Every day I am going to post something about the settlement and try to either explain it or show what it is going to look like when all is said and done. I will still have two full Redshirt Diaries next week but these are sort of mini versions focused on the House vs NCAA settlement. I think one of the things that sort of establishes how much this is not going to solve anything but actually make it worse is this: The NIL collectives and groups are still able to raise and spend as much money as they want. The NY Times wrote about this in a really good article Saturday and highlighted how some football teams will have a payroll essentially of $40-$50 million. I think the best case for Pitt is a payroll of about $20-$22 million when you combine revenue share and NIL.
I know there is doom and gloom about Pitt's payroll vs the elite but understand the more I am researching this the more I am convinced there will be far more teams in Pitt's neighborhood than that neighborhood of the elite teams paying $50 million.
I point out UCLA, whose athletic director Martin Jarmond (who used to be at Boston College) is one of the smarter guys in the room on many issues. as a great example. UCLA Is in the Big Ten, has Big Ten money, has Big Ten exposure, has Big Ten security and all of that other good stuff. UCLA should be able to do whatever it wants in terms of funding its athletic department, right?
Well, not quite. And UCLA Is a lot like Pitt - fiscally strapped and in debt after a half decade of overspending, not flush with billionaire type donors and an administration that wants the athletic department to succeed while also trying to maintain some semblance of academic excellence. UCLA Is a lot like Pitt with one exception - they have the Big Ten and Pitt doesn't.
However, Jarmond outlined what the plans for UCLA are and it isn't exactly painting a picture of a program floating in cash. In case you don't want to click on the article, here is the money graph:
"UCLA will distribute $20.5 million in revenue sharing — the maximum allowed under the settlement — while keeping its Olympic sports programs and athletic department staff intact. The school will also preserve scholarship limits at their current levels for at least one year in order to distribute more revenue sharing money to each player."
In other words even though teams can go to 105 scholarships in football and 15 in basketball, UCLA, at least for one year is sticking at 85 and 13. Jarmond estimates a scholarship costs about $65 K and UCLA is trying to maximize their payroll by holding the line. That means, like Pitt, UCLA will have a lot of walkons still to fill in the extra roster spots.
Jarmond said that (like Pitt) he is committed to preserving Olympic sports (which may be tougher to do than any of these guys want to admit) and while there won't be staff cuts, there will be staff reassigned to match department's changing needs and jobs will be cut, sorry, streamlined via attrition. In other words, if five people leave, there will be 2 1/2 hired to fill their roles.
I picked this article because it illustrates just how difficult this could be for some schools to maintain their goals of staying at a high level. This is going to require some painful decisions.
When it comes to Pitt I was initially told as many as four sports could be on the chopping block. Some of the same people who told me that have backed off that prediction a little bit but the funding for a few programs will change dramatically and not for the better. There will be a couple of sports that are going to be minimally funded and operate one step above club sports in some ways. It sounds like all of the sports may have survived the chopping block - for now - but I don't know if they all will still be able to compete legitimately in the ACC.
Back to UCLA Jarmond's focus now is trying too raise NIL - sound familiar? - and find new ways to generate revenue - sound familiar? - from donors and collectives and whatnot.
We have already talked about Oklahoma, which has laid off a bunch of its athletic staff and cut a few sports while basically coming right out and saying a few of their other sports will have a dramatic reduction in funding despite being in the SEC.
It isn't going to be an easy year for some schools, actually many, and I would put Pitt in that category. It doesn't mean it is impossible. It doesn't mean that the programs are cooked for good. It doesn't mean anything other than schools like Pitt - and UCLA and even Oklahoma - will have to be very creative and proactive to make sure they are maximizing whatever resources they have.
I think for Pitt it means a belt tightening in terms of the athletic department, similar to UCLA. Some people will be reassigned to fill roles and the staff will be reduced via attrition (people leave and not necessarily replaced). It means at least initially, Pitt not fully funding the 105 scholarships but continuing its walkon program. It means a greater push for the collective to raise more money to fill in the gaps and it means Pitt will have find ways to make all of it work.
