The whole point of football is to help fund these other sports. I give money to other sports, even though it doesn’t drastically affect the budget.
Except the answer is both. There is no reason football, men's basketball, baseball, and hockey can't all be successful. There is no causation between the success of one and the failure of another, except the contrived and artificial excuse that football uses more money that could be used on the other programs. No - just spend more money.
Vanderbilt is a baseball school and spends like one. They also recently started spending on football and hoops. Guess which one is the worst program this year?
The answer seems easy, just locate that "pot o' gold" everyone keeps talking about.
Notre Dame made $185 million in revenue last year for athletics. That would put them at top 5 in the nation. We got a pot of gold.
If you were a donor, are you going to give them $50M to spread everywhere? A blank check to Pete - have at it however you best see fit?
Someone might be willing to give the money if they were convinced that money is the only thing holding back the program. Seems like a hard sell right now.
Completely agree. Especially as a Catholic.
For real, there is finite funding not infinite funding. ND donors are primarily passionate about football AND are enthusiastic to donate because they believe in the product. It's emotional ROI ... giving money to a program run by Freeman that has back-to-back top 10 seasons is not a hard sell. They see the impact of their funding.
What's the NIL look like for lax? Obviously it's not going to take as much, but they have been recruiting well.
Notre Dame is going to be cutting scholarships for Olympic sports in future years. I heard baseball was going from 11.7 to 10.5. Hockey will lose 2 scholarships as well.
Syracuse does the most NIL for lax and it isn't close. Hopkins also does a good amount.
Concur. There is a very small group of people who enthusiastically want to donate money to football and are emotionally invested in winning. And then everyone else it's arguably much more awkward fundraising than historical athletic or academic fundraising.
I don't keep up on a lot of that stuff, that's good info I didn't know about Olympic sports. I do know they made some public comments about having to tighten the belt on sports that are in the red + don't have donor support but I'm surprised hockey is in that category considering the funds they raised for Compton.
This part. Bevacqua has indicated they are playing within the bounds of the $20M cap for direct pay. As for NIL, sure, there is money out there for NIL, but what exactly is the pitch to boosters to spend it on MBB in its current state?
I'm not sure Pat has been back for basketball at all. I realize he's been in the NBA, but he used to go back during the summer when Brey was there. He's a Brey guy through and through, and I'm not sure he's that happy with how he was treated the last few years. Beyond that, he seems to put his money towards his charity, which is frankly a better use of it.
If we can't raise NIL $ for MBB we could allocate more of the 20M direct money to MBB and raise more NIL for FB since that's where the market seems to be.
I anticipated that NIL funding was going go through three phases.....1) rapid increase as people that couldn't directly fund before now could 2) Step 1 would peak and there would be a plateau and even slight decline as people grew tired of the ask for moar! and or realized the by product of their investment was not something they wanted to continue to finance 3) After step 2, reach a stable saturated state.
That’s not what will happen. The message will be “we won a title, but now we need another title”. It won’t ever end; there will always be some excuse made for not giving to other sports.