VCU going to pay athletes directly - UR?

[SpiderTrap]

Article it RTD the other day saying VCU AD has presented to the Board of Directors at VCU that beginning next school year, they will begin paying players directly for all their sports. Obviously - more pay will go the more revenue generating sports, which for VCU - is basketball. They estimate this will cost them 4-5 million per year, and they are looking for donors and additional revenue to come up with that money - and even stated they will not raise ticket prices or add fees to tickets as some schools have done.

Here is the kicker and I think this is what constantly separates VCU from UR. They come out and say exactly what they are trying to achieve. Quote from the article. "VCU intends to spend on men’s basketball as much as other top teams in its conference, the Atlantic 10, and rank in the top 35 nationally." So right off the bat - they want to be one of the top paying schools in the A10, and they want to be a top 35 paying school in the country. They are not trying to "compete" in this space. They are not trying to pay a fair wage, etc. They want to be a top in the A10 and top 35 nationally. Article says some schools have discussed alloting 75% to football, 15% to men's basketball, and 10% to the rest. With that math and recent settlement which allows schools to spend 21 million a year on paying athletes - that comes out to about $250K per basketball player. I read that and think - if you want to be the top A10 or top 35 nationally - 250K is the starting point (average wise). Not saying everyone will get 250K, some will get more, some will get less - but it gives you an idea where you need to be. Obviously - without football, it is much easier for them. Even with our 1AA football, we will need to pay something and that will mean the bill will be more than 4-5 million for UR.

But do you see UR jumping into this pool? I give VCU credit - they seem to be out in front in Virginia, they grabbed the headlines, and want to be a leader in this space. Again - how they seperate from UR.

 

[Eight Legger]

Of course we aren't going to pay players $250k apiece.

 

[97spiderfan]

Yeah, we will probably have a plan to do this in about 3 years with the message being this is what we need to do to compete in the new landscape of college hoops. Just like the practice facility was the only thing holding us back a few years ago from competing at the highest level.

 

[GKiller]

Maybe we can merge this thread with the 1 started by student17?

 

[spider23]

I kind of like this thread better.

To 97's point, everything around our Athletic Department and basketball program is years late. Amoeba/match up getting smoked. Changes 3-4 years late. Check. Does not pursue transfers at all. Years late. Check. Practice facility. Check. I do love the practice facility example best. Because Hardt was wowed to find out about and tour VCU's facility. BANG. Light Bulb On! Of course if someone would force him to look at twitter five minutes a day he would have noticed this trend 4 years earlier.

 

[SpiderTrap]

The other thread is called Revenue sharing - and I don't see this as revenue sharing at all and I don't think VCU even mentioned it as such. To me - that sounds like IF your program makes revenue, we will share with it you (the players). But in the article - the VCU AD simply states - this is the new era of college athletics - we need to budget for 4-5 million per year and we need to find ways to make revenue to cover that expense.

We all knew this was coming when last year that legislation was passed in Virginia and there was a picture taken with all the schools and UR was noticeably absent. Well - rather than wait and see, VCU is jumping out ahead of this. And this has been my whole point all along, some schools will jump right in with this and others will not or other can't afford to do it. The A10 might be a good example - if UR decides not to do this, or will do very small amounts - do we want to be in a league or should we be in a league where we will be facing an uphill battle just to get players to compete on this level? Come to VCU - get 150K from the school your first year plus NIL. Or come to UR and get 20K and some NIL money? There will be a trickle down effect on this.

As mentioned above - it will take UR a couple of years to catch up to this, and maybe by that time - the NCAA tourney will be up to 200 teams and we have a shot at making it.

 

[Gallipoli]

One may expect that schools, in treating players as employees, will be required to cover plays with workers comp insurance.

 

[GKiller]

The other thread is called Revenue sharing - and I don't see this as revenue sharing at all and I don't think VCU even mentioned it as such. To me - that sounds like IF your program makes revenue, we will share with it you (the players). But in the article - the VCU AD simply states - this is the new era of college athletics - we need to budget for 4-5 million per year and we need to find ways to make revenue to cover that expense.

??

vcu is paying players because of the ncaa's "revenue sharing" settlement. article does reference it and vcu opting in. The other thread is talking about the exact same thing & the tweets in it r about the exact same rtd article. personally I don't really see revenue sharing as best term either but that is what its being called at large.

I don't have a preference for either thread I just think it's easier to follow board with less duplication. I post enough I don't need reasons to post more lol.

vcu opted in to the revenue sharing settlement. allowing for up to ~ 20 million. amount will only go up. They just can't pay 20 mil but without having FBS football they don't need to.

Anyway it is revenue sharing in a sense but it's not revenue sharing on your own revenue. They got that 20 mil by taking a percentage of all power conf schools (with football) revenue. Nothing to do with VCU revenue either. But in theory this is good for us..if we opt in....because if it was actually based on % of your own revenue we would be screwed because we don't generate much. however at UR we have ability to take $ from other sources, in theory if we so chose. But u r right Trap to question if we do that & decide not to jump in or pay little.

 

[SpiderTrap]

Got it - but how will schools that don't make a revenue from their sports, and I have to believe UR is in that group. Or if we do make a revenue -its not much, not enough to cover the cost to jump in this pool - like you stated. And I think this will become a cross-roads for UR, and just like they did with Soccer and Track - they didn't want to spend any extra money on athletics or dumb down the student pool with more athletes - then why all of a sudden would they say - sure, we will pay our athletes, and not only pay them - but pay them enough where we will can feel like we have a chance.

I will say - one slight advantage UR might have had in some recruiting battles was our strong academics. But that gets less and less, cause if your a kid choosing between UR, where maybe you have a good shot to play or feel better about your chances to get minutes - but you will not paid a whole lot, or you can go to NC State, where you might be the 9th-10th guy at best - but they are willing to pay you 150K a year to start (and more if you do get minutes) - is the degree really worth that much more if you can leave college not only debt free (athletic Scholarship), but maybe even with 400K-500K in your bank account?

GKiller - I totally agree, UR could pull this money from other sources. But they will not. We will get the woe is UR, small private school with limited enrollment and limited resources story. Even though we have a 3 billion endowment, which I know we can't use (or choose not to use at times) - but that 3 billion came from somewhere right? Donors?

 

[RichmondNative]

I will be extremely surprised if UR decides to participate in this “revenue sharing” model. It simply is not part of the University mission and vision for athletics (link below).

The University wants the best SCHOLAR athletes. It doesn’t want to be a basketball factory. The new “revenue sharing” model is not College Athletics at all. It is professional sports.

The only question I have is whether the A10 becomes a league where the majority of the teams are revenue sharing or whether it remains closer to the old collegiate model. Both tiers will exist.

Academic Services Mission - University of Richmond Athletics

A Strategic Plan for Spider Student-Athletes University of Richmond Athletics MISSION STATEMENT The University of Richmond's NCAA Division I Intercollegiate ...

richmondspiders.com

 

[GKiller]

Got it - but how will schools that don't make a revenue from their sports, and I have to believe UR is in that group. Or if we do make a revenue -its not much, not enough to cover the cost to jump in this pool - like you stated.

That is what schools r figuring out, VCU in the article says they don't know how to pay for it yet. Sure, find new athletic revenue streams. Kinda hard. Other ways r donor $ and cuts. Of course they never want to say cuts in an article like that. But in business I can't make u buy my product or services. The only thing I can control is expenses. Which to me means cuts r likely coming too.

At UR we got an athletic revenue problem. The #1 revenue is winning. 3 in 20 ncaa, 9-25 vs. VCU. 40% .500 or lower years out of 20. Means winning is not high on our bball list. Until we do that at a high consistent clip we probably always will have athletic revenue issues. But we are a rich school. So we are in better shape than many if we wanted to just pull $ from elsewhere or manuever it around.

 

[Eight Legger]

The A10 is an interesting league, because we have some very polar-opposite groups of schools:
1. Big state schools – VCU, Rhode Island, George Mason, UMass
2. Big private schools – SLU, GW, Dayton, Loyola
3. Small, mediocre academic schools – Bona, Duquesne, Lasalle, St. Joe's
4. Small, elite academic schools – Davidson, Fordham, Richmond

Groups 1 and 2 seem to have the best chance at becoming basketball factories, though of course the publics may have some state hoops to jump through first. The third group can get players in but probably won't have the funding to pay them. Our group (theoretically) could pay them but probably doesn't want to and also may not admit them anyway.

 

[ur2K]

Got it - but how will schools that don't make a revenue from their sports, and I have to believe UR is in that group. Or if we do make a revenue -its not much, not enough to cover the cost to jump in this pool - like you stated. And I think this will become a cross-roads for UR, and just like they did with Soccer and Track - they didn't want to spend any extra money on athletics or dumb down the student pool with more athletes - then why all of a sudden would they say - sure, we will pay our athletes, and not only pay them - but pay them enough where we will can feel like we have a chance.

I will say - one slight advantage UR might have had in some recruiting battles was our strong academics. But that gets less and less, cause if your a kid choosing between UR, where maybe you have a good shot to play or feel better about your chances to get minutes - but you will not paid a whole lot, or you can go to NC State, where you might be the 9th-10th guy at best - but they are willing to pay you 150K a year to start (and more if you do get minutes) - is the degree really worth that much more if you can leave college not only debt free (athletic Scholarship), but maybe even with 400K-500K in your bank account?

