Right LAF. It’s the money. If a program has enough money they can mitigate anything. I wonder if schools like GW are waiting to see if there is legislation in the offing that might help. Thought Sally Jenkins’ column yesterday was good. Any legislation needs to focus on the schools and structure of the industry, not the players. Unless the advantage of having more money is dealt with nothing bad changes imo

Asking GW to assist with the House settlement should be met with a hard no if possible

Last edited by FredD (6/03/2024 8:35 am)

In 2007 Derrick Rose and John Calipari went 38-2 and went to the championship game only to lose in OT to Kansas, and subsequently had those 38 wins vacated due to falsified SAT paperwork. And all before legalized cannabis, sports betting, NIL, and transfer roulette.

I remember feeling empty and disgusted at the time. 

Call me old fashioned but I don’t think NIL will make GW any more or less competitive nor do I fear transfer loss. We were never big time and never will be.

Lonergen was the national DIII coach of the year, and  CC played 4 years at Westfield State.  Both had humble beginnings which I respect more than a 5 star McDonald  All American driving a Lambo to class.

Nurture and grow the chemistry of the team and develop solid citizens in the many aspects of growing up!

Winning would go a long way to retaining worthy talent.

Patriot League makes sense but I wouldn't rule out CAA. 

I agree with GW0509 about the TV money being too good for GW to drop down to a lower conference. I actually think the proliferation of transfers can help GW because players want to play, as simple as that sounds!! Even if GW doesn't have a lot of NIL money, you will still have a lot of players who want the opportunity to get shots and minutes on a somewhat large stage like the A10 in Washington D.C. In my opinion, the biggest problem for GW has been getting the right mix of transfers/recruits, not necessarily the NIL money. The right coach/recruiter (if it isn't CC) should be able to turn things around at GW because of the hundreds (or is it thousands!!) of players that will be available in the portal each year. 

Not saying that NIL and transfer issues aren't vitally important issues that need to be discussed, but it would sure be nice to be talking instead about your traditional summer topics, such as the strengths and weaknesses for the 2024-2025 team; the schedule;  all time greatest GW teams/players, the upcoming Kenner League and the pros and cons of the Smith Center; not if and how we can survive in this new age of semi-pro basketball players wearing college jerseys.

First, under the current settlement agreement, 60% of the NIL money being paid out directly to power conference schools will be via a reduction in conference tournament revenue to all small conference and midmajor conference teams.   So whether GW is in the A10 or a smaller conference, their annual "take" will be less than it once was (not factoring an offset from rising overall revenues) or would otherwise be at a smaller conference.  

Second, regarding media rights, the conference just extended its agreement to the tune of a 40% raise through 2028-29.  Rising's point regarding UMASS plus any other school's decision to leave the conference is potentially valid in that the networks may have contingencies build in to address these possibilities.

What's worth watching is whether the smaller schools/conferences revolt (in court) against this settlement.  If they do, it would likely mean the end of the NCAA as we know it.  The NCAA could govern over the power conference schools and the NCAA tournament could consist of solely these programs.  David vs Goliath first round matchups would be a thing of the past.

Did anyone foresee this once NIL became immediate and unrestricted free agency for all athletes in most/all sports?  

Gwmayhem wrote:

First, under the current settlement agreement, 60% of the NIL money being paid out directly to power conference schools will be via a reduction in conference tournament revenue to all small conference and midmajor conference teams.   So whether GW is in the A10 or a smaller conference, their annual "take" will be less than it once was (not factoring an offset from rising overall revenues) or would otherwise be at a smaller conference.  

Second, regarding media rights, the conference just extended its agreement to the tune of a 40% raise through 2028-29.  Rising's point regarding UMASS plus any other school's decision to leave the conference is potentially valid in that the networks may have contingencies build in to address these possibilities.

What's worth watching is whether the smaller schools/conferences revolt (in court) against this settlement.  If they do, it would likely mean the end of the NCAA as we know it.  The NCAA could govern over the power conference schools and the NCAA tournament could consist of solely these programs.  David vs Goliath first round matchups would be a thing of the past.

Did anyone foresee this once NIL became immediate and unrestricted free agency for all athletes in most/all sports?  

Gwmayhem, the smaller non P-5 schools will have no financial ability to compete in the era of NIL, unlimited transfers, and lesser revenues from the tournament. On a smaller scale, this is exactly what happened with the advent of athletic scholarships. Schools just opted out. Some of the most prestigious colleges just said no. The Ivy League still maintains a no athletics scholarship rule. The costs will be prohibitive for the return. But what no one is focusing on is that its not just that they will move to a conference with commensurate NIL expenditures, it's that all athletic scholarships will be gone. Why spend money on sports when there is no return? As tuition rises and hard costs increase, the juice will no longer be worth the squeeze. In the end, the very few will benefit at the expense of the very many. The situation is dire but very much self-inflicted by poor leadership at the University and NCAA level. The same incompetent Presidents that can't deal with student encampments and harassment are the same morons who are driving NCAA policies. Good luck! The old expression "a ship of fools" applies here. 

Gwmayhem wrote:

Rising, what are your thoughts regarding the future of salaries for head coaches and athletic directors?  Will the bubble be bursting causing the head coach bringing home $4 million/year to have to learn to get by on $2.5 million/year?  It would be hard to cut salaries at very small programs but how about at a school like GW?  Does $700,000/year ultimately become $450,000/year?  It's not like the number of jobs will change meaning someone like CC, assuming he does not set the world on fire in the next year or two, will have limited recourse but to accept a reduction in pay, should this trickle down to salaries.  The Sally Jenkins example was flawed but interesting...if Alabama wants to pay its football coach $11 million, they should only be able to do this if the players are also receiving at least this much.
 

Yes, salaries will be reduced as schools move to smaller conferences and lower divisions. And when I say reduced, I don't mean a little. Look at what happened at Hartford for an example. I am willing to bet the men's basketball coach there now makes 33-50% of what John Gallagher made when Hartford was in the America East Conference. I can only imagine that every other coach/administrator had reductions in salary.
 

The missing piece in all of this is the impending use of Endowments to pay players.  It's the absolute only way non-P5, non-TV revenue generating schools, can compete. 

You need two things to be rich: a lot of money, and a lot of money.

So what is the baseline for GW's success? Winning games? Graduating players? Breaking even on the balance sheet? All three? Something else? Once that is cleared up, we will be able to chart a course moving forward.
Until then, we might see some memorable wins and winning stretches, but GW is not going to threaten larger brands... err, "schools" on a regular basis.