But again, rest assured far more schools are in Pitt's boat than in the boat of the elite teams that have huge payrolls and seemingly unlimited resources. I don't know if this helps you feel a little better but I will continue to bring these posts daily to keep you up to date, explain some things that are being tossed around. I think Tuesday I am gonna try and have the Q&A with an agent for you but i am trying to hammer it down and confirm.
Let me know if you find these posts helpful as I will continue to crank them out.
I know there is doom and gloom about Pitt's payroll vs the elite but understand the more I am researching this the more I am convinced there will be far more teams in Pitt's neighborhood than that neighborhood of the elite teams paying $50 million.
I point out UCLA, whose athletic director Martin Jarmond (who used to be at Boston College) is one of the smarter guys in the room on many issues. as a great example. UCLA Is in the Big Ten, has Big Ten money, has Big Ten exposure, has Big Ten security and all of that other good stuff. UCLA should be able to do whatever it wants in terms of funding its athletic department, right?
Well, not quite. And UCLA Is a lot like Pitt - fiscally strapped and in debt after a half decade of overspending, not flush with billionaire type donors and an administration that wants the athletic department to succeed while also trying to maintain some semblance of academic excellence. UCLA Is a lot like Pitt with one exception - they have the Big Ten and Pitt doesn't.
However, Jarmond outlined what the plans for UCLA are and it isn't exactly painting a picture of a program floating in cash. In case you don't want to click on the article, here is the money graph:
"UCLA will distribute $20.5 million in revenue sharing — the maximum allowed under the settlement — while keeping its Olympic sports programs and athletic department staff intact. The school will also preserve scholarship limits at their current levels for at least one year in order to distribute more revenue sharing money to each player."
In other words even though teams can go to 105 scholarships in football and 15 in basketball, UCLA, at least for one year is sticking at 85 and 13. Jarmond estimates a scholarship costs about $65 K and UCLA is trying to maximize their payroll by holding the line. That means, like Pitt, UCLA will have a lot of walkons still to fill in the extra roster spots.
Jarmond said that (like Pitt) he is committed to preserving Olympic sports (which may be tougher to do than any of these guys want to admit) and while there won't be staff cuts, there will be staff reassigned to match department's changing needs and jobs will be cut, sorry, streamlined via attrition. In other words, if five people leave, there will be 2 1/2 hired to fill their roles.
I picked this article because it illustrates just how difficult this could be for some schools to maintain their goals of staying at a high level. This is going to require some painful decisions.
When it comes to Pitt I was initially told as many as four sports could be on the chopping block. Some of the same people who told me that have backed off that prediction a little bit but the funding for a few programs will change dramatically and not for the better. There will be a couple of sports that are going to be minimally funded and operate one step above club sports in some ways. It sounds like all of the sports may have survived the chopping block - for now - but I don't know if they all will still be able to compete legitimately in the ACC.
Back to UCLA Jarmond's focus now is trying too raise NIL - sound familiar? - and find new ways to generate revenue - sound familiar? - from donors and collectives and whatnot.
We have already talked about Oklahoma, which has laid off a bunch of its athletic staff and cut a few sports while basically coming right out and saying a few of their other sports will have a dramatic reduction in funding despite being in the SEC.
It isn't going to be an easy year for some schools, actually many, and I would put Pitt in that category. It doesn't mean it is impossible. It doesn't mean that the programs are cooked for good. It doesn't mean anything other than schools like Pitt - and UCLA and even Oklahoma - will have to be very creative and proactive to make sure they are maximizing whatever resources they have.
I think for Pitt it means a belt tightening in terms of the athletic department, similar to UCLA. Some people will be reassigned to fill roles and the staff will be reduced via attrition (people leave and not necessarily replaced). It means at least initially, Pitt not fully funding the 105 scholarships but continuing its walkon program. It means a greater push for the collective to raise more money to fill in the gaps and it means Pitt will have find ways to make all of it work.
But again, rest assured far more schools are in Pitt's boat than in the boat of the elite teams that have huge payrolls and seemingly unlimited resources. I don't know if this helps you feel a little better but I will continue to bring these posts daily to keep you up to date, explain some things that are being tossed around. I think Tuesday I am gonna try and have the Q&A with an agent for you but i am trying to hammer it down and confirm.
Let me know if you find these posts helpful as I will continue to crank them out.
