university was home to Canada’s first intercollegiate hockey, football, swimming, and basketball teams. Over the years, McGill has produced 125 Olympians, who together have won 31 medals, and numerous alumni have gone on to careers in the CFL, NHL, and NFL. Varsity sports have been central to campus identity for generations. They are woven into student life, alumni pride, and the institution’s reputation as a cradle of Canadian sport. Beyond varsity teams, McGill’s athletics program reaches thousands: over 5,000 students participate in 500 intramural teams each semester, and more than 8,000 individuals use the Fitness Centre each year.
Administrators insist the decision is not about punishing underperforming teams. Instead, they framed it as a capacity and sustainability issue. With 26 varsity teams and 13 competitive sports clubs under the Athletics and Recreation umbrella, resources – financial, human, physical – have become stretched too thin.
“The easiest thing to do is to look at wins and losses,” said Daniel Méthot, Director of Varsity Sports Programs. “But we’ve reached a point where we need to review competitive sports based on capacity – not just performance – considering medical support, HR, and financial resources”.
The cuts also occur against a backdrop of university-wide financial pressures. McGill’s FY2025-26 budget anticipates a $15 million deficit, which could balloon to $194 million by 2028 if no action is taken. To help mitigate these losses, McGill launched the Horizon McGill project, a multi-phase initiative designed to correct what it calls an “unsustainable budget trajectory”, including a $45 million correction to balance FY2026.
Yet many athletes feel they are bearing the burden of financial issues far beyond their control. “Most of us fundraise thousands of dollars to play,” said a U1 Varsity Golf athlete. “We cover travel, tournament fees, and rent practice spaces.”For many, this raised deeper questions about what, exactly, McGill hoped to save financially by cutting teams that already paid much of their own way.
Indeed, varsity teams already rely heavily on fundraising campaigns, including McGill24, which covers league fees, equipment, and external facilities. Though some programs enjoy sponsorships or endowments – men’s rugby receives $80,000 to offset travel, while hockey teams enjoy sponsored meals after games – it just goes to show the long-standing disparity in institutional support.
While the official list of cut teams was released on November 20th, the process had been quietly underway for weeks. Many athletes say they were kept in the dark throughout: “I think the most disappointing part throughout this process was the lack of transparency from McGill with anyone – not with the team, coaches, or alumni community”, Gilroy explained. In a confidential meeting with varsity team representatives before reading break, Perry Karnofsky, Director of Wellness Programs and Facility Operations, and Méthot foreshadowed the sweeping changes that would be taking place over the next month. “We have utmost respect for the time you dedicate to these teams,” Méthot emphasized, “but we’ve reached a point where we must evaluate how to best support competitive sports sustainably”.
The groundwork for these changes traces back to McGill’s last athletics review in 2009, which found that league demands were consistently outpacing available support. A 2024 audit reinforced these concerns, highlighting gaps in human resources, wellness services, marketing, and facility capacity. As Karnofsky explained, “we’ve exceeded our capacity to serve the McGill community that needs space in our buildings”.
At the November 7th town hall open to all athletes, both directors outlined the review framework based on the RSEQ sport model, which categorizes teams by competitive level and resource needs. Group 1 includes sports represented at all three levels – high school, McGill, and U SPORTS championships. Group 2 covers university-level teams competing in U SPORTS championships, while Group 3 comprises teams competing in both university and RSEQ championships. Teams that do not fit these structures were placed in a fourth group to ensure fair evaluation. Criteria included competitive potential, recruitment capacity, coaching and leadership, facility access, home-event needs, and administrative support.
Moreover, many athletes were at a loss as to the timing for this decision, but Karnofsky affirmed it was done to ensure athletes can make informed choices about potential transfers before the December 1 roster deadline for the upcoming season. However, it is interesting to note how for many international students like Gilroy “transferring would mean losing [their] study permit”.
For teams that remain, McGill plans to consolidate support under a single competitive umbrella, aiming to enhance training, coaching, and overall student experience. Teams that were cut may transition to student-run competitive clubs or focus on recreational programs. Administrators have pledged continued wellness, academic, and facility support for affected athletes through the remainder of their seasons. Still, the emotional and cultural impact is profound: “We built friendships, traditions, and a sense of belonging around these teams”, said U3 Varsity Baseball athlete. “To have that taken away feels like erasing part of what makes McGill, McGill”.
Fifteen eliminated programs represent a nearly 60% reduction of McGill’s varsity roster – a historic change in Canadian university sport. The cuts will reshape recruitment, alumni engagement, and campus culture, leaving a void in traditions that have endured for generations.
As the university navigates the financial reality, capacity limits, and sustainability, it faces a central challenge: how to honour its legacy of athletic experience while adapting to modern constraints. For student-athletes, alumni, and the wider campus, the reverberations of this decision will be felt for years. The echoes of cheers, the rhythm of practices, and the camaraderie of teams now gone will linger across arenas and gyms – an indelible reminder of what was lost.
