Will revenue sharing end up giving the Big East a competitive advantage?

[CL82]

Think about this a minute. Schools will be able to "share" up to $22 million with their student athletes. Initially my reaction is it's going to be extraordinarily hard for the Big East conference to compete with that. But, the vast majority of that $22 million will be going toward the 105 football scholarship players. Men's basketball will get the next biggest piece of the pie, but it will be dramatically reduced. So, the non-football football big east schools don't have to find $22 million they only need to find whatever the competitive amount is for basketball, and perhaps a bit more.

There is an article that kind of makes this point in the athletic.

(For what it's worth, UConn is still on the hook for the full 22 million if we decide that we want to continue to compete playing football.)

 

[radecicco]

Yeah I had thought about this. I subscribe to The Athletic so I have read this article. The BE doesn’t have to worry about football and that certainly focuses just about everything on hoops which is good for us. But the SEC and B1G schools that can’t cover their pay for play expenses with the $22 million cap will rely on the outside NIL collectives to pay players what they have to. NIL is not impacted in any way.

 

[lloyde dobler]

Interesting that it also hurts a school like Providence which has an additional revenue sport in hockey (which actually loses significant money).

 

[The Crows Nest]

Think about this a minute. Schools will be able to "share" up to $22 million with their student athletes. Initially my reaction is it's going to be extraordinarily hard for the Big East conference to compete with that. But, the vast majority of that $22 million will be going toward the 105 football scholarship players. Men's basketball will get the next biggest piece of the pie, but it will be dramatically reduced. So, the non-football football big east schools don't have to find $22 million they only need to find whatever the competitive amount is for basketball, and perhaps a bit more.

There is an article that kind of makes this point in the athletic.

(For what it's worth, UConn is still on the hook for the full 22 million if we decide that we want to continue to compete playing football.)

I think Danny has first dibs on those funds....whenever he is done...lol...then football can have at it.

At UConn the formula will be flipped...and rightfully so.

And, if its not...wait for Danny to get his next offer...

 

[SOBO1]

Is there a title IX component here? Are the women entitled to men’s basketball revenue?

 

[HallBall02]

Is there a title IX component here? Are the women entitled to men’s basketball revenue?

Yes it might be.

As far as i know, the title 9 stuff doesn’t mention equal pay specifically since you couldn’t pay players directly till recently…so some folks (football conferences) think you satisfy it by equal allotment of sport scholarship opportunities and possibly other resources between men and women college athletes. Others (women players, women player lawyers and agents) argue that the spirit of the rule implies equal pay of men and women’s college players if colleges start paying directly.

I think the title 9’lawers lose this one and the power football conf win here. More resources, scholarships and pay will eventually go to women players but there is no way they allow equal pay IMHO

 

[TrueBlue1989]

Think about this a minute. Schools will be able to "share" up to $22 million with their student athletes. Initially my reaction is it's going to be extraordinarily hard for the Big East conference to compete with that. But, the vast majority of that $22 million will be going toward the 105 football scholarship players. Men's basketball will get the next biggest piece of the pie, but it will be dramatically reduced. So, the non-football football big east schools don't have to find $22 million they only need to find whatever the competitive amount is for basketball, and perhaps a bit more.

There is an article that kind of makes this point in the athletic.

(For what it's worth, UConn is still on the hook for the full 22 million if we decide that we want to continue to compete playing football.)

This may hasten UConn’s exit from major football. Its football program is already bleeding money. It will rightly protect its basketball franchise at all costs.

 

[cams555]

I think Danny has first dibs on those funds....whenever he is done...lol...then football can have at it.

At UConn the formula will be flipped...and rightfully so.

And, if its not...wait for Danny to get his next offer...

At that point why even play, wouldn't football be at a competitive disadvantage against like lower level schools?

 

[SPK145]

Is there a title IX component here? Are the women entitled to men’s basketball revenue?

Well there is in the proposed settlement. Big East men's basketball players will get an average of $6,700 each while Big East women's basketball players will get an average of $300 each.

Contrast this to what basketball players in the P5 conferences will get: P5 men's basketball players will get an average of $135,000 each while P5 women's basketball players will get an average of $35,000 each.

This is just another example of how grossly unfair this settlement is, I hope the judge rejects it.

 

[cams555]

Is there a title IX component here? Are the women entitled to men’s basketball revenue?

There is no such ting as gender anymore so Title 9 should be abolished.

For what its worth I would love to see Catlin Clark play against the men. Its interesting that she turned down the Big 3 money.

She would be killed on D but with more space and her willingness to pass and ability to knock down a shot I think she would have been fine on offence.

