• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

WFU Hoops: '24-'25 Roster Construction Thread: +Spillers/Biliew/Cosby/Johnson/Abass

I'm not sure they are dumb. They are an almost 120 year old organization. For much of that time, college sports was not even close to a big money maker.

It started to change a lot in the late 70s-80s? I am not sure anyone would have predicted the growth of college sports revenue especially over the last ~30 years. And once you have a cash cow, everyone is happy. The schools, the media companies, the governing body, etc. Except the players. Cause as that pie got bigger, and they didn''t have a real piece of it, it was doomed.

But if you are the NCAA, I'm not sure there was much incentive at all to change. And even if they knew it was going to, I don't think its crazy for them to try to ride this out as long as possible until their hand is forced.
 
And we are only talking football and men's basketball here, with a few exceptions. They are governing dozens of other sports.
 
deaconson said:
They cashed thise checks with no thought about the future. So seems dumb for being short sighted.
Click to expand...
What's happening in the future that will endanger the checks? They're still signing TV deals.

The NCAA has made two major mistakes with respect to money. Neither of them directly has to do with NIL. One is undervaluing women's sports. They just signed a $65M a year deal for the women's tournament that just outdrew the $900M a year men's tournament in the Final Four. The other is not locking down college football.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Why gamble on 5 stars who haven't played CBB, when you can get proven CBB dudes? I sure as hell wouldn't be paying up for HS recruits.
Click to expand...
This is what we have been encountering at the high school level in a variety of sports. Lots of major D1 colleges telling kids to go to smaller D1 schools or D2 schools and get college experience. They would rather have kids transfer in from smaller schools who have proven they can play in college than take risks on high school kids

Only kids they care to take from high school are 5 and some 4 star guys
 
Haros said:
The biggest reason is the 5-star freshmen seem to be getting anywhere from $500k to $1M -- with the rare talents (Cooper Flagg) getting more like $2M for a year.

This year's reclamation project is coming here for probably $250-$350k, a year older/more mature, though with a bad year in the books that has taken off the shine a little bit.
Click to expand...
Good point
 
Pilchard said:
No doubt that the current system suppresses the interest in HS talent right now.

Under the current system, coaches simply do not benefit from bringing in a player that won't immediately help, as a year from now that HS player may be in the portal or the HC may be out of a job. With a finite amount of NIL money, staffs and collective are incentivized to spend it only on players who will make a difference the very next season; even if the HS recruit has a lot more long term potential. Just another crappy aspect of the system.
Click to expand...
I think that is a way this works against the players. It limits their options for a best fit straight out of high school. It deters the desire to invest in their development (athletically, but also academically and personally) for the reasons you mentioned.
The ideal scenario for the student athletes is a system that compensates them fairly for their skill/work, while still supporting longer term relationships with their school(s).
 
It is tough spending several years recruiting a HS kid, who now is likely to leave after a year bc he didn't get enough PT his freshman year. You can't abandon HS recruiting, but portal recruiting is far more efficient.
 
PhDeac said:
What's happening in the future that will endanger the checks? They're still signing TV deals.

The NCAA has made two major mistakes with respect to money. Neither of them directly has to do with NIL. One is undervaluing women's sports. They just signed a $65M a year deal for the women's tournament that just outdrew the $900M a year men's tournament in the Final Four. The other is not locking down college football.
Click to expand...
I don’t think this is a good take. This past years women’s final four tournament attraction was primarily based upon a once in a life time player in Kaitlin Clark, and next years women’s tournament numbers will likely pale in comparison. I don't believe women’s sports will ever, on the whole, generate much fan interest. I will not be surprised if interest in both men and women’s college sports declines significantly in the coming years with the average fan (especially the average alumni fan) if a different solution to the “wild west” we are currently experiencing in the NIL environment is not found. Declining interest equates to declining money for the players, schools and the NCAA.
 
Women's sports ratings have been steadily increasing. The NCAA has only recently started giving them the opportunity to succeed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top