Welcome Guest! Create an Account login email: password: remember me: BASKETBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting FOOTBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting MESSAGE BOARD Message Home - Ohio Basketball - Ohio Basketball Recruiting - The O Zone - Ohio Football - Ohio Football Recruiting - Ohio Volleyball - Ohio Baseball - Ohio Olympic Sports... - General OU Discussion... - Website Feedback... - Posting Policy Edit My Profile Private Messages Logout CHAT LINKS site searchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp Message Board BobcatAttack.com Message Board Ohio Basketball Topic:  Money Topic:  Money Author Message Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 4,314 Status: Offline     Money    Posted: 11/25/2025 8:55:36 AM  The conversation over Boals' future running the program has led to a could of smaller, subsidiary conversations about money and resources. I don't think anybody would debate that the NIL, Revenue Share, and capital investment in the program will likely play an outside role in how competitive Ohio Basketball is in both the short and long-term. But right now, our strategy and approach are a black box. In conversations about Boals' job performance, there's a group of posters whose long is essentially that it's unreasonable to expect better on-court results because we don't have any money. I'm not sure I know enough to have an opinion as to how true that is, so I figured I'd start a thread to try and learn more about the current budget, NIL numbers, Revenue Share strategy, and get folks' thoughts on the right strategy going forward. I've seen anecdotes here and there, and some of the posters here that are closely connected hinting at some knowledge, and rather than it living in 19 different threads, wanted a single place where we can discuss it. Some things in interested in understanding better, if anybody has insight: 1) How much revenue does the basketball program have, what percentage is eligible for revenue share and what are we sharing currently? I shared the numbers from 2023 (as confirmed by a state auditor, here https://ohioauditor.gov/auditsearch/Reports/2024/Ohio_Uni... ). Billy tells me that we "don't even have close to that", so setting aside the accounting fraud, I'm curious to understand that better. 2) How have we spent our NIL money? Anybody know any figures for players? Like it or not, how that money is allocated is a big part of how Boals (or any coach) will be graded. 3) What are other schools doing that we're not? Any creative approaches? 4) What's a competitive pay pool look like? Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 4,314 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/26/2025 10:01:59 AM  Popular topic, I see. Kind of wild how little we know about something that we all agree is a key component of success in college basketball going forward. Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 4,314 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/26/2025 10:22:46 AM  Talking to myself, but this a big part of what I've been curious about is how 'revenue' is actually defined as it relates to the House v. NCAA revenue share settlement. Looking into the settlement docs, it seems like revenue share doesn't apply to all operating revenue, but specific categories (in the settlement, those categories are labelled as 1, 7, 11, 12, 13, 13A, 15, and 19). Basically, it seems like the "shareable" revenue excludes student fees & private donations. If you apply that to 2023: Ticket sales: 466,573 Direct institutional support: 1,461,145 Indirect institutional support: 311,398 Guarantees: 121,070 Contributions: 26,329 Media rights: 38,500 NCAA distributions: 318,660 Conference distributions: – Conference distributions of bowl generated revenue: – Program, novelty, parking and concession sales: 41,879 Royalties, licensing, advertisements and sponsorships: – Sports camp revenue: 137,336 Athletics restricted endowment and investment income: 18,807 Other operating revenue: 850 Bowl revenues: – Total operating revenue: 2,942,547 You end up with 1,170,,004 in "share eligible" revenue. So theoretically the men's basketball program could share up to $257,400 with players. Back to Top Recovering Journalist General User Member Since: 8/17/2010 Location: Cleveland, OH Post Count: 1,853 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/26/2025 1:43:19 PM  I'll piggyback on this since adding another gloomy thread may be deserved but is certainly unnecessary. I've said something similar elsewhere but it bears repeating: This isn't fun anymore. I don't fault any student for chasing NIL money and the old system was certainly unfair, but this explicit caste system - catering exclusively to P5s and/or feeding the maw of television - is unsustainable. We're already in a league where all athletic departments only exist at the D1 level because of student fees. Now we need to find benefactors to cobble together a competitive team? And the reward for success is a mass transfer after winning the MAC Tournament and losing in the first round