Jake
Mod
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2011
- Messages
- 10,097
- Like
- 76,497
Critical for smaller private schools competing against st land grant and SEC schools.
New Fundraising Campaign Launched - Champion CUSE
- Thread starter richmondcuse03
- Start date
kingtidge
All American
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Messages
- 5,893
- Like
- 12,797
That's what I did with Orange United.
I held out allocating any of the my donation to basketball - it all went to football.
I was using this year as a litmus test and see if I change the allocation and earmark some of it for basketball, but decided no, I won't, until Red has been replaced... all stays with football for now.
Fly Rodder
Hall of Pretty Good
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 11,206
- Like
- 34,016
If I want to light money on fire, I'll do it at my house and at least enjoy the warmth.
phil77
BC Prophet
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2011
- Messages
- 10,169
- Like
- 26,308
I did give monthly to both football and basketball but early in the year I canceled the basketball monthly donation and doubled football. Won't start basketball again until they give me a product to believe in just as I didn't start football until they gave me a product to believe in.
Toga
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 31,007
- Like
- 73,287
So let's say a big-time school has an NIL of about $15M and add to that $20.5M for a total of $35.5M. Let's say our past NIL was $5M. Add $20.5M equals $25.5M. on a ratio comparative basis we would be closer overall to the big-time program than we had been (I just plugged some figures in so I could make the point). Make sense?
gmoney44
All Conference
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,749
- Like
- 7,199
I just can’t see how SU competes in all sports if this trend continues. I feel like when the inevitable wheels fall off the ACC SU will have to ditch football and go all in on basketball in the Big East. It pains me to say because SU football was my first true love.
kingtidge
All American
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Messages
- 5,893
- Like
- 12,797
Yeah, the stratification is gonna change... from a funding perspective, there will be the BIG BOYS and then a lot more of what we'd today consider "Mid-majors" when all is said and done.
There are a bunch of schools in conferences with the BIG BOYS currently that will essentially be mid-majors when all is said and done.
We probably fall into that category if we're being honest.
How that all shakes out from a conferences perspective is anyone's guess, but a big realignment is coming.
My understanding and some of the main concepts on how this will all look in the future from different conversations with people I trust on this in no specific order:
As some said in this thread, booster fatigue is a very real concern and fairly uniform for schools across the country. You can only keep asking people for money so many times before it strains the relationship. Many schools view the $20M revenue share set up as a positive.
As predicted, schools don’t like competing with their athletes for booster dollars and would prefer to have everything brought back in house.
Schools will very likely start to detach from current NIL collectives. There are some that already have done so.
NIL will probably be more constricted moving forward and be actual NIL not pay for play like we see now.
I can’t remember the exacts but all NIL deals I think will be run through an actual clearinghouse process where they’ll use a third party major accounting firm to assess the terms of each NIL agreement. Maybe Deloitte?
The first one to be denied will sue and then that’s where we see how things will go. It’s much different suing a toothless NCAA as opposed to suing a reputable firm with plenty of experience in the valuation space and reputation risk at stake.
Overall, there will still be big gaps between the haves and have nots. The blue blood football programs will still be able to leverage their fan base and program notoriety to offer bigger actual endorsement and NIL opportunities, but it won’t be as much of a free for all moving forward.
As some said in this thread, booster fatigue is a very real concern and fairly uniform for schools across the country. You can only keep asking people for money so many times before it strains the relationship. Many schools view the $20M revenue share set up as a positive.
As predicted, schools don’t like competing with their athletes for booster dollars and would prefer to have everything brought back in house.
Schools will very likely start to detach from current NIL collectives. There are some that already have done so.
NIL will probably be more constricted moving forward and be actual NIL not pay for play like we see now.
I can’t remember the exacts but all NIL deals I think will be run through an actual clearinghouse process where they’ll use a third party major accounting firm to assess the terms of each NIL agreement. Maybe Deloitte?
The first one to be denied will sue and then that’s where we see how things will go. It’s much different suing a toothless NCAA as opposed to suing a reputable firm with plenty of experience in the valuation space and reputation risk at stake.
Overall, there will still be big gaps between the haves and have nots. The blue blood football programs will still be able to leverage their fan base and program notoriety to offer bigger actual endorsement and NIL opportunities, but it won’t be as much of a free for all moving forward.
BomberOrange
2019-20 Iggy Co-Winner Reg Season Rcd
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2011
- Messages
- 2,348
- Like
- 4,684
This money should go to football and men’s hoops only.
hoopsupstate
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 14,341
- Like
- 33,707
I believe I was told there is a minimum of 16 sports teams that schools have to have in order to be a power 4 or ACC member.
I just did a round of donations myself with this new campaign. I gave to football and women’s basketball. I want to wait for this offseason on men’s basketball. There is just way too much uncertainty with the program right now. Again, I will reevaluate in a months time based on end of season communication and messaging about the future of what we’re trying to do. Why I made it a priority to give to women’s basketball? I love our coach and the program she runs, we play hard, and the sport is the fastest growing in the country. FLJ is going against so many headwinds with the money in that sport more than I think Autry is on the men’s side. I truly believe that our struggles this year on that side is talent deficiencies. They deserve support for so many reasons. I am willing to give support to both basketball programs, but I can see the light more with the women’s side at the moment.
CuseLegacy
Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 97,664
- Like
- 157,100
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2011
- Messages
- 98,410
- Like
- 196,886
They are two different things.
richmondcuse03
All American
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 5,031
- Like
- 22,620
Agree. That's the key point. I'll be doing my part, too.
Here's my take having been known about this for a bit.
1) This signals SU is willing to play at the almost big boys table. Outside of the top 20-25 programs, most will be spending this amount (based on what SU knows).
2) Not all of the $20.5M will come from donors. I understand the BoT/Admin side has committed their own funding too. That's a drastic change from the past. Obviously the more we raise, the better off we are and will help. But the notion that this all falls on fans is completely wrong. The school is contributing revenue. The more we raise, the more we'll be able to funnel money to collectives on top of the $20.5M.
3) Having this centralized helps the school reward donors, who also, by the way, get a tax deduction. Doing it through the school is key. Doing it through a collective is bad if you care about deductions. Most donors are in the tax brackets where deductions help them contribute more. And having it centralized means the school can also credit donors with the money they contributed to a collection before. All fans who chip in should get some form of recognition and this campaign helps them do it.
The school should announce how much they are contributing (if they haven't already). I don't think people trust they are holding up their end.
That will never happen, nor should it. It will be interesting to see what the criteria will be when the $$ are allocated. I know team success will probably not be in the equation, but if it were that would add an interesting dimension to this mess.
Fly Rodder
Hall of Pretty Good
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 11,206
- Like
- 34,016
Fly Rodder
Hall of Pretty Good
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 11,206
- Like
- 34,016
I should hope so since the bulk of the argument that led to this was the NCAA and schools exploiting revenue athletics to pad their bottom line.
If the NCAA and schools hadn't been so greedy over 70 years there probably wouldn't have been the need for such a massive lawsuit.
It’s advertised as a grassroots campaign. So hopefully they have marketing materials ready to go to show how far the volume of fans donating just a small amount can make a huge difference.
BomberOrange
2019-20 Iggy Co-Winner Reg Season Rcd
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2011
- Messages
- 2,348
- Like
- 4,684
It should go to revenue generating sports. You think the competition will be giving this to non-revenue sports?? I mean sure allocate a small percentage to non revenue sports but let’s not forget who drives the bus. This isn’t about equality, it’s about who makes $$
Known revenue generators: Football and Men’s Basketball
Possible Revenue Generators: Women’s Basketball and Men’s Lacrosse
Quite frankly the teams who’s home is the JMA Dome is where investment needs to be going too. This is random, but they should look into having a women’s volleyball game in the dome next season and market the heck out of it to draw a huge crowd with national eyes. I feel that these are the programs that can generate the most interest and revenue long term. We have a unique building that besides football can have absurd attendance number for their respective sport if it’s funded at a championship contender level.
They have done a poor job of connecting with the mid to low level donors. Would like to see some innovation there
Similar threads