 

[silkcitypirate]

There is no such ting as gender anymore so Title 9 should be abolished.

For what its worth I would love to see Catlin Clark play against the men. Its interesting that she turned down the Big 3 money.

She would be killed on D but with more space and her willingness to pass and ability to knock down a shot I think she would have been fine on offence.

She would also have to use a men's basketball . Big difference .

 

[SPK145]

There is no such ting as gender anymore so Title 9 should be abolished.

For what its worth I would love to see Catlin Clark play against the men. Its interesting that she turned down the Big 3 money.

She would be killed on D but with more space and her willingness to pass and ability to knock down a shot I think she would have been fine on offence.

She would get utterly destroyed on both ends of the court. And I'm a big fan of hers.

 

[lloyde dobler]

There is no such ting as gender anymore so Title 9 should be abolished.

For what its worth I would love to see Catlin Clark play against the men. Its interesting that she turned down the Big 3 money.

She would be killed on D but with more space and her willingness to pass and ability to knock down a shot I think she would have been fine on offence.

We’re just going to overlook the speed of the game and the size and strength of the players?

 

[CL82]

This may hasten UConn’s exit from major football. Its football program is already bleeding money. It will rightly protect its basketball franchise at all costs.

It certainly puts more pressure on the athletic department. No Connecticut sport is making a profit right now. Football loses the most money though.

 

[TrueBlue1989]

It certainly puts more pressure on the athletic department. No Connecticut sport is making a profit right now. Football loses the most money though.

If men’s basketball doesn’t make money, something is wrong.

 

[SOBO1]

At a certain point you have to ask yourself - should colleges be in the business of running professional sport franchises? The business has gotten so big. Too big?

 

[CL82]

If men’s basketball doesn’t make money, something is wrong.

We have a lot of quirky costs like an above market lease deal for half our games at the XL center. Pretty sure it is something like $45,000 to rent the venue +3 dollars surcharge per ticket. Even after renting it, all the concessions and parking revenue goes to a quasi public agency called the CDRA (capital redevelopment district area.) Basically it sucks the cash surplus out of the men's basketball program so that the agency "only" shows a $2 million loss. They do the same thing with women's basketball.

The athletic department estimates that the arrangement with the CDRA cost the athletic department approximately 17 million a year between out-of-pocket payments and lost revenue opportunities. It is also a big contributor to the football teams deficit since we have to rent our football stadium from them, which is located a half hour off-campus, also doesn't share concessions or parking revenue and in addition to that we subsidize the first $250,000 of loss Incurred by the facility.

 

[CL82]

At a certain point you have to ask yourself - should colleges be in the business of running professional sport franchises? The business has gotten so big. Too big?

It's a fair question, the answer is going to be yes for the upper echelon participants as long as they are making tens of millions of dollars from it. Revenue sharing becomes an interesting wrinkle. I feel as if that was intended to push smaller schools out. But as pointed out above, it may be something that the big east can exploit.

 

[radecicco]

We have a lot of quirky costs like an above market lease deal for half our games at the XL center. Pretty sure it is something like $45,000 to rent the venue +3 dollars surcharge per ticket. Even after renting it, all the concessions and parking revenue goes to a quasi public agency called the CDRA (capital redevelopment district area.) Basically it sucks the cash surplus out of the men's basketball program so that the agency "only" shows a $2 million loss. They do the same thing with women's basketball.

The athletic department estimates that the arrangement with the CDRA cost the athletic department approximately 17 million a year between out-of-pocket payments and lost revenue opportunities. It is also a big contributor to the football teams deficit since we have to rent our football stadium from them, which is located a half hour off-campus, also doesn't share concessions or parking revenue and in addition to that we subsidize the first $250,000 of loss Incurred by the facility.

Whoof!

 

[SPK145]

We have a lot of quirky costs like an above market lease deal for half our games at the XL center. Pretty sure it is something like $45,000 to rent the venue +3 dollars surcharge per ticket.

1) At that rate it is a HUGE money maker for UCONN.
2) Seton Hall pays more than that to play at the Prudential Center.

 

[SOBO1]

We have a lot of quirky costs like an above market lease deal for half our games at the XL center. Pretty sure it is something like $45,000 to rent the venue +3 dollars surcharge per ticket. Even after renting it, all the concessions and parking revenue goes to a quasi public agency called the CDRA (capital redevelopment district area.) Basically it sucks the cash surplus out of the men's basketball program so that the agency "only" shows a $2 million loss. They do the same thing with women's basketball.

The athletic department estimates that the arrangement with the CDRA cost the athletic department approximately 17 million a year between out-of-pocket payments and lost revenue opportunities. It is also a big contributor to the football teams deficit since we have to rent our football stadium from them, which is located a half hour off-campus, also doesn't share concessions or parking revenue and in addition to that we subsidize the first $250,000 of loss Incurred by the facility.

I know you’re just explaining the costs/lost revenue that UConn experiences compared to a more traditional arrangement, but that “issue” is literally Seton Hall’s situation for 100% their games every year.

In 2007 I was told The Rock was $75k/game. Assuming that was accurate it must be significantly more now. Seton hall never makes a dime off parking or concessions either. I’m sure they would literally do backflips down South Orange Ave to have an arrangement similar to UConn.

 

[CL82]

I know you’re just explaining the costs/lost revenue that UConn experiences compared to a more traditional arrangement, but that “issue” is literally Seton Hall’s situation for 100% their games every year.

In 2007 I was told The Rock was $75k/game. Assuming that was accurate it must be significantly more now. Seton hall never makes a dime off parking or concessions either. I’m sure they would literally do backflips down South Orange Ave to have an arrangement similar to UConn.

Thanks, that's good information. I've been wondering what Seton Hall pays to use the rock. $75,000 for use of a 10k arena is insane. Don't forget the three dollar surcharge. If the XL center is sold out that means the cost would be $98,000 to use the facility. That's just stupid money.

 

[SOBO1]

That was 17 years ago. I don’t know what it costs today but it must be significantly more.

It’s one of the reasons I never understood why seton hall didn’t seriously explore another option. Between the millions in lost revenue from parking and concessions, and the millions in rent I would imagine it would be less expensive to have your own facility.

 

[SPK145]

Thanks, that's good information. I've been wondering what Seton Hall pays to use the rock. $75,000 for use of a 10k arena is insane. Don't forget the three dollar surcharge. If the XL center is sold out that means the cost would be $98,000 to use the facility. That's just stupid money.

A sold out XL Center at $50 per ticket brings in $883,000 in revenue for UCONN. That's just stupid money.

 

[SOBO1]

The real question for UConn is if the additional ticket revenue at XL (5,385 additional seats) offset the rent and lost parking and concession revenue at Gampel.

It's a moot point if those numbers offset.

 

[SPK145]

The real question for UConn is if the additional ticket revenue at XL (5,385 additional seats) offset the rent and lost parking and concession revenue at Gampel.

It's a moot point if those numbers offset.

Unless there's debt service on Gampel, it's not free. Plus event day expenses like ticket takers, utilities, security, etc.

 

[SOBO1]

Any debt service would be a fixed expense irrespective to whether they play at Gampel or XL so I don't think that matters for purposes of this discussion (i.e. are they losing money by not playing at Gampel), but you're absolutely right there would be an additional game day operational expense at Gampel that would offset some of the rent (i.e. utilities, headcount, etc.).

 

[CL82]

That was 17 years ago. I don’t know what it costs today but it must be significantly more.

It’s one of the reasons I never understood why seton hall didn’t seriously explore another option. Between the millions in lost revenue from parking and concessions, and the millions in rent I would imagine it would be less expensive to have your own facility.

Yeah, things have just gotten stupid expensive though now. The other issue, of course, is where would you put it? Right now real estate is at a premium for the school. Even if there was room, before the new athletic center, at Walsh, I have to admit I'd hate to see that building demolished. It's a cool place to see a basketball game. I try to get down there for the women's game every year.

 

[CL82]

Unless there's debt service on Gampel, it's not free. Plus event day expenses like ticket takers, utilities, security, etc.

Any debt service would be a fixed expense irrespective to whether they play at Gampel or XL so I don't think that matters for purposes of this discussion (i.e. are they losing money by not playing at Gampel), but you're absolutely right there would be an additional game day operational expense at Gampel that would offset some of the rent (i.e. utilities, headcount, etc.).

Yeah, it's not free, but I'm pretty confident it's not $98,000 per game either.

 

[CL82]

The real question for UConn is if the additional ticket revenue at XL (5,385 additional seats) offset the rent and lost parking and concession revenue at Gampel.

It's a moot point if those numbers offset.

I figured out a quick and dirty comparison a while back. basically a sold out XL brings in the same revenue as a sold out Gampel. But at. Gampel you have parking in concessions revenue.

The problem is when the game isn't sold out. Then it's a money loser..

 

[CL82]

A sold out XL Center at $50 per ticket brings in $883,000 in revenue for UCONN. That's just stupid money.

oh, it's probably more than that. Don't forget seat donations.