of the NCAAs. Rinse and repeat. The ceiling in this world isn't an Elite Eight run or an at-large bid like when I was in school. It's being the one bid in a perpetual one-bid league and lacking the talent to make a run in the tourney. Even if our basketball program was doing everything possible and had all the right donors the most it could become is present-day Akron. See above for results. Long gone are the days of grabbing (and keeping) a Gary Trent and blowing out UConn, ousting Michigan with DJ Cooper and making the kind of national splash that athletics uses to justify its existence. And it's only getting worse. It was always a rigged game but greed is rigging it beyond recognition. And yes, watching our atrocious basketball team makes this easier to say, but the writing has been on the wall since NIL started. I doubt I'm alone in my rapidly waning interest in the whole enterprise. Back to Top bobcatsquared General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Post Count: 5,584 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/26/2025 1:50:04 PM  Recovering Journalist wrote: I doubt I'm alone in my rapidly waning interest in the whole enterprise. Definitely not alone. But will our waning interest have any negative impact on the situation? Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 4,314 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/26/2025 2:09:37 PM  Recovering Journalist wrote: The ceiling in this world isn't an Elite Eight run or an at-large bid like when I was in school. It's being the one bid in a perpetual one-bid league and lacking the talent to make a run in the tourney. Even if our basketball program was doing everything possible and had all the right donors the most it could become is present-day Akron. See above for results. Long gone are the days of grabbing (and keeping) a Gary Trent and blowing out UConn, ousting Michigan with DJ Cooper and making the kind of national splash that athletics uses to justify its existence. And it's only getting worse. I get the thinking, but think you're vastly over-stating the case here. It's far from a given that it's no longer possible to make an Elite Eight run or win NCAA tournament games. In fact, I'm actually struck by the fact that the disparity between the top spenders in the country and the top spenders in the MAC isn't nearly as large as I expected it to be. A few things have been published lately about this. Last year, there were 9 programs that spent up to $10m on player pay. There were another 14 spending up to $8m. That's 6% of D1 basketball programs. Are they spending lot of money? Sure. Way more than MAC schools will ever pay? Also, sure. But it's not like we were ever actually competing for recruits with those schools. They always had a massive, massive recruiting advantage and got better players consistently. It's not clear to me, exactly, why money reaching the players eliminates the possibility of upsets. Drake beat Missouri last year. McNeese State beat Clemson. In 2024, Yale upset Auburn -- one of the schools with an $8m player budget. Duquesne upset BYU -- one of the schools with a $10m player budget. Oakland beat Kentucky -- who has a 10m budget. There was always a massive, massive spending disparity between the top of NCAA basketball and middle and bottom. It created huge advantages before some of that money went to players, and there are still upsets every year, and plenty of surprise runs. Last Edited: 11/26/2025 2:11:14 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame Back to Top TWT General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Alexandria, VA Post Count: 5,362 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/26/2025 10:17:49 PM  Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Recovering Journalist wrote: The ceiling in this world isn't an Elite Eight run or an at-large bid like when I was in school. It's being the one bid in a perpetual one-bid league and lacking the talent to make a run in the tourney. Even if our basketball program was doing everything possible and had all the right donors the most it could become is present-day Akron. See above for results. Long gone are the days of grabbing (and keeping) a Gary Trent and blowing out UConn, ousting Michigan with DJ Cooper and making the kind of national splash that athletics uses to justify its existence. And it's only getting worse. I get the thinking, but think you're vastly over-stating the case here. It's far from a given that it's no longer possible to make an Elite Eight run or win NCAA tournament games. In fact, I'm actually struck by the fact that the disparity between the top spenders in the country and the top spenders in the MAC isn't nearly as large as I expected it to be. A few things have been published lately about this. Last year, there were 9 programs that spent up to $10m on player pay. There were another 14 spending up to $8m. That's 6% of D1 basketball programs. Are they spending lot of money? Sure. Way more than MAC schools will ever pay? Also, sure. But it's not like we were ever actually competing for recruits with