Fryowa
Administrator
...it won't.
I keep reading a lot of people online commenting that once revenue sharing goes into effect it will help even out the playing field. Couldn't be further from the truth.
Revenue sharing is capped at $20.5 million per school to be divided up between sports. So in the case where say, Purdue currently has $7 million for basketball and Iowa has $1.5 million, the gap between other schools isn't going to close. Football is always going to be the big dog in town for each sports program (even basketball schools), and it's being widely reported that most places will put 75%+ of revenue sharing towards football which makes sense because you put your money toward your biggest revenue sport. Heinrichs has said for Iowa it will be probably more than 75%.
So let's be conservative and say that Iowa is going to give 30% of that $20.5 million to basketball ($6,150,000...not gonna happen, btw, lol)...Under current state that would bring us to $7.65 million for basketball salary.
Let's then be conservative the other way and say that Purdue gives 20% of their rev-share to basketball ($4,100,000). That would bring their total basketball salary money to $11.1 million. That extreme (and very unlikely) scenario...heavily favored towards Iowa...would still put the salary gap at $3.5 million to the detriment of the Hawks. And that's just one team.
Basically this means that if Iowa was on the bottom of NIL before rev share, they're still going to be on the bottom after.
Sorry to burst your bubble, folks, but that above hypothetical is total fiction, heavily biased towards Iowa, and isn't going to happen, but even if it did the Hawks are still WAY out of the mix for NIL. And then when you start talking schools like Penn State and OSU that have those enormous collectives it gets even worse. Those schools are effectively going to double the huge collectives they already have. And let's not even get started with the big SEC schools that have even bigger collectives, they could essentially give everything to basketball and it wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket to their football programs.
It's time to face the music and temper your expectations of what a new coach, revenue sharing, and so on will bring. It's not going to move the needle. People here better get ready for a new reality, and Iowa basketball isn't in that new reality. Until they get some donor to fork over $5-6 million bucks specifically to the basketball program this thing is going to tank no matter what coach they hire. You really think any coach they interview isn't doing that math too? If you know someone with an extra $5 million to blow expecting no ROI, give 'em a call. I'll wait.
Also, before anyone here starts gushing about McCollum, let's all remember he has ONE season of Division 1 basketball under his belt, no coaching experience in P6 basketball...and Todd Lickliter had 4 NCAA tourneys (including 2 S16's) before he came here. I get wanting a different coach...I really do...but you guys are setting yourselves up for extreme disappointment here.
I keep reading a lot of people online commenting that once revenue sharing goes into effect it will help even out the playing field. Couldn't be further from the truth.
Revenue sharing is capped at $20.5 million per school to be divided up between sports. So in the case where say, Purdue currently has $7 million for basketball and Iowa has $1.5 million, the gap between other schools isn't going to close. Football is always going to be the big dog in town for each sports program (even basketball schools), and it's being widely reported that most places will put 75%+ of revenue sharing towards football which makes sense because you put your money toward your biggest revenue sport. Heinrichs has said for Iowa it will be probably more than 75%.
So let's be conservative and say that Iowa is going to give 30% of that $20.5 million to basketball ($6,150,000...not gonna happen, btw, lol)...Under current state that would bring us to $7.65 million for basketball salary.
Let's then be conservative the other way and say that Purdue gives 20% of their rev-share to basketball ($4,100,000). That would bring their total basketball salary money to $11.1 million. That extreme (and very unlikely) scenario...heavily favored towards Iowa...would still put the salary gap at $3.5 million to the detriment of the Hawks. And that's just one team.
Basically this means that if Iowa was on the bottom of NIL before rev share, they're still going to be on the bottom after.
Sorry to burst your bubble, folks, but that above hypothetical is total fiction, heavily biased towards Iowa, and isn't going to happen, but even if it did the Hawks are still WAY out of the mix for NIL. And then when you start talking schools like Penn State and OSU that have those enormous collectives it gets even worse. Those schools are effectively going to double the huge collectives they already have. And let's not even get started with the big SEC schools that have even bigger collectives, they could essentially give everything to basketball and it wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket to their football programs.
It's time to face the music and temper your expectations of what a new coach, revenue sharing, and so on will bring. It's not going to move the needle. People here better get ready for a new reality, and Iowa basketball isn't in that new reality. Until they get some donor to fork over $5-6 million bucks specifically to the basketball program this thing is going to tank no matter what coach they hire. You really think any coach they interview isn't doing that math too? If you know someone with an extra $5 million to blow expecting no ROI, give 'em a call. I'll wait.
Also, before anyone here starts gushing about McCollum, let's all remember he has ONE season of Division 1 basketball under his belt, no coaching experience in P6 basketball...and Todd Lickliter had 4 NCAA tourneys (including 2 S16's) before he came here. I get wanting a different coach...I really do...but you guys are setting yourselves up for extreme disappointment here.
