posted also in football but wondering if the new changes will allow some of the walk-ons cut to come back and if they will make our two current walk-ons be the designated and open up two more walk-on spots. I don’t think we can add someone mid-year though and leave a roster spot open with a designated wall-on, that seems like a work around so might be dangerous to designate someone and lose the spot. Has this been discussed elsewhere.
House Settlement Roster Limit - Basketball
- Thread starter POTFHBTFU
- Start date
College sports are really going all in on the top level programs and leaving the mid majors/everyone else behind. Between expanding the rosters to allow the big boys to stack more talent, nil, and unlimited transferring, it’s really going to hurt the little amount of parity we had.
Not just with mid majors but even among the P4. SEC, B1G and a handful of acc/B12.
Colleges are like the G-leagues for the pros the only difference they get paid a lot more money .
It was announced yesterday that colleges will now pay players direct and who knows what will happen to NIL.
Yeah, average $20.5 million in total, but not required.
Can we just disband the NCAA now? What are they needed for except for a few annual rule adjustments?
We know in a few years that there will be 3 to 4 main conferences, but really only the BT and SEC.
The NCAA tournament is pretty cool…. But yeah, other than that they’re a bit antiquated.
For football. There’s already only 4 power conferences and you are right the B1G and SEC are clear outliers. In 2030 it will be even a bigger gap.
Basketball there is much more parity. B12 and ACC and lesser extent Big East are still strong. Still a big ten - sec favorite as 11 of 16 sweet 16 teams came from those two conferences. The $20.5 m will be spent mostly on football forest teams that opt to spend it.
I want you to arrange a meeting.....call the commissioners of the four conferences.....ehh......tell them we can straighten out all this NIL and portal misunderstandings......we'll get the networks behind us, and I'll make 'em an offer they can't refuse.
I imagine the NIL framework will likely disappear. Players will get their salaries, and their agents will still be able to negotiate deals for promoting products. Just like the NBA.
Big East Basketball will get a big boost because their $20.5 mil will mostly go to basketball unlike the other conferences!
Not really the revenue sharing is based on how much money a school or conference brings in. The $20.5 is a B1G10 number only and I believe it is only the 6 founding members as they receive 5-15% more from conference TV deals and such. The 4 newest teams receive the least. NO school can pay more than those 6 thru revenue sharing. A Big East player will probably be less than 1/2 what Purdue will pay by the settlement agreement. Translated Painter now has the most money he MUST payout along with the other 5 other coaches. Nice problem to have. It is why the 4 pack10 teams wanted in the B1G (big TV contracts). Watch a recruits finial list after this year if he has UCONN and Purdue as his finial 2 bet Purdue.
I don't think that's right. Everybody I've heard talk who knows more about this than I have suggested that the Big East basketball will be at a significant advantage because they don't have to share with football.
B1G 10 schools are actually at a huge disadvantage because they give small portions of their NIL money to other sports like golf, track, swimming, baseball and women’s team like basketball and volleyball. It’s not a lot, but it’s more than many schools do. OSU will give more money to football than most teams. Purdue gives more money to basketball than a lot of schools do. It’s still up to the AD how he allocates his money. And also how much he allocates. I believe you will find a few schools that will not allocate max allowed.
I think CBS Sports disagrees with your with your narrative.
The collective money will continue to be a major factor as schools will find a way to technically follow the rules. I don’t see the dynamics fundamentally changing within the power conferences. I think that Purdue basketball is positioned well with the combination of Big Ten money and great donor support.
Considering all sources, Purdue football is going to continue to be greatly outspent by schools like OSU and Michigan, but there will still be a path to building a very strong team.
Considering all sources, Purdue football is going to continue to be greatly outspent by schools like OSU and Michigan, but there will still be a path to building a very strong team.
Excerpts from cbssports.com article:
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...oor-for-revenue-sharing-in-college-athletics/
Great financial opportunities for young adults for "college" athletics now. It's a fast-changing landscape, but be careful what you wish for - there is no turning back now.......