those schools. They always had a massive, massive recruiting advantage and got better players consistently. It's not clear to me, exactly, why money reaching the players eliminates the possibility of upsets. Drake beat Missouri last year. McNeese State beat Clemson. In 2024, Yale upset Auburn -- one of the schools with an $8m player budget. Duquesne upset BYU -- one of the schools with a $10m player budget. Oakland beat Kentucky -- who has a 10m budget. There was always a massive, massive spending disparity between the top of NCAA basketball and middle and bottom. It created huge advantages before some of that money went to players, and there are still upsets every year, and plenty of surprise runs. I think you are on to something here. Recruiting is a zero sum game the players have to go somewhere. Players paid well in the P5 have less incentive to move around then with transfers in more talented freshman drop down to the mid-majors. Prior to the portal there was room for 8-10 mid majors to be consistent bubble teams or better. The money could drive that back to happening again. Strategic additions of contributors at mid-majors. Poaching staffs that were fired. Development of third party NIL deals for players. Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended 2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round 2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl 2015 34-3 drubbing of Fiami @ Peden with 25,086 fans 2023 10-7 near shutout of Iowa State @ Solich Field 2025 17-10 defeat of WVU @ Peden in front of 26,740 Back to Top FJC31 General User Member Since: 3/31/2022 Post Count: 1,940 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/27/2025 8:40:44 AM  TWT wrote: Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Recovering Journalist wrote: The ceiling in this world isn't an Elite Eight run or an at-large bid like when I was in school. It's being the one bid in a perpetual one-bid league and lacking the talent to make a run in the tourney. Even if our basketball program was doing everything possible and had all the right donors the most it could become is present-day Akron. See above for results. Long gone are the days of grabbing (and keeping) a Gary Trent and blowing out UConn, ousting Michigan with DJ Cooper and making the kind of national splash that athletics uses to justify its existence. And it's only getting worse. I get the thinking, but think you're vastly over-stating the case here. It's far from a given that it's no longer possible to make an Elite Eight run or win NCAA tournament games. In fact, I'm actually struck by the fact that the disparity between the top spenders in the country and the top spenders in the MAC isn't nearly as large as I expected it to be. A few things have been published lately about this. Last year, there were 9 programs that spent up to $10m on player pay. There were another 14 spending up to $8m. That's 6% of D1 basketball programs. Are they spending lot of money? Sure. Way more than MAC schools will ever pay? Also, sure. But it's not like we were ever actually competing for recruits with those schools. They always had a massive, massive recruiting advantage and got better players consistently. It's not clear to me, exactly, why money reaching the players eliminates the possibility of upsets. Drake beat Missouri last year. McNeese State beat Clemson. In 2024, Yale upset Auburn -- one of the schools with an $8m player budget. Duquesne upset BYU -- one of the schools with a $10m player budget. Oakland beat Kentucky -- who has a 10m budget. There was always a massive, massive spending disparity between the top of NCAA basketball and middle and bottom. It created huge advantages before some of that money went to players, and there are still upsets every year, and plenty of surprise runs. I think you are on to something here. Recruiting is a zero sum game the players have to go somewhere. Players paid well in the P5 have less incentive to move around then with transfers in more talented freshman drop down to the mid-majors. Prior to the portal there was room for 8-10 mid majors to be consistent bubble teams or better. The money could drive that back to happening again. Strategic additions of contributors at mid-majors. Poaching staffs that were fired. Development of third party NIL deals for players. I’d add that a lot of these P5 rosters are littered with former mid-major talent. I think it’s relevant because yes, you have situations like Yaxel Lendeborg who doesn’t skip a beat going JUCO->UAB->Michigan. However, there’s more circumstances like Xavien Lee not being able to make the jump and significantly eating into that roster budget without the matching production. It’s like baseball. There’s a disparity in spending, but it’s finding a way to be the Brewers/Guardians/Dbacks if financial resources are less significant. Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 4,314 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/27/2025 10:10:18 AM  FJC31 wrote: TWT wrote: Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Recovering Journalist wrote: The ceiling in this world isn't an Elite Eight run or an at-large bid like when I was in school. It's being the one bid in a perpetual one-bid league and lacking the talent to make a run in the tourney. Even if our basketball program was doing everything possible and had all the right donors the most it could become is present-day Akron. See above for results. Long gone are the days of grabbing (and keeping) a Gary Trent and blowing out UConn, ousting Michigan with DJ Cooper and making the kind of national splash that athletics uses to justify its existence. And it's only getting worse. I get the thinking, but think you're vastly over-stating the case here. It's far from a given that it's no longer possible to make an Elite Eight run or win NCAA tournament games. In fact, I'm actually struck by the fact that the disparity between the top spenders in the country and the top spenders in the MAC isn't nearly as large as I expected it to be. A few things have been published lately about this. Last year, there were 9 programs that spent up to $10m on player pay. There were another 14 spending up to $8m. That's 6% of D1 basketball programs. Are they spending lot of money? Sure. Way more than MAC schools will ever pay? Also, sure. But it's not like we were ever actually competing for recruits with those schools. They always had a massive, massive recruiting advantage and got better players consistently. It's not clear to me, exactly, why money reaching the players eliminates the possibility of upsets. Drake beat Missouri last year. McNeese State beat Clemson. In 2024, Yale upset Auburn -- one of the schools with an $8m player budget. Duquesne upset BYU -- one of the schools with a $10m player budget. Oakland beat Kentucky -- who has a 10m budget. There was always a massive, massive spending disparity between the top of NCAA basketball and middle and bottom. It created huge advantages before some of that money went to players, and there are still upsets every year, and plenty of surprise runs. I think you are on to something here. Recruiting is a zero sum game the players have to go somewhere. Players paid well in the P5 have less incentive to move around then with transfers in more talented freshman drop down to the mid-majors. Prior to the portal there was room for 8-10 mid majors to be consistent bubble teams or better. The money could drive that back to happening again. Strategic additions of contributors at mid-majors. Poaching staffs that were fired. Development of third party NIL deals for players. I’d add that a lot of these P5 rosters are littered with former mid-major talent. I think it’s relevant because yes, you have situations like Yaxel Lendeborg who doesn’t skip a beat going JUCO->UAB->Michigan. However, there’s more circumstances like Xavien Lee not being able to make the jump and significantly eating into that roster budget without the matching production. It’s like baseball. There’s a disparity in spending, but it’s finding a way to be the Brewers/Guardians/Dbacks if financial resources are less significant. I think we're also just in a phase where the transfer portal and "free agency" is the new, shiny toy. I think programs are going to become a lot less enamored with one year free agents that are expensive over time. There's no NBA playbook for building a championship roster that involves turning over 75% of your roster every year. Continuity will become valued again, and soon there'll be much better data about how production translates from level-to-level, which will likely result in less completely drunk spending. Back to Top Diamond Cat General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Post Count: 899 Status: Offline     RE: Money    Posted: 11/27/2025 2:40:26 PM  Really great insight BLSS and others. Gives pause for how this mess will look in say 2030. I really can't disagree or add to the post from Recovering Journalist. Like many of you, I have never stopped passionately following our Bobcats since graduation in 1988. It all started with going to my 1st hoops game in the Convo. I never looked back. I like being the underdog. I like having a chip on my shoulder. I like the shock on someone's face when I tell them I could care less about ousucks. I couldn't have celebrated harder when going to play Southern Miss in the first bowl game of my Bobcat life or when leaving Bridgestone Arena after we hung an L on Michigan. Say what you want but Solich forever made Saturdays in Athens a football party. With maybe a HC game as the exception, you could drop the Dr. Pizza Express ambulance in what is now Tailgreat Park and not hit a soul. When I hear about the basketball victories in 1969-1970, it fires me up. How did we build that roster? Rolled out of the gate 7-0 with the first 4 wins against formidable opponents (including, of course, beating osu's ass). Given today's nonsense,how many of those players transfer out to chase NIL money? Over the years, our coaches went out and found recruits that were impact players. We aren't going to be able to keep these players going forward. Our coaches develop and bring along these players and boom! they are plucked right from us. Without some guard rails or policy changes, we cannot stop the train. Yes we can get some decent grad students in football and maybe hoops but we are hitting a point in what we lose we in talent isn't going to be a 1:1 ratio to what we bring in. I would be happy as hell if I am wrong. Time will tell. It is hard to explain this to most people. It's kind of like you had to be there (for 10-20-30 years) to see the wins, coaches and players to relate and I have left out a ton of other examples you all have in your memory. Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving people! Just my unsolicited view as a lifer. Back to Top BillyTheCat General User Member Since: 10/6/2012 Post Count: 10,548 Status: Online     RE: Money    Posted: 11/28/2025 8:57:39 AM  Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: FJC31 wrote: TWT wrote: Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Recovering Journalist wrote: The ceiling in this world isn't an Elite Eight run or an at-large bid like when I was in school. It's being the one bid in a perpetual one-bid league and lacking the talent to make a run in the tourney. Even if our basketball program was doing everything possible and had all the right donors the most it could become is present-day Akron. See above for results. Long gone are the days of grabbing (and keeping) a Gary Trent and blowing out UConn, ousting Michigan with DJ Cooper and making the kind of national splash that athletics uses to justify its existence. And it's only getting worse. I get the thinking, but think you're vastly over-stating the case here. It's far from a given that it's no longer possible to make an Elite Eight run or win NCAA tournament games. In fact, I'm actually struck by the fact that the disparity between the top spenders in the country and the top spenders in the MAC isn't nearly as large as I expected it to be. A few things have been published lately about this. Last year, there were 9 programs that spent up to $10m on player pay. There were another 14 spending up to $8m. That's 6% of D1 basketball programs. Are they spending lot of money? Sure. Way more than MAC schools will ever pay? Also, sure. But it's not like we were ever actually competing for recruits with those schools. They always had a massive, massive recruiting advantage and got better players consistently. It's not clear to me, exactly, why money reaching the players eliminates the possibility of upsets. Drake beat Missouri last year. McNeese State beat Clemson. In 2024, Yale upset Auburn -- one of the schools with an $8m player budget. Duquesne upset BYU -- one of the schools with a $10m player budget. Oakland beat Kentucky -- who has a 10m budget. There was always a massive, massive spending disparity between the top of NCAA basketball and middle and bottom. It created huge advantages before some of that money went to players, and there are still upsets every year, and plenty of surprise runs. I think you are on to something here. Recruiting is a zero sum game the players have to go somewhere. Players paid well in the P5 have less incentive to move around then with transfers in more talented freshman drop down to the mid-majors. Prior to the portal there was room for 8-10 mid majors to be consistent bubble teams or better. The money could drive that back to happening again. Strategic additions of contributors at mid-majors. Poaching staffs that were fired. Development of third party NIL deals for players. I’d add that a lot of these P5 rosters are littered with former mid-major talent. I think it’s relevant because yes, you have situations like Yaxel Lendeborg who doesn’t skip a beat going JUCO->UAB->Michigan. However, there’s more circumstances like Xavien Lee not being able to make the jump and significantly eating into that roster budget without the matching production. It’s like baseball. There’s a disparity in spending, but it’s finding a way to be the Brewers/Guardians/Dbacks if financial resources are less significant. I think we're also just in a phase where the transfer portal and "free agency" is the new, shiny toy. I think programs are going to become a lot less enamored with one year free agents that are expensive over time. There's no NBA playbook for building a championship roster that involves turning over 75% of your roster every year. Continuity will become valued again, and soon there'll be much better data about how production translates from level-to-level, which will likely result in less completely drunk spending. Unless their are guardrails created and new rules put in place, you may see a real live unicorn first. Back to Top Showing Replies:   1 - 11  of 11 Posts Jump to Page:   1 View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               WHO'S ONLINE There are 291 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com 286 Guests 5 Registered Users:   Deciduous Forest Cat, Radar, davepi2, BillyTheCat, shabamon There are no other users looking at this page.

Copyright ©2025 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties