Yes but big donors are already, in theory, contributing the (vast?) majority of their cash to NIL/collectives, and not "the athletic department". I mean if not, then they're doing it wrong.
We are talking revenue share, which is what has changed.
Big East $$ for Rosters Will Exceed RU
- Thread starter RUsojo
- Start date
We are talking revenue share, which is what has changed.
That’s not the case for Rutgers. Rutgers collectives have raised something but it’s not nearly enough to maintain successful programs, but it’s better than nothing. The collective is making a huge effort, but not getting the support, imo.
Rutgers is the only program mostly relying on revenue share for now. Big East programs are relying on revenue share AND NIL/collectives.
That wasn't my point.
You're saying revenue that can be used for revenue share also includes donations. Which is true. But the wealthy donors who want their big east team to win aren't donating to the school anymore, they're donating straight to collectives. So it's not relevant to the point of rev share being a huge benefit to the big east.
No, revenue share is based on media revenue. NIL is based on donations mostly given by wealthy donors to collectives. NIL is the reason a good number of Big East schools have more money to spend, than Rutgers.
They are nowhere near 20M for revenue sharing. The issue is that they still have a lot more money to offer to prospective players than RU.
?? Uconn has more $ problems with its football than us. That team needs most of the 20% to survive.The premier team in the bigeast needs a power football league destination ?In any event listen to the Purdue bball coache's comments . He goes into NIL the portal and how HS players and hundreds of college players are not going to get their degrees. And that he sits on committees discussing this stuff. The football schools are already talking and will always get what they want. They'll find valid reasons to justify their dominance.
How much revenue a school has and what we think is fair is not as relevant as you think. Google and review the HOUSE Settlement and you will see what I mean. Those are the new rules, fair or not. Big Donors matter for small revenue conferences. Not having football is a huge boost for basketball programs and smart coaches see this
In all reality, we don’t have a good argument for being a football or basketball school, neither one has delivered illustrious and consistent results over the decades. Football generates more revenue based upon association with Big 10 TV contracts, but make no mistake Rutgers football is not some sort of brand or revenue generator on its own for us to be clearly known as a football school. Basketball does not have a stronger argument to claim we’re a basketball school either. We are probably a football school by default, but really we’re a Neither school until one of the programs establishes itself with consistent winning.
The Big East's new media contract will give each school $6M+ a year, with no football to feed, that's all basketball money. Seton Hall is rumored to be contributing $5M to revenue sharing, that doesn't include collective funding. Seton Hall will likely spend close to $7M annually toward compensating basketball athletes.
The dilemma for the Big Ten is that the NIL feeding frenzy will heat up in both football and basketball, this will lead to the lion's share of collective money going to football. A successful basketball coach doesn't leave a successful Big Ten program for the Big East, unless he knows that he'll have more financial support in the Big East.
Last edited:
March Madness is the only revenue generating event for the NCAA, raking in over $1 billion a year. The allure of March Madness is the Cinderella teams knocking off Power conference teams. Without the small schools in the Big East and mid-majors, March Madness dies along with that $1 billion.
I would say that RU is definitely a football school. This is not based on performance. It’s based on the fact that football will always be the priority here. This is especially true with GS as the head coach. I also think the circumstances for RU men’s bball will be difficult in the near future. The team is losing the majority of its scoring, and it does not have a great NIL to replenish the roster. Pike is a good HC but he is more geared to retaining and developing players over time. I think those days are gone for most programs.
You said it. March Madness is the NCAA cash cow. Imagine a world where the tv tournament contract is negotiated directly with a subset of conferences and cuts the NCAA out.
NCAA will accept any changes necessary to keep certain conferences appeased. It’s in its best interest.
GO RU
Pretty sad that in a year where it was known Dylan Harper and Ace Bailey were coming to RU, that big donors didn't step up and give Rutgers enough NIL to field a better team.
If the report that we paid Acuff $400k is accurate, we should really stop blaming money. Sure, obviously if we had unlimited funds we could’ve done much better - that’s true of every single team.
The bottom line is this - if we were handing out mid 6 figure range to unproven mid-major guards (at power level with questionable D ratings) in a year where we had Dylan coming in, returned J Will (starter) and J Davis (6 man), our priorities were wildly off the mark. We needed an experienced center. That was the only obvious hole on the roster. We chose to fill it with an income frosh and rely on a guy who had like 100 total D1 minutes of experience, maybe less in Ogbole. That was the huge mistake. We needed to outbid for a center first and then use whatever funds were left to backfill the rest of the roster. We chose not to do this.
I’d love to know what our 4 transfers got in combo - Acuff, Jordan, PJ and Martini.
Plus JWill and Davis.
Take JWill money and allocate it towards an actual wing defender and push JWill to the bench for cheaper.
I'd be surprised if its over $500K total. My guesses, $200K Acuff, $150K Derkack, $100K Martini, $50K Hayes