I also expect there will eventually be some congressional legislation on this because there are still too many open questions regarding employment and anti-trust issues - and there are already draft bills, which have been in early phases for a while.
"Schools can share as much as $20.5 million of their revenues with players during the upcoming academic year. The settlement also includes $2.8 billion in back payments for athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024. The new revenue-sharing cap will increase by at least 4% each year during the 10-year agreement.
***
The power conferences are expected to soon announce the College Sports Commission, an organization tasked to oversee the settlement's terms and enforce new rules. The power conferences hired Deloitte and LBI, major players in revenue management for professional sports, to develop software to dissect NIL deals and track players' revenue-sharing contracts. The CSC will police NIL deals over $600 with a new clearinghouse called "NIL Go," sources told CBS Sports. Deloitte will use data from past endorsement deals with athletes to review boosters' NIL deals and determine whether an agreement exceeds an athlete's fair market value."
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...oor-for-revenue-sharing-in-college-athletics/
Great financial opportunities for young adults for "college" athletics now. It's a fast-changing landscape, but be careful what you wish for - there is no turning back now.......
I also expect there will eventually be some congressional legislation on this because there are still too many open questions regarding employment and anti-trust issues - and there are already draft bills, which have been in early phases for a while.
"Schools can share as much as $20.5 million of their revenues with players during the upcoming academic year. The settlement also includes $2.8 billion in back payments for athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024. The new revenue-sharing cap will increase by at least 4% each year during the 10-year agreement.
***
The power conferences are expected to soon announce the College Sports Commission, an organization tasked to oversee the settlement's terms and enforce new rules. The power conferences hired Deloitte and LBI, major players in revenue management for professional sports, to develop software to dissect NIL deals and track players' revenue-sharing contracts. The CSC will police NIL deals over $600 with a new clearinghouse called "NIL Go," sources told CBS Sports. Deloitte will use data from past endorsement deals with athletes to review boosters' NIL deals and determine whether an agreement exceeds an athlete's fair market value."
Not that it is a significant amount in the scope of things, but that 2.8 billion in back pay will come from the schools. I think the AD said it would "cost "PU 1.4 M a year to pay that back. Someone please correct me, if I didn't read that letter correctly.
Dry - it's my understanding that the NCAA itself has agreed to pick up $1.2 billion of that - universities to pick up the balance.
If you listen to the interview of Odom that someone posted on the football page, he gets asked about this whole deal. The staff seems to be really confused on the details as it pertains to roster limits and walk-ons and grandfathered players. The details keep changing. He specifically said that right now, they have too many players if the end result number is 85. But certain players know where they stand and could theoretically get cut or end up on some kind of taxi-squad for potential injuries. He was pretty transparent about the situation not being very transparent right now.
I don't think Painter is in that dilemma, but it's easier to work with 13-15 as opposed to 85-105.
I don't think Painter is in that dilemma, but it's easier to work with 13-15 as opposed to 85-105.
Nope it’s across the board and it’s been widely discussed some big east teams will take advantage of this.
That’s not necessarily true. There is some discretion but schools are being cautious to systematically calculate the revenue brought in by each sport and pay it proportionally as it will likely be taken to court especially with title IX. This has been consistent and even some conferences have created guidelines for how it is spent. Non-revenue sports will get very little as per the name they don’t generate revenue. If you read the settlement it actually spells out how the revenue is calculated and it’s based on specific criteria (TV, tickets, brand/licensing) and so that’s how schools are allocating to follow the settlement. Donations from boosters is not part of it.
Where it gets tricky is schools that don’t have football get the vast majority of it from men’s basketball and could allocate that proportionate share up to the full limit which is a big advantage.
So no you are not right the big ten makes very little on non-revenue sports and will share very little with them. Look up Texas Techs strategy, most are following this and 91-92% of revenue will go to men’s basketball and football.
