Name, Image, Likeness

Bluedog said:
Yes, theoretically schools like UConn and Georgetown could come out ahead in basketball. If the thought is that schools will dedicate 70-80% of their $20M to football, the traditional basketball powers that don't have big time football should come out ahead. We shall see though....
Click to expand...
That is why Willard left MD for Nova. Did not like rev share for hoop
 
Being a state school will have its advantages.

NC State and UNC are likely to get help from the state before the end of the year as state lawmakers have proposed distributing revenue from sports betting taxes to the schools with the Senate offering a much larger chunk for the two ACC members in its budget. Even under the House of Representatives’ less generous plan, the schools would receive an estimated $14 million in the next fiscal year.
Click to expand...

 
tommy said:
Tough one. Basketball is our cash cow and our flagship. But a lot more mouths to feed in football.
Click to expand...
But the question is the extent to which NIL can make up for money paid by Duke itself, which isn’t NIL. If NIL can pay out $15 million or so to the MBB team, Duke can allot nearly its entire budget for paying athletes to football.
 
hallcity said:
But the question is the extent to which NIL can make up for money paid by Duke itself, which isn’t NIL. If NIL can pay out $15 million or so to the MBB team, Duke can allot nearly its entire budget for paying athletes to football.
Click to expand...
At some point, and an article in the Athletic suggests that P4 conferences will need to spend $40 million in payroll on football, will football still be an economic benefit to the university?
 
MChambers said:
At some point, and an article in the Athletic suggests that P4 conferences will need to spend $40 million in payroll on football, will football still be an economic benefit to the university?
Click to expand...
I've heard many suggest that football prominence is amazing advertising for the university and they believe it brings immense marketing value for the university even if expenses exceed revenues....but I'm skeptical somewhat. It's not limitless.
 
RoseBowl1942 said:
That cannot be right. Is there an actual source or real rumor for this? We’re paying Mensah $4mm alone
Click to expand...
Before this agreement, we (Duke) was paying Mensah zero, other than a scholarship and living expenses. At least, not directly. NIL was paying him the rumored $4M (which I thought was over two years.). The $20M is new, direct, payments.
 
DU82 said:
Before this agreement, we (Duke) was paying Mensah zero, other than a scholarship and living expenses. At least, not directly. NIL was paying him the rumored $4M (which I thought was over two years.). The $20M is new, direct, payments.
Click to expand...
That is exactly right I think, at least technically. But my (very uninformed and confused) understand is that in most cases NIL cooperatives are working closely with their associated schools, and the boosters who normally would give to school athletics are instead supporting their related cooperatives. This new system will allow boosters to give to the school directly thereby allowing NIL deals to be real deals under which players are actually being paid by businesses as opposed to boosters, as no doubt was the initial vision. So yes, Duke was paying nothing to Mensah, but one cannot assume that the NIL dollars Mensah received would have not otherwise gone to Duke. I could be wrong on all of this and would happily stand corrected. No need for intemperate responses.
 
RoseBowl1942 said:
That cannot be right. Is there an actual source or real rumor for this? We’re paying Mensah $4mm alone
Click to expand...

No, it was just a poorly landed joke. I have no idea what the split will be with the $20.5M.

I think another big factor here is sponsor money, notably Nike, and how it flows into the program and disperses to the players. If Duke wants to juice player payments beyond the $20.5M, perhaps more of the $$ that traditionally flow into the athletic department will go directly to the players? I imagine there's room for creativity.
 
MChambers said:
At some point, and an article in the Athletic suggests that P4 conferences will need to spend $40 million in payroll on football, will football still be an economic benefit to the university?
Click to expand...

It's already a drain on most schools.

Here's a chart on total expenses in the FBS:

1749472564245.png
And the revenue:
1749472637642.png
So even before we add the money schools are now lining up to pay (we'll say $20m because it's a round number and some schools may not use all of the money they're allowed - it's 2.68 BILLION dollars), we're seeing student fees pushing them to near-even.

The big-time state schools will be fine. Georgia had revenues of $241.8m against $195.1m in expenses. Texas brought in a staggering $331.9m in revenue against $327m in expenses.

Texas collects no student fees. On the other hand, before James Madison jumped up to the FBS, student fees accounted for $55.53m of their $76.38 in revenue -- 73%! Students essentially paid the equivalent of professional season-ticket prices, often without even realizing it.

A lot of people assume media rights deals are going to be so big that they'll make up the gaps. In the SEC, sure. Elsewhere?
 

Attachments

  • 1749472620429.png
    1749472620429.png
    118.5 KB · Views: 9
Predictably, the House settlement terms are already under attack for violating Title IX. The current challenge involve the allocation of the back "damages" payment under the settlement, which according to the challengers' lawyer "allocates $2.4 billion to men and only $102 million to women." https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...nge-from-female-athletes-on-title-ix-grounds/

Undoubtedly, the going-forward revenue sharing payments (disproportionately expected to be used primarily for football and Men's basketball) are also going to be challenged on the same basis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top