How are you feeling right now about the team and program?

I really see the problem the more I read this thread. People really want to think the amount a person gets in NIL is somehow related to their performance.
 
share the ball said:
VCU Athletics requires a $25 million dollar subsidy to break even (2023 financial statements) - VCU is not making money by fielding intercollegiate athletic teams - so I am not sure your view of the tons of money athletes bring in is accurate at VCU (P5 football heck yes)

as an example VCU women's basketball lost over $4.3 million (i.e expenditures exceeded revenues) last year (year ended 6/30/23 per Auditor of Public Accounts report) - doesn't even include the costs of any of the facilities they use or allocations of admin expenses etc

VCU has one sport and one sport ONLY that generates more revenue than they spend annually (before any allocations of expenses for facilities, debt and admin costs) YUP men's basketball

Maybe we should ask those athletes in the other 15 teams or so to pay for those deficits (yeah I am being tongue in cheek here)

P5s are the only ones making money for the most part and they make it primarily in Mens football and basketball

I have said it before that the best solution for mid major schools etc, is to free them of the obligations to field 14 -16 or more intercollegiate teams to play at the D1 level - Let schools decide how many or how few sports they want to play intercollegiately as long as they comply with Title IX

right now the NCAA sets the mininmum level and some conferences require more

go VCU
Click to expand...
So why do we keep so many programs by funding them and why don’t we axe some? (I’m not trying to be confrontational or derogatory to any sport. To me it’s simple: no margin no mission. Make money, or at least don’t lose it— perhaps find a sugar daddy— or turn it into a club sport of volunteers),
 
RamJamFan said:
So why do we keep so many programs by funding them and why don’t we axe some? (I’m not trying to be confrontational or derogatory to any sport. To me it’s simple: no margin no mission. Make money, or at least don’t lose it— perhaps find a sugar daddy— or turn it into a club sport of volunteers),
Click to expand...
Well here's the question.... How many Sports Teams at VCU out side of MBB "breakeven" or bring in profit to VCU?

Then you gotta factor in Title IX.... so however many scholarships the men have through all their sports... you have to give the same amount of scholarships to the women.

Also.... isn't there a certain amount of sports required for a school to be Division 1?
 
Wolfpack Ram said:
Shedeur Sanders made more NIL money last year than any other college football player, and what has he won? Colorado wnet 4-8. He got 90% of that NIL money after beating TCU the first game of the season and Colorado was a bust after that. If his last name isn't Sanders and his dad isn't his coach, he's lucky to get $1 million.
Click to expand...
You’re right. This year had so many incredible quarterbacks. Shedeur is bad.
 
I’d like to see an NIL deal with performance-based incentives. The higher your +-, the bigger your take-home. Team wins a tournament game? All scholarship players get an extra 30k.

That would be entertaining.
 
I think a lot of schools actually lose money on their athletic programs. But by having the programs, it's an enticement to get students to apply.....many students want to go to a school with athletic programs. So athletic programs are a big recruitment tool ....for non-athlete students. So the money they lose on their athletic program vs student recruitment, alumni donations to the general fund, booster donations, school advertisement and sponsors benefit the school more than not having the athletic programs.
 
WillWeaverRVA said:
12 - at least 6 men's sports and at least 6 women's sports.
Click to expand...
from an NCAA website

To be a Division I member, FBS schools must sponsor a minimum of 16 sports, and FCS and Division I Subdivision schools must sponsor a minimum of 14 sports.

I believe VCU is considered a Division 1 Subdivision school

conferences are allowed to set even more rigourous requirements
 
Last edited:
SPI-DA1 said:
I respectfully disagree. These athletes bring in tons of money to schools via tickets sales, merchandise, tv exposure, tournament money,etc. I can tell you as an ex-athlete, you don’t have time to work therefore, what’s wrong with them getting a piece of the pie? Yeah you get a free education but even a regular student needs money. I am a old dude and I can say I wish it were around during my days.
Click to expand...
I think MBB devours every penny it brings in.
Scholarships, Stipends,exclusive dorms, dining, practice facility, game venue, set up/ break down of the Stu, staff, trainers, Chartered travel, Recruiting, Buy games, coaching salaries, equipment, marketing costs (billboards)... Its an exhaustive list of expenditures.
I dont think donations, ticket sales, the A10 TV package and NCAA revenue covers all the expenses. If it does, it is very tight. VCU spends a poop load on MBB. These athletes do not realize that if the money they generate goes in there pockets, then where will we get the money for all the regular expenses and other perks? To a certain degree there will be a trade off with less extravagant extras but more cash in their pockets. I think these companies "investing" in NIL and hoping for a return on their spend, are going to be sorely disappointed. I don't think anyone is going to spend significantly more at certain places because a VCU athlete is affiliated with the company. I advertised with VCU and I never saw any business revenue correlate with the VCU ad spend.
 
rambunctiousrowdyram said:
Players would revolt. Players don’t want to pay anything and simply want to collect. That fact is why so many players are unprepared for real life as far as financial decisions and responsibility. When you don’t learn financial responsibility more often than not you learn it the hard way. Players are not gonna roll with any salary where they have to pay for things. Not in an era where they demand more money or will walk out. You tell the players to pay for their stuff and they’ll tell you to GFY.
Click to expand...
This is a Pandora's box the student athletes are opening. If the courts are pushed to rule these athletes are employees and are entitled to salary, health insurance, unions/ collective bargaining, retirement... just as other employees. The other employees will say its unfair to give them a benefit package like free tuition, books, and extra perks. There will be transparency and some level of consistency will be enforced if they become employees of a public body (which is where it appears to be headed).
You are spot on with many of the SA's not understanding the full financial ramifications of what may play out. As much as the schools like to thump their chest about how well prepared their student athletes are when they graduate and the NCAA bragging about graduation metrics. I think for the most part all the schools have done is lower the bar for graduation requirements and turn loose a bunch of former college basketball/ football players into the world. I think that is wrong and the schools should be graded for life/ career outcomes of these SA's at 5, 10 and 20 years after college -not just tracking graduating in 5 years.
 
BradRamFan said:
I think a lot of schools actually lose money on their athletic programs. But by having the programs, it's an enticement to get students to apply.....many students want to go to a school with athletic programs. So athletic programs are a big recruitment tool ....for non-athlete students. So the money they lose on their athletic program vs student recruitment, alumni donations to the general fund, booster donations, school advertisement and sponsors benefit the school more than not having the athletic programs.
Click to expand...
And that's the issue in a nutshell. College athletics wasn't created to make money nor was it ever expected to break-even financially. I has always been subsidized. It's when big money got injected into the equation and schools/NCAA recognized a lot of coin could be made in college sports, that's when stuff got thrown off (i.e. paying athletes, gambling scandals, conference musical chairs, etc.). So I agree, college sports exists for reasons beyond making money.

And you're right, there are a ton of residual income and benefits to the institutions from college athletics. The amount of advertising and publicity VCU received (and continues to receive) from the final four appearance probably can't be monetized to accurately calculate its value. The Siegel Center (a multipurpose venue used for a ton of activities) doesn't get built without a basketball team. Without basketball how many potential students would even know about VCU outside of Virginia? And yes, having a robust array of non revenue generating intercollegiate sports greatly enhances the university experience.
 
rambunctiousrowdyram said:
Players would revolt. Players don’t want to pay anything and simply want to collect. That fact is why so many players are unprepared for real life as far as financial decisions and responsibility. When you don’t learn financial responsibility more often than not you learn it the hard way. Players are not gonna roll with any salary where they have to pay for things. Not in an era where they demand more money or will walk out. You tell the players to pay for their stuff and they’ll tell you to GFY.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but this is one of the strangest comments posted on this thread (trying to be diplomatic).

It is actually the exact opposite. Real life is about those with rare abilities get paid, get privileges, get opportunities us average people don't get or have to work ultra hard to match. Would you say the top engineering students in the country who will have a boatload of full ride scholarship opportunities thrown at them, who will be provided with paid summer internships and will have multiple high paying job offers lined up for them before even graduating, are they ill prepared for real life?

What's the difference between them and athletes? Both were blessed with gifts most of us weren't (one intellectual the other physical). Both had to work hard to cultivate their gifts to put themselves in a position have opportunities offered to them. Either will likely have to worry about "financial responsibility" through college.

So is it only athletes this applies to and if so, why?
 
I believe in getting an education. That is paramount. The reality that we are faced with is things have evolved. I am just playing devils advocate when I say this…As a student athlete who came from a poor background having the prospect of having money in your pocket is something these kids are going to consider. When you are dead broke your whole life the money is a draw. I am not saying it is always right. As I said I believe in having an education. But I can see why they would take NIL money that they help create.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top