j. spilotro said:

Academics? lol. “Hey siri”.

When is the last time you saw an academic ineligibility. Remember having to sweat out some summers? Winter break? It’s not a thing anymore.

Click to expand...

Evans?

looks like N’Diaye in portal now

That is a strange way for them to say that “an offer from Division 1 UNLV” makes it sound like the other offers are D2. Not saying that is the case just strange the way they said that.

unlove said:

Like win, play an attractive style of ball, not get blown out at home by quad 4 teams

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a good start

Just an aside from a former NCAA referee, these games in the latest season have shown the effects poor non calls have on the outcome of a game. Differences between charge and no charge, offensive elbowing by the dribbler are pandemic, the defense has no defense because the offense can knock them over at any time. Smaller schools like UNM and CSU and larger schools like Gonzaga and U Conn were jobbed by chosen refs to make sure the ESPN, CBS teams make it to the finals.

WarthogRebel said:

IMO, the NCAA will see many more foreign players. Leagues in Europe, Middle East and Asia are split into tiers. There are basically 5 tiers from tier 1 through tier 5 and tier 1 being the most prestigious. Most P4 NCAA teams pay players what they could make in tier 2 or 3 with perhaps 25 players getting the top pay in a tier 1 league. More and more players will make the jump to the U.S. for lower taxes, better playing environment and better pay etc.

Click to expand...

Good point. Hopefully it improves the game. My impression of euro players is that they’re skilled, can shoot it and handle the ball, play smart, and most of all don’t bring a highlight reel, give me the ball approach to a team.

LVRebel2000 said:

Plus, they need to come up with a way to make it a party. Utah State has a ton of students that go to the games. I know UNLV is a large commuter campus but there are still a lot of students on campus or nearby. Figure out how to get them to games and to be loud.

Click to expand...

Like win, play an attractive style of ball, not get blown out at home by quad 4 teams

Those ACC powerhouse programs!

WarthogRebel said:

Revenue sharing and it's implications to NCAA sports is not generally understood.

Revenue sharing is the result of a court case. The case allows up to $ 20 mil to be split to existing athletes. As of today there has been no mandate on how revenue needs to be split.

The initial date for the first distributions in this coming July 1st. Most schools are not planning to distribute equally to each athlete but are planning to split the majority to the sports bringing in revenue. Most P4 are set to follow something like the Texas Tech's model. Texas Tech announced in December 2024 a plan to distribute about 74% to football, 17–18% to men’s basketball, 2% to women’s basketball, 1.9% to baseball, and the rest to other sports, mirroring their revenue contributions. This would mean a $ 3.5 mil payment to Mens BB players. $ 270,000 per player if split equally. ( this is why it will be difficult to lure away P4 bench players)

An interesting aside are teams in conferences that don't have football but do bring in relatively large income from BB (think Villanove, Big East, Gonzaga - PAC , Grand Canyon - MW). They will be able to go much larger to BB - say 75% to men's BB. If they have the $ 20 mil that will mean $1.15 mill per player before NIL. With that they'll be able to lure the best players from around the world.

I've heard zero on UNLV plans along this subject. It would seem to me we have no funds for this.

Click to expand...

If it goes to the point where you must be in a major conference to be competitive in the NCAA, why should a booster want to put money into basketball? Paying a six figure salary or higher to a player that has zero chance of ever playing professional is beyond ludicrous!

I agree. Those are realistic expectations. I don’t care who he recruits, I only care about how they play.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

Rosegreen1 said:

Elijah Price to Reno College. UNLV was on his list.

Click to expand...

Probably best to avoid players that show that kind of judgement... lol

Elijah Price to Reno College. UNLV was on his list.

I think the idea is top 3 in conference is a good start at the very least.
Why should we expect anything more? Middle of the pack coaching salary, seemingly reduced NIL funds.
Because of our rabid 1500 people fan base!?!
Just because we were good generations ago doesn't mean we deserve anything. Some level of progress and consistency is what we need. I agree this conference is ripe for the taking, especially after this year, but our fancy facilities mean d!ck now without the payroll for the players.
Now more than ever, butts in the seats is necessary to increase the perception of the program, increase revenue, and get momentum.
The attitude of the "MW sucks and anything other than a MW crown is a disappointment themat doesn't deserve to be attended :will push this team lower and lower in it's quality

WarthogRebel said:

Use the same model for pricing used by Utah State. Their arena seats 10,000 in a single bowl.

Click to expand...

Plus, they need to come up with a way to make it a party. Utah State has a ton of students that go to the games. I know UNLV is a large commuter campus but there are still a lot of students on campus or nearby. Figure out how to get them to games and to be loud.

WarthogRebel said:

Top 3 will be hard even in the New MWC. GCU will always be tough because the have Jerry Colangelo dumping in NIL money. New Mexico will be tough every year for some unknowable reason. UTEP is excited about "moving up" in conference - I wouldn't doubt the have access to laundered cartel $$ for NIL. Every third year Reno or Wyoming will play out their ass.

Click to expand...

Hard but not impossible!

We should be striving for the top spot every year, getting second place would be worst case on most years and third place is the extreme exception!

Use the same model for pricing used by Utah State. Their arena seats 10,000 in a single bowl.

Rebel1986 said:

College sport has zero to do with academics anymore, and if they want the money, they will have to play by the rules which are now set by the boosters and not the NCAA! Now on it will be instant gratification or the boosters will pull their funding. Slow growth means zero NIL dollars donated!

Click to expand...

Guys like Kevin Kruger will not be able to survive in this environment. You have to have a “relatable” plan upfront as a coach to even convince the NIL collectives to even give you a chance to coach and that chance is the money needed to operate!

LVRebel2000 said:

I believe the initial ruling was that the colleges were going to need to spread it out amongst all of the sports at a particular school, but that ruling was challenged. If it's truly profit sharing, then only sports that make a profit should be sharing that money, or at the very least, allow the schools to decide how to distribute it.

Click to expand...

Revenue sharing and it's implications to NCAA sports is not generally understood.

Revenue sharing is the result of a court case. The case allows up to $ 20 mil per University to be split to existing athletes. As of today there has been no mandate on how revenue needs to be split.

The initial date for the first distributions in this coming July 1st. Most schools are not planning to distribute equally to each athlete but are planning to split the majority to the sports bringing in revenue. Most P4 are set to follow something like the Texas Tech's model. Texas Tech announced in December 2024 a plan to distribute about 74% to football, 17–18% to men’s basketball, 2% to women’s basketball, 1.9% to baseball, and the rest to other sports, mirroring their revenue contributions. This would mean a $ 3.5 mil payment to Mens BB players. $ 270,000 per player if split equally. ( this is why it will be difficult to lure away P4 bench players)

An interesting aside are teams in conferences that don't have football but do bring in relatively large income from BB (think Villanove, Big East, Gonzaga - PAC , Grand Canyon - MW). They will be able to go much larger to BB - say 75% to men's BB. If they have the $ 20 mil that will mean $1.15 mill per player before NIL. With that they'll be able to lure the best players from around the world.

I've heard zero on UNLV plans along this subject. It would seem to me we have no funds for this.

Rebel1986 said:

They have lowered UNLV basketball tickets a long ways in the last few years. You can buy season tickets for a little over $100 upstairs!

Click to expand...

So raise it to $200 and move them downstairs.

unlove said:

How many season ticket holders are even left? I’d be shocked if it were above 3000. Seems like there is more upside financially to lower season tickets so you can attract larger crowds with reasonable ticket prices, of course that’s assuming the team actually performs well enough to attract folks to the games. It may just be a simple calculation that maintaining season ticket prices with a mediocre team brings in more revenues than trying to attract more fans with lower prices.

Click to expand...

They have lowered UNLV basketball tickets a long ways in the last few years. You can buy season tickets for a little over $100 upstairs!

rebel5280 said:

The thing is, you could see this coming, and I wonder if the NIL money would have magically appeared if Wade or Crean would have been the choice?

I don’t say this to stir anything up about hiring Josh, I’m actually curious to see if he can implement his ideas and system here. Because if he does we will be just fine in basketball.

Boosters running the show by pulling the purse strings, get use to it! Lol

Click to expand...

College sport has zero to do with academics anymore, and if they want the money, they will have to play by the rules which are now set by the boosters and not the NCAA! Now on it will be instant gratification or the boosters will pull their funding. Slow growth means zero NIL dollars donated!

Bullmastiff 1 said:

I don't know what the actual number is but I don't think there are any potential additions that increase it.

Example if the PAC deal is 8 they would need a school that was worth 18 million to a media partner to bump the average up to 10 million. (I'm terrible at math but you get the point)

There's nobody left that does that I don't think.

Click to expand...

I see the $8 million for the PAC as being their top out number at best, in regards to the MWC, I do see the possibility to move the number up some.

LVRebel2000 said:

I believe the initial ruling was that the colleges were going to need to spread it out amongst all of the sports at a particular school, but that ruling was challenged. If it's truly profit sharing, then only sports that make a profit should be sharing that money, or at the very least, allow the schools to decide how to distribute it.

Click to expand...

I agree and think that is how it will end up in the long run. Water ballet shouldn't be participating in profit sharing when there are no profits to be had.