From the Athletic…
“Last offseason, the consensus was a team needed to spend $3-5 million on its roster to be competitive at the high-major level. This year that number is expected to fall in the $5-8 million range, with some of the top spenders expected to reach $10 million.
“You need $7 million to be in the mix, when last year $4 million could get you a really good team,” a general manager of a high-major program said. “Everybody’s coming up with all this money to front-load in addition to the back end of rev share. So if your rev share is $2.7 million from the school, people are trying to raise $5 million in addition to that, where you can pay to retain guys, plus go out and spend a whole bunch of money for transfers….”
“Right now we’re trying to get as much done before revenue sharing kicks in on April 7 as we can,” an SEC assistant said. “Because obviously what we have to operate with is going to be drastically reduced through the rev share — partially because we are in the SEC and football is king in this conference. For this year’s team specifically, we’re trying to get as much done before April 7. And then whatever we are allotted through the revenue share we will then use for the rest of the transfer portal class we have to bring in.”
Once the settlement goes into effect, a school can directly pay a player whatever it wants without justifying that it’s a fair-market deal, but any payments beyond what’s budgeted through revenue sharing will need to be funneled to players through a collective.
“I wish collectives would go away for everybody,” a Big 12 coach said. “But if anybody has one, we’d better have one. I think if you’re going to try to compete, you have to have one…”
There’s a lot of money in the market this spring. The uncertain role of collectives in the revenue sharing era has some programs operating as if they need to spend all excess funds controlled by their current collective. And players are asking for more, dating back to the fall, when the asking prices for five-star high school recruits matched what the top transfers received a year ago. That has in turn increased the asking price for transfers this year.
“Some of these guys have the same agent, so the agents ask for more for the players who’ve already done it, which I get,” the GM said. “It makes sense. If a high school All-American is worth $1-5 million, what’s a collegiate All-American worth?”
The consensus is that transfer price tags have risen to two to three times what the same level of player went for a year ago.
“I’ve heard Conference USA kids getting offered $1 million,” the GM said. “Sun Belt kids getting offered $1 million. The high-major ones sound like they’re going for $1.5 (million) plus.”
“We’re seeing some outrageous numbers on some kids that are marginal at best,” a second SEC assistant said. “Like, unproven.”
“And the number goes up every week whoever you’re talking to,” said an administrator who helps negotiate NIL deals for his school…”
“I’ve heard numbers already for kids in the (NCAA) Tournament right now, where they’re going and they’ve got a number already,” the GM said. “It’s pretty cut-and-dry. For the good ones, you see more going in with a no-contact tag than last year. A lot of it is driven by the agents. And the agents are using the same analytical tools we’re using to figure out who’s good at these lower levels in December and just grabbing them.”
Roster retention is also a priority, and at the high-major level, typically every player a team wants to keep is getting a pay bump. While it’s possible to get in a bidding war for your own player, those situations are more avoidable than they are for talent in the portal.
The coaching carousel’s upheaval also spurs inflation.
“Brand-new coaches are in brand-new situations with a brand-new, more robust NIL situation than the previous guy,” the Big 12 assistant said. “And then he’s got to go fill potentially 13 roster spots. And so he’s throwing around huge amounts of money right now trying to get some spots filled.”
And then there’s “the illusion of revenue sharing,” as the same assistant describes it: “Agents have been sitting back waiting on this for a long time, just the idea that programs are going to be sitting here flush with cash…”
www.nytimes.com
“Last offseason, the consensus was a team needed to spend $3-5 million on its roster to be competitive at the high-major level. This year that number is expected to fall in the $5-8 million range, with some of the top spenders expected to reach $10 million.
“You need $7 million to be in the mix, when last year $4 million could get you a really good team,” a general manager of a high-major program said. “Everybody’s coming up with all this money to front-load in addition to the back end of rev share. So if your rev share is $2.7 million from the school, people are trying to raise $5 million in addition to that, where you can pay to retain guys, plus go out and spend a whole bunch of money for transfers….”
“Right now we’re trying to get as much done before revenue sharing kicks in on April 7 as we can,” an SEC assistant said. “Because obviously what we have to operate with is going to be drastically reduced through the rev share — partially because we are in the SEC and football is king in this conference. For this year’s team specifically, we’re trying to get as much done before April 7. And then whatever we are allotted through the revenue share we will then use for the rest of the transfer portal class we have to bring in.”
Once the settlement goes into effect, a school can directly pay a player whatever it wants without justifying that it’s a fair-market deal, but any payments beyond what’s budgeted through revenue sharing will need to be funneled to players through a collective.
“I wish collectives would go away for everybody,” a Big 12 coach said. “But if anybody has one, we’d better have one. I think if you’re going to try to compete, you have to have one…”
There’s a lot of money in the market this spring. The uncertain role of collectives in the revenue sharing era has some programs operating as if they need to spend all excess funds controlled by their current collective. And players are asking for more, dating back to the fall, when the asking prices for five-star high school recruits matched what the top transfers received a year ago. That has in turn increased the asking price for transfers this year.
“Some of these guys have the same agent, so the agents ask for more for the players who’ve already done it, which I get,” the GM said. “It makes sense. If a high school All-American is worth $1-5 million, what’s a collegiate All-American worth?”
The consensus is that transfer price tags have risen to two to three times what the same level of player went for a year ago.
“I’ve heard Conference USA kids getting offered $1 million,” the GM said. “Sun Belt kids getting offered $1 million. The high-major ones sound like they’re going for $1.5 (million) plus.”
“We’re seeing some outrageous numbers on some kids that are marginal at best,” a second SEC assistant said. “Like, unproven.”
“And the number goes up every week whoever you’re talking to,” said an administrator who helps negotiate NIL deals for his school…”
“I’ve heard numbers already for kids in the (NCAA) Tournament right now, where they’re going and they’ve got a number already,” the GM said. “It’s pretty cut-and-dry. For the good ones, you see more going in with a no-contact tag than last year. A lot of it is driven by the agents. And the agents are using the same analytical tools we’re using to figure out who’s good at these lower levels in December and just grabbing them.”
Roster retention is also a priority, and at the high-major level, typically every player a team wants to keep is getting a pay bump. While it’s possible to get in a bidding war for your own player, those situations are more avoidable than they are for talent in the portal.
The coaching carousel’s upheaval also spurs inflation.
“Brand-new coaches are in brand-new situations with a brand-new, more robust NIL situation than the previous guy,” the Big 12 assistant said. “And then he’s got to go fill potentially 13 roster spots. And so he’s throwing around huge amounts of money right now trying to get some spots filled.”
And then there’s “the illusion of revenue sharing,” as the same assistant describes it: “Agents have been sitting back waiting on this for a long time, just the idea that programs are going to be sitting here flush with cash…”
College basketball’s transfer portal opens with prices rising again. Which schools will keep up?
The price of building a contender has ballooned to well above what most men’s basketball programs will have to work with in revenue sharing.
www.nytimes.com
