I'll echo the sentiment. How we stack up against other A10 schools, and to a lesser extent, other higher echelon mid-major schools, ought to be our genuine concern. There are two things worth noting about this.
1) To some extent, this apples to oranges dilemma has been in effect well before NIL was established. Can GW realistically compete on the basis of facilities, coaches (if you subscribe to the theory that a better compensated coach will likely be a more successful one more often than not), recruiting budgets, and perks like charters against the public school with a thriving alumni base that prioritizes basketball (VCU), the sizable metro area school with no real sports entertainment options in the area during the college basketball season aside from NHL hockey (SLU), or an unofficial college basketball mecca who hosts the First 4 annually, plays in a 14,000 seat arena which often sells out, and is really the only game in town for sports entertainment (Dayton)? If I were to speculate, I'd ask whether these competitive advantages go beyond the items I mentioned. If Will Wade routinely paid players to play for him at LSU, can one say with absolute certainty that this practice did not go on while he was with VCU? As we've begun to see at places like Arizona, Kansas and LSU, the business of pay-for-play certainly predates NIL. Sure, there was a point where I might have said that even if this goes on among some or many major conference schools, it just doesn't happen in the A10. Today, I've done a 180. There is pressure to win at virtually all levels, certainly among schools in a multibid league. If a midmajor has the booster support to pull this off, why wouldn't they, particularly when looking to their left and right only to find their neighbors doing the same thing?
On a separate point, The Athletic had an interesting analysis on transfers last week. They grouped the A10 with a few other conferences, referring to them as midmajor+ conferences (the better midmajors). They identified 25 players who transferred from a midmajor+ to a high major program, and found that something like 21 or 22 of these players saw both their playing time and their scoring averages go down. (Interestingly, their efficiency ratings often went up because they went from having the ball in their hands nearly every possession to this not being the case at the higher program.) Nothing shocking about this except to point out that perhaps the grass isn't always greener on the other side. It should be noted that some players may still find that their "up-transfers" were more than worthwhile given perhaps a more realistic chance at winning a national championship/advance further in the tournament or the allure of NIL money (or a greater amount of NIL money).
Online!
Gwmayhem wrote: