Potential 2025 Roster / Staff / Portals [Updated 2/25/25]

[kcsu]

How good is this. What a nice and kind person. He brought DART with him from home. Any chance we sponsor him?

 

[Moontan]

Interesting, as I'd not heard of Brewable before and I live in his hood.

 

[cayugacuse]

Shout out to AJ Miller as well. Hope he doesn't get squeezed out with the new projected roster limit changes.

 

[orangemass]

Shout out to AJ Miller as well. Hope he doesn't get squeezed out with the new projected roster limit changes.

I’m afraid most of the walkons will. No way the numbers work out. Almost at 105 with the scholarship players

 

[richmondcuse03]

I’m afraid most of the walkons will. No way the numbers work out. Almost at 105 with the scholarship players

are we all of a sudden going to have a lot of "student managers" that compete in practice but never dress?

 

[orangemass]

are we all of a sudden going to have a lot of "student managers" that compete in practice but never dress?

Good question. Not sure what the plan is. But will be an issue everywhere I presume

 

[SUDadx2]

Good question. Not sure what the plan is. But will be an issue everywhere I presume

It is going to be a bigger issue at some schools more than others. Not everyone is bringing in 42 new players: 35 high school guys and 7 transfers.

If approved, the new rules will have a 105 players roster limit. No longer a limit of 85 scholarships and as many walk-ons as you can afford.

Right now, I'm counting approximately 103 players on campus: 81 scholarship players and 22 walk-ons. All good and dandy for now. But... I also see approximately 24 more guys who have committed to Syracuse and should be enrolling in the summer. My numbers are not perfect, but that's 127 players in a system that could be limited to 105 if the proposed rules get passed.

Are we really going to cut lose all of the current walk-ons? I believe Runyon who played in 11 games last year is a walk-on. And Kubala, who played in 12 games (primarily on special teams) is also a walk-on. fullback last year. And didn't we just bring in another walk-on this semester, Jackson Iak (OL)? And do we have a long-snapper who is on scholarship?

Of course, there is the spring transfer portal from April 16 - April 25 where we could lose players. But we may also see the spring transfer portal window as an opportunity to add a quality player or two if such a player were to present themselves.

IF the proposed rules do not pass, we will not have a problem with the overall roster size, but we will have approximately 105 scholarship guys where the current (old) rules only allow for 85 scholarship players on the roster at any given time.

I'm pretty sure Coach Fran believes the proposed rules changes will pass, and we will be allowed to carry as many as 105 scholarship players or why would he offer so many high school players a scholarship this year? If the rules don't change, what happens to the 20 or so young men to whom you've offered a scholarship?

If players realize the situation, they're in, this could be a very interesting spring.

 

[kingtidge]

Of course, there is the spring transfer portal from April 16 - April 25 where we could lose players. But we may also see the spring transfer portal window as an opportunity to add a quality player or two if such a player were to present themselves.

If players realize the situation, they're in, this could be a very interesting spring.

With the two recent development funding hires in the AD, I expect we are (hopefully) aggressively ramping up funding efforts and squaring away the new $20.5 mill coffers.

Also, I'd expect that the first chunk of that will be in play for the Spring transfer window 4/16 - 4/25/25.

I am guessing that a lot of schools are doing the same and targeting that window for their first real outlay on funding.

I'd also guess it will be a competitive window and there will be a fair amount of player movement.

I know a bunch of people had mentioned they were worried that previous portal window incomings seemed really light.

I am hoping we make up for that in the Spring window.

 

[hoopsupstate]

With the two recent development funding hires in the AD, I expect we are (hopefully) aggressively ramping up funding efforts and squaring away the new $20.5 mill coffers.

Also, I'd expect that the first chunk of that will be in play for the Spring transfer window 4/16 - 4/25/25.

I am guessing that a lot of schools are doing the same and targeting that window for their first real outlay on funding.

I'd also guess it will be a competitive window and there will be a fair amount of player movement.

I know a bunch of people had mentioned they were worried that previous portal window incomings seemed really light.

I am hoping we make up for that in the Spring window.

A bunch will have to leave if they plan to pick up anyone from the portal.

 

[kingtidge]

A bunch will have to leave if they plan to pick up anyone from the portal.

Yeah, I am think there could be fran talks and another wave of exits during spring window... or not, and we are just gonna roll with it and focus on retention.

We need some pickups tho...

 

[OrangeXtreme]

No more walk-ons in college sports? Jim Boeheim’s relative worries about spot with Syracuse football

Adam Boeheim is a member of the football team and could lose his spot as a walk-on if the NCAA settlement is approved in April.

www.syracuse.com

 

[SUDadx2]

With the two recent development funding hires in the AD, I expect we are (hopefully) aggressively ramping up funding efforts and squaring away the new $20.5 mill coffers.

Also, I'd expect that the first chunk of that will be in play for the Spring transfer window 4/16 - 4/25/25.

I am guessing that a lot of schools are doing the same and targeting that window for their first real outlay on funding.

I'd also guess it will be a competitive window and there will be a fair amount of player movement.

I know a bunch of people had mentioned they were worried that previous portal window incomings seemed really light.

I am hoping we make up for that in the Spring window.

I would expect the first chunk of the "new" money* will be used for retention of quality players currently on the roster.

Recruiting never stops these days. You spend a couple of years identifying talent early, then you recruit said talent until they agree to come to your school, then you spend the next few years continuing to recruit the same young men and fighting off poachers.

With regards to the spring transfer window, 4/16 - 4/25, I suspect we will use it to

• Address roster weak spots revealed during spring ball. Not for depth but focused on players they believe can immediately contribute. Yes, this type of player will need $$ to land.
• Move underperforming players off the roster to fit the anticipated roster caps for 2025.
  • Saying goodbye to former walk-ons?
  • Encouraging current scholarship players to move on?
    • It is possible some of the early enrollees could find themselves having "the talk".

No one is safe.

• Projected starters could leave for the promise of more $$ or more playing time.
• Guys in the two-deep could become targets of other programs with a need; their projected starter gets injured in spring, so they go "shopping" for a replacement in the sprig transfer window.
• Young players will be trying to prove they belong.
• Former walk-ons will be fighting to establish their value to the program and find a place to contribute.

It should be a very competitive spring. By all accounts it already is. Guys have been working hard in the weight room since they returned to campus in mid-January. MAT drills started this week, and guys were flying around outside before dawn with temperatures in the 20's and their head coach wearing shorts.


* An unknown is how much if the proposed $20-$22 million will go to football, and how much will go to other sports. IMO, if it is considered revenue sharing, then is should be disbursed based on which programs produce revenue. This can be adjusted year to year based on the success of each program (a three-year average of the generated revenue).

• If football gets to the playoffs or goes to a bigger bowl, more money.
• If MBB goes to the tournament and does well, they could get more money for the program.

How much do you think women's softball will get? How much revenue does each sport generate annually? I haven't seen any data regarding this subject in years. Does anyone know where we might find this data?


**The biggest way to grow your NIL for players will be thru corporate sponsorships, paying players to represent a product. That money is separate from the $20-$22 mil for revenue sharing. If you want a stud payer, get the player a corporate deal for print advertising or a commercial. Local car dealerships pay, but a national brand pays significantly more.

 

[hoopsupstate]

I‘m only guessing, but having listend to the collective guy at Texas Tech, he xpects the breakdown to be along the lines of $13-14 million for football, $4-5 million to men’s basketball, $2 million to women’s basketball and the rest divided up to other sports. I have to think lacrosse should get a significant piece of the pie. It might depend on how much the business community pitches in to keep all teams competitive.

 

[SUDadx2]

I‘m only guessing, but having listend to the collective guy at Texas Tech, he xpects the breakdown to be along the lines of $13-14 million for football, $4-5 million to men’s basketball, $2 million to women’s basketball and the rest divided up to other sports. I have to think lacrosse should get a significant piece of the pie. It might depend on how much the business community pitches in to keep all teams competitive.

I don't know how Syracuse intends to share the revenue, but if it is true revenue sharing between the school and the players (not revenue sharing between teams) then shouldn't distribution of revenue or size of your piece of the pie be based on which programs generate the most revenue or make the most pie?

Football has a ton of overhead but also brings in the most money. What's the bottom line? How much true revenue does each sport generate (revenue minus expenses)?

This shows the numbers Syracuse reported for the 2022-2023 year; Equity in Athletics

Thus, it should include revenue generated by the National Champion Men's Soccer team.

The football program (+$30.8 mil) and the men's basketball program (+$10.9 mil) were the only two programs where revenue generated exceeded the program's expenses. WBB -$3.4 mil, all other men's sports -$3.9 mil, all other women's sports -$8.3 mil.

How does a program expect to "share" revenue when the program is not generating true revenue for the university?

I know we have a very strong men's lacrosse team this year. What will it take for this team to generate revenue for the university? Three homes games so far and they're averaging 4,400 in attendance. I hope they win a national championship. But why would men's lacrosse get a significant piece of the pie?

 

[Cuse4455]

To be fair one lacrosse game was on a Friday at 6, and the other was Monday at 5. Cuse fans no matter the sport tend to only go to the games that are later in the day 7-730.
Men's lacrosse should be just below football and mbb, but that's just my opinion.

 

[upperdeck]

how many people would attend any of the other sports if tickets were $25-200 a pop.

 

[Comstock44]

What’s the latest on Zeed Haynes? Is he coming back?

 

[richmondcuse03]

I don't know how Syracuse intends to share the revenue, but if it is true revenue sharing between the school and the players (not revenue sharing between teams) then shouldn't distribution of revenue or size of your piece of the pie be based on which programs generate the most revenue or make the most pie?

Football has a ton of overhead but also brings in the most money. What's the bottom line? How much true revenue does each sport generate (revenue minus expenses)?

This shows the numbers Syracuse reported for the 2022-2023 year; Equity in Athletics

Thus, it should include revenue generated by the National Champion Men's Soccer team.

The football program (+$30.8 mil) and the men's basketball program (+$10.9 mil) were the only two programs where revenue generated exceeded the program's expenses. WBB -$3.4 mil, all other men's sports -$3.9 mil, all other women's sports -$8.3 mil.

How does a program expect to "share" revenue when the program is not generating true revenue for the university?

I know we have a very strong men's lacrosse team this year. What will it take for this team to generate revenue for the university? Three homes games so far and they're averaging 4,400 in attendance. I hope they win a national championship. But why would men's lacrosse get a significant piece of the pie?

I've heard the school talk about lax and apparently a bigger benefit there is more scholarships, not NIL or revenue sharing. so i don't think the NIL is really a focus there or a need. Now, that could change, but as of now, it's not the goal. Most of the money will be football and basketball.