Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

We Will or CGC?

Cyclad said:
I think your numbers are reasonably accurate. I think you are low on the dollars in NIL for the big boys. Our goal is $2M, but we are far short of that, so your estimate seems correct. Iowa expects to get to $20M, which would put them in the top 30, as I understand it. I would not be surprised that the big dogs are $50m. Ohio State plans $12M just for football.
Click to expand...
ya.. i have not kept up with recent numbers for NIL.. I think people were estimating around 20M for the top collectives this summer... but I am sure they have gone up from there...

My main point, whether it's 10M, 20M or 50M, our 1M - 2M is far behind. When we compare Athletic Dept Rev gaps to NIL gaps, it is pretty clear we are further behind on NIL.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: State2015 and Cyclad
cymonw1980 said:
ya.. i have not kept up with recent numbers for NIL.. I think people were estimating around 20M for the top collectives this summer... but I am sure they have gone up from there...

My main point, whether it's 10M, 20M or 50M, our 1M - 2M is far behind. When we compare Athletic Dept Rev gaps to NIL gaps, it is pretty clear we are further behind on NIL.
Click to expand...
Yes sir ( or madam)

Just some perspective, I believe Texas Tech announced that all athletes in all sports will get $25K. They have 400+ athletes / thats $10M.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: cymonw1980
Cyclad said:
Yes sir ( or madam)

Just some perspective, I believe Texas Tech announced that all athletes in all sports will get $25K. They have 400+ athletes / thats $10M.
Click to expand...
If we get to 10M, I would rather have that focused on players getting offers to go elsewhere than distributed evenly. I am sure some of their top players will get more. But just think the challenge going forward is holding on to the Breece Hall and Monte Morris type of talent when you get them… who knows? Maybe just to sign a class that has that level of talent you will need to pay 25k per player… I guess we will see.
 
cymonw1980 said:
My recommendation is to donate to We Will.

The reality (in my opinion) is that coaches and facilities are key components, but now, the ability to make money on NIL is becoming more and more important.

Currently, the ISU athletics budget is around $100M. Sure this is not as much as other schools, but we have slowly moved up the rankings and started to narrow the gap a bit. As of 2019* we were within 30M - 40M of the top 20-25 schools (teams like Nebbie, Clemson, Washington). This is still a significant gap, but we are competitive (within 30% - 40% of their revenue) and have been gaining ground.

What money do we have in the collective? I am not sure.. but I would guess we likely have $1M or less. Competitive levels are estimated to be in $10M range, top schools are 20M+. So, percentage wise, we may be 90% behind the top 20-25 (estimate) and our athletic budget (which currently cannot be used to pay players) is within 30% to 40% of of the top 25.

Basically, I think we are over indexed on athletic department revenue and not enough NIL money. Since the university cannot move funds to NIL, it is up to us.

That is just my 2 cents.


Note on 2019 Revenue Data:
*2019 is the last year I have "clean" data for all the schools. The 2020 season is an outlier since there were huge differences in how conferences addressed this from media payouts to ticket sales, etc. So, not a good comparison. The 2021, and 2022 seasons should be cleaner data when available.
Click to expand...
You need to factor in how many sports ISU supports.
 
GoldCy said:
You need to factor in how many sports ISU supports.
Click to expand...
In terms of overall budget compare, yes.... but in terms of where we need money the % gaps are fine.

My point was that we are further behind on NIL (significantly) than we are on athletic revenue overall. That is very clear in the numbers and is not changed based on number of sports.

If you want to do a detailed budget compare between ISU and schools that have sports like Baseball and Field Hockey, etc. ... that is fine. But that is a small percent of the overall revenue / expense. The vast majority of rev/exp is driven by Football. After that, MBB is a distant second. Everything else is relatively small. So, maybe 10% of the budget is saved by not having a handful of sports other universities support... But 1) That doesn't make up the full gap, and 2) we are still much further behind on NIL than overall budget.
 
cymonw1980 said:
If we get to 10M, I would rather have that focused on players getting offers to go elsewhere than distributed evenly. I am sure some of their top players will get more. But just think the challenge going forward is holding on to the Breece Hall and Monte Morris type of talent when you get them… who knows? Maybe just to sign a class that has that level of talent you will need to pay 25k per player… I guess we will see.
Click to expand...
Clearly understand your point.
Certainly that must be our strategy now - use what $ we have to try to keep our highest value players. Maybe it always should be.
I think the argument for everybody getting the same is locker room harmony.
Gender equity could possibly come into play in the future. Hence TT giving the same to all athletes.
Opinion - we will never remotely approach $10M.
 
Cyclad said:
Clearly understand your point.
Certainly that must be our strategy now - use what $ we have to try to keep our highest value players. Maybe it always should be.
I think the argument for everybody getting the same is locker room harmony.
Gender equity could possibly come into play in the future. Hence TT giving the same to all athletes.
Opinion - we will never remotely approach $10M.
Click to expand...

depends... what does the athletic dept value more? facilities or players? what do the coaches value more? I think you could make the case that going forward NIL money will be more important than facility money. Facilities were key because they helped bring in recruits. I am not saying they won't be important in the future, but I think how much you can pay an athlete will start to become more important than having a barbershop in your football complex...

ISU's athletic dept was bringing in about $20M in donations the last several years. This year they are expecting about $30M. Not all of those donors will be willing to switch from athletic department contributions to NIL contributions (many of those donations are tied to ticket tiers, etc.). But some portion of them would. If coaches and AD determine paying players is most important to remain competitive, I absolutely think they can convince some of the top donors to switch funds to We Will.

But, it just depends, what do they view as most important to overall success? NIL or Facilities? Right now, I don't think they will encourage donors to switch. But that could change in the future.
 
cymonw1980 said:
depends... what does the athletic dept value more? facilities or players? what do the coaches value more? I think you could make the case that going forward NIL money will be more important than facility money. Facilities were key because they helped bring in recruits. I am not saying they won't be important in the future, but I think how much you can pay an athlete will start to become more important than having a barbershop in your football complex...

ISU's athletic dept was bringing in about $20M in donations the last several years. This year they are expecting about $30M. Not all of those donors will be willing to switch from athletic department contributions to NIL contributions (many of those donations are tied to ticket tiers, etc.). But some portion of them would. If coaches and AD determine paying players is most important to remain competitive, I absolutely think they can convince some of the top donors to switch funds to We Will.

But, it just depends, what do they view as most important to overall success? NIL or Facilities? Right now, I don't think they will encourage donors to switch. But that could change in the future.
Click to expand...
Very solid points. I do not disagree at all.
Redistributing funds is certainly possible / although you mentioned some of the tricky parts to doing that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cymonw1980
Gunnerclone said:
Click to expand...

I figured this would happen. Also when a player doesn't perform how a big donor hopes, those donations will go down.

Eventually, we will be back to where we always were except money is paid legit now instead of under the table. I dont see our place in the pecking order changing that much.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Gunnerclone
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom