2025 Transfer Portal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xudash

Would Kansas football be a major consideration in all of this, insofar as it’s going to suck a lot of oxygen out of the room with regard to that athletic department’s allocation of the $20.5 million? Whether they like it or not, the Big 12 is now a second class citizen. They cannot keep up with the spending levels of the B1G and SEC.

---

Depending on how April 7th & subsequent litigation goes, there are gonna be a lot of schools like Kansas, Duke, North Carolina, etc. that are going to be forced to make some business decisions on how money is allocated.

I think this really has to be taken with a big ole grain of salt. However, this was posted from Dan Wetzel. Per Opendorse (NIL Tech Platform) said conference average of revenue share allocated for men's basketball is as follows:

BE: 5.7 million
ACC: 4.4 million
Big 12 4.3 million
B10: 3.2 million
SEC: 3.1 million

Couple of things to consider: 1.) who knows how accurate this is but the numbers do kind of shake out in that there have been reports that the big 10 and sec's rev share will be about 30% for basketball of the total number.

2.) this number doesn't include the real nil opportunities of which im sure there will be plenty in the big 10 and sec. And, I'm sure there will be plenty of skirting the rules or just downright cheating as far as that is concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xville

I think this really has to be taken with a big ole grain of salt. However, this was posted from Dan Wetzel. Per Opendorse (NIL Tech Platform) said conference average of revenue share allocated for men's basketball is as follows:

BE: 5.7 million
ACC: 4.4 million
Big 12 4.3 million
B10: 3.2 million
SEC: 3.1 million

Couple of things to consider: 1.) who knows how accurate this is but the numbers do kind of shake out in that there have been reports that the big 10 and sec's rev share will be about 30% for basketball of the total number.

2.) this number doesn't include the real nil opportunities of which im sure there will be plenty in the big 10 and sec. And, I'm sure there will be plenty of skirting the rules or just downright cheating as far as that is concerned.

---

Couple of things:

- All of this is contingent on the court accepting the settlement in Hosue v. NCAA next week.

- Even if the court accepts the settlement in that case, there is going to be litigation almost immediately challenging payments made to athletes under Title IX alleging that revenue sharing must pay male and female athletes equally -- regardless of how much revenue each side generates. My guess is that there's no grounds to grant a stay on this since revenue will keep flowing yearly and any female athletes not paid could recover backpay in the event of a victory.

- There will be real NIL opportunities, but they'll be vetted by an independent group to ensure it's actually for real value and not just booster pay or from a slush fund.

- Also important to remember -- the "revenue share" money has to come from somewhere. Right now, most (if not all) of these schools -- including X -- have the revenue being spent someplace else to keep the lights on. That means the ability to commit revenue sharing dollars to sports is going to require boosters and donors to donate equivalent amounts to the university in order to offset what's going to the athletes. If you want Xaiver to have a 5.7M basketball roster, you're going to need to find donations of $5.7M to the athletic department.

And that's BEFORE the NIL opportunities the school is going to want / need to generate for players to increase comp as well. It's gonna be more important for alums with consumer facing businesses to offer NIL opportunities for athletes. Looking your way Cintas, Joseph Auto Group, Home City Ice, etc.

Just catching up. Were any of you surprised that Ryan Conwell was ranked 11 in the portal and media reports said he received offers of $1.5 to $2 M by several schools?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArizonaXUGrad

I bet locker room dynamics are a lot different especially when some players make as much or close to coaches. Colleges need to hire GMs to shield the coach from the negotiating process.

---

Be careful, I got skewered for saying something similar.

I actually agree with you, but you may rile up all the Pollyanna’s here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caveat

Couple of things:

- All of this is contingent on the court accepting the settlement in Hosue v. NCAA next week.

- Even if the court accepts the settlement in that case, there is going to be litigation almost immediately challenging payments made to athletes under Title IX alleging that revenue sharing must pay male and female athletes equally -- regardless of how much revenue each side generates. My guess is that there's no grounds to grant a stay on this since revenue will keep flowing yearly and any female athletes not paid could recover backpay in the event of a victory.

- There will be real NIL opportunities, but they'll be vetted by an independent group to ensure it's actually for real value and not just booster pay or from a slush fund.

- Also important to remember -- the "revenue share" money has to come from somewhere. Right now, most (if not all) of these schools -- including X -- have the revenue being spent someplace else to keep the lights on. That means the ability to commit revenue sharing dollars to sports is going to require boosters and donors to donate equivalent amounts to the university in order to offset what's going to the athletes. If you want Xaiver to have a 5.7M basketball roster, you're going to need to find donations of $5.7M to the athletic department.

And that's BEFORE the NIL opportunities the school is going to want / need to generate for players to increase comp as well. It's gonna be more important for alums with consumer facing businesses to offer NIL opportunities for athletes. Looking your way Cintas, Joseph Auto Group, Home City Ice, etc.

---

Do you consider cutting non-revenue sports within the realm of possibilities? The school potentially saves scholarship money and will be able to cut coaching staffs and probably a little bit of administration. It’s unfortunate, but I expect this will happen here and there. Maybe not every school will do it, but my guess is that some will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Fan

Just catching up. Were any of you surprised that Ryan Conwell was ranked 11 in the portal and media reports said he received offers of $1.5 to $2 M by several schools?

---

6'4" guard who can absolutely rip it from 3 against high-major competition, can create his own shot going to the hoop and defends his positions decently well? Absolutely not surprised in this market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MHettel

Do you consider cutting non-revenue sports within the realm of possibilities? The school potentially saves scholarship money and will be able to cut coaching staffs and probably a little bit of administration. It’s unfortunate, but I expect this will happen here and there. Maybe not every school will do it, but my guess is that some will.

---

I suspect everything is on the table.

You're still going to need to comply with TIX in terms of scholarships and opportunities -- so the schools playing football are still gonna have to offer a ton of women's non-rev stuff. There are also considerations with conferences and what they'll require to meet requirements for membership.

The other part of this to remember is that the people making these decisions are still university presidents. And, at the end of the day, they still think of themselves as academics and these schools as academic institutions. Cutting the swim team or the tennis team to pay a shooting guard another $50K probably isn't gonna go over well in the circles they run in.

Anthony Robinson committed.
Top 100 recruit. Another guy with three years left. Nothing impressive numbers wise but hopefully can develop.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...thony-robinson

LFG! Welcome to X Mr Robinson!