I think WBB splits the cost of Hilton and the practice facility with MBB, which is fair, but if WBB went away all that cost would just be put on the MBB side.
Williams & Blum: Recapping a crazy 10 days
- Thread starter Aiden Wyatt
- Start date
Why is Campbell driving the bus or negatively impacted by cutting costs of non-revenue sports?
Staying competitive in non-revenue sports should NOT be on the table. And shouldn’t have for at least 15 years. That’s both operating costs and infrastructure.
Gut the non-revenue, cutting two sports or male scholarships in non-revenue sports if needed.
Delay any infrastructure costs that aren’t for facilitating revenue generation, which for the most part they have.
Be political and get the views on how the state, and State, support college athletics. But being charismatic and swaying others isn’t exactly a strength of JP. He’s not that kind of leader.
Borrow against the future. I mean, does anyone really think the Iowa AD is going to pay off all of their liabilities?
Last edited:
How does Women's T&F/XC have that much additional revenue vs. Men's T&F/XC?
Are we sure anything is really “settled law” right now?It's not the NCAA that would sue. It's the Federal Government
Some of this smells like creative accounting to manufacture a specific bottom line. Not calling out you, Messi, but the AD could explain this better. For example I'm skeptical that Swimming (a couple home meets each year, zero broadcasts, free admission) has 2.5x the revenue of Volleyball (a dozen home matches per year, several broadcast, ticketed event, concessions, etc).
when ISU hosts home meets (college and HS) i believe the womens program is credited with the revenue for said meets even though both genders host
Because if you cut all support staff, who else is on the payroll to drive the bus?
I'm all for cutting what we can to fully fund the athlete revenue sharing, but I highly doubt it's as simple as cut all except MBB & Football and we'll be there. You can't just say "cut everything!!" - that's not a real plan. Not that I have one either, but don't act like it's so simple.
Whatever happens, there have to be dramatic changes. My personal hope would have been coaches taking a paycut across the board. But that can't happen since it's a separate budget and the rich schools will still pay. Maybe they can't pay huge buyouts anymore but they can still pay huge contracts.
It would certainly hurt TV revenue if Iowa State was competing in a 2nd tier division of college sport. But at the same time it would force schools to right-size their athletic budgets to match the new level of TV revenue.
Maybe football/basketball coaches in the Big12 would only make $1M annually. Football and basketball teams would limit the number of assistants/analysts. Teams would cut back on expensive road trips. Facility investment would be backed off. And athletic department overhead expenses would have to be cut way back.
It might also cause conferences like the Big12 to explore taking media in house and cut out for profit entities like ESPN, FOX, etc. With technology today, it's not like broadcasting games to the masses is difficult. Heck I have Roku apps for IHSSN, CISN and WHOTV+ that I have all watched sports with solid viewing quality.
I’ve seen that WBB loses about 4-5mil a year several times on here.
Does anyone know or have seen a number about how much NIL money they eat up?
Imagine that isn’t a small number after paying to keep Crooks and Addy, plus adding the transfer from Arizona.
Does anyone know or have seen a number about how much NIL money they eat up?
Imagine that isn’t a small number after paying to keep Crooks and Addy, plus adding the transfer from Arizona.
We will see a big hit to football recruiting imo.
Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska and Wisconsin will have that money.
Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska and Wisconsin will have that money.
IMO Title IX will survive because of the academic nature of the law.
More than likely, if athletes become employees, the universities would spin-off all or some athletic teams into a separate legal entity to avoid potential future legal liabilities that universities and states could face.
I think University Presidents would face the obvious conclusion, their CORE MISSION is to educate 18-22yo and not run a minor league sport franchise.
We're not competing against them for most of our prospects anyway. Look at the 4* players we have recruited out of high school. Becht is from Florida. Purdy Arizona. Not many from the Midwest.
I haven't seen anything for ISU.
But I've read where schools are contemplating splitting the $20M according to this general split:
- FB - 75%
- MBB - 15%
- WBB - 5%
- All Other - 5%
I imagine it would be like banks not having to report deposits of under $10K. A bunch of $9K deposits would standout IF someone is investigated for tax evasion, fraud, money laundering, etc... You have one of the best players in the country not reporting perceived value and an investigation would be started.
Actually, on the podcast they were saying the $600 was a cap on what you could make in individual deals before the clearing house would need to arbitrate if it's fair market value?
Again with these false dichotomies.
Gutting the non-revenue does not mean cutting the support staff for things like someone driving the football bus, which is undoubtedly already under the football expenses
If we’re truly spending that much on things like WBB, then either Pollard has done an awful job splurging on non-revenue sports, or it is that simple
This isn’t a new problem. He’s been spending too much on non-revenue for at least 15 years, when it became apparent that college athletics was changing.
Although retention in football may decrease, basketball is the real risk of suffering hierarchy changes
Disagree wholeheartedly. Majority of these schools already have more money than us, and recruiting hasnt suffered