GKiller - I totally agree, UR could pull this money from other sources. But they will not. We will get the woe is UR, small private school with limited enrollment and limited resources story. Even though we have a 3 billion endowment, which I know we can't use (or choose not to use at times) - but that 3 billion came from somewhere right? Donors?

Everyone makes revenue of some type (ticket sales, NCAA tournament shares, etc.), the question more likely should be framed as who makes a profit after expenses are factored in. Accounting in athletics is a mess anyway with no real standard and things like University contributions and student fees rolled into the "revenue". This is just giving schools a way to pay players directly.

 

[GKiller]

I will be extremely surprised if UR decides to participate in this “revenue sharing” model. It simply is not part of the University mission and vision for athletics (link below).

The University wants the best SCHOLAR athletes. It doesn’t want to be a basketball factory. The new “revenue sharing” model is not College Athletics at all. It is professional sports.

The only question I have is whether the A10 becomes a league where the majority of the teams are revenue sharing or whether it remains closer to the old collegiate model. Both tiers will exist.

Academic Services Mission - University of Richmond Athletics

A Strategic Plan for Spider Student-Athletes University of Richmond Athletics MISSION STATEMENT The University of Richmond's NCAA Division I Intercollegiate ...

richmondspiders.com

Opt in or participate? Personally I 100% expect us to opt in. Certainly the opt in & more should be asked to UR admin. But will we get information out of UR - no doubt it. You'll get nothing and like it! We'll get our standard philsophizing.

There is not much downside to opting into ncaa settlement. You forgoe some ncaa distributions for a bit - 140K next year per vcu article. That's only downside. U r not committing to paying anything in future to athletes. But it gives you the option. An opt out would just be admitting u r a non serious program.

So I see us opting in. What we do after that we'll see.

I don't like paying players but I dislike having a shitty bball program more.

 

[RichmondNative]

The A10 is an interesting league, because we have some very polar-opposite groups of schools:
1. Big state schools – VCU, Rhode Island, George Mason, UMass
2. Big private schools – SLU, GW, Dayton, Loyola
3. Small, mediocre academic schools – Bona, Duquesne, Lasalle, St. Joe's
4. Small, elite academic schools – Davidson, Fordham, Richmond

Groups 1 and 2 seem to have the best chance at becoming basketball factories, though of course the publics may have some state hoops to jump through first. The third group can get players in but probably won't have the funding to pay them. Our group (theoretically) could pay them but probably doesn't want to and also may not admit them anyway.

Thanks Eight Legger.

Good way to classify the teams and seems to suggest that the A10 has a good chance of shrinking to a smaller league with the pay to play model to me.

Umass is on the way out already, so one down. The Bonnies have gone the GM route so they seem interested in pay to play.

I could definitely see the group 4 teams deciding to opt out.

 

[RichmondNative]

Opt in or participate?

So I see us opting in. What we do after that we'll see.

My “opt in” means going to the paying players directly model as well as matching the payment amounts that have been suggested.

I concur that we are likely to see agreeing to the NCAA arrangement and then kicking the can down the road. Not making a decision seems to be the usual decision.

 

[SpiderGuy]

I guess lost in all this is that those on basketball scholarships are getting a fantastic education at UR which I believe is worth about 80k per year for students that live on campus and eat in the dining hall. I know that’ll get pushback. Wish my kid (exceptional academically) would have gotten that deal.

 

[SpiderTrap]

lets not forget too - the athletic budget for most schools will also increase next year with the increased scholarship limits in basically all sports. of course - its optional for each school as to how much they want to increase their scholarships, but hard to compete again, if you don't do it - and the schools around you, especially in own league - decide to.

 

[GKiller]

lets not forget too - the athletic budget for most schools will also increase next year with the increased scholarship limits in basically all sports. of course - its optional for each school as to how much they want to increase their scholarships, but hard to compete again, if you don't do it - and the schools around you, especially in own league - decide to.

From what I gather big schools r not doing that. Yet. Why? Because any new ships count towards the total they can pay players. So rather than take on those costs for end of roster guys they’d rather use the $ to pay & get/keep the better players.

Of course that can all change quickly who knows.

 

[SpiderTrap]

I just have a hard time believing UR will pay its athletes or pay them enough to be on the level of teams in our conference (Dayton, VCU, St. Louis, maybe even the Bonnies at this point) - if just a few years ago, the school didn't want to spend the money to keep soccer and track. With the main reasons being - they we didn't have the money to keep those sports and add women's sports and they didn't want to dumb down the student pool with more athletes. Yet - now they will gladly hand over 100K-200K to a student-athlete as spending money???