Hanging on for 26

[Bigdaddyg1]

Maybe what college football should do is conduct a high school player draft for the G5 schools. Picks are totally randomly chosen each round. These guys play 2 years at the G5 level and each team takes X number of guys each draft. After their sophomore season any player can leave for a P4 offer. After the G5 draft the rest of the high school players can sign with FCS or lower levels. The FCS players remain at their school for 2 years then can move up as well. If we are glorified minor leagues then just treat it that way. Basically all G5 would be on equal footing and still have a playoff spot. For portal purposes P4 guys who aren’t getting playing time could “drop down” to G5 to fill spots as free agents. The high school draft could even be regionalized so kids don’t have to play too far from home. Hell you could even add trades. Since it’s all pay for play just change the whole system.

[Saint3333]

Remember when some here warned of the impact on non-revenue sports. We are a couple years away from schools dropping programs and thus limiting the number of opportunities available.

The goal of the NCAA is to provide students opportunities and they are failing in a macro sense.

[Appmountaineers19]

Remember when some here warned of the impact on non-revenue sports. We are a couple years away from schools dropping programs and thus limiting the number of opportunities available.

The goal of the NCAA is to provide students opportunities and they are failing in a macro sense.

100% it's coming unfortunately. They may keep the non-revenue sports but they will never be fully funded the way they need to be to compete.

[Bigdaddyg1]

Remember when some here warned of the impact on non-revenue sports. We are a couple years away from schools dropping programs and thus limiting the number of opportunities available.

The goal of the NCAA is to provide students opportunities and they are failing in a macro sense.

100% it's coming unfortunately. They may keep the non-revenue sports but they will never be fully funded the way they need to be to compete.

Absolutely true. How will a majority of schools be able to fund track, volleyball, field hockey, golf, tennis, etc if a great majority of the funds are directed towards football in the all out attempt to chase those rainbows? Obviously every program wants to compete and many continue to be delusional with their $1.5m pay for pay pots of cash. Will those other “minor” sports get relegated to club level? When is the last time anyone even heard a peep from the NCAA regarding any school doing something wrong?

[ASUTodd]

Remember when some here warned of the impact on non-revenue sports. We are a couple years away from schools dropping programs and thus limiting the number of opportunities available.

The goal of the NCAA is to provide students opportunities and they are failing in a macro sense.

I think the courts have failed the students and athletes.... The NCAA, while inept at times, has it's hands tied these days. Judges are making some mind boggling rulings these days.

[Appmountaineers19]

Remember when some here warned of the impact on non-revenue sports. We are a couple years away from schools dropping programs and thus limiting the number of opportunities available.

The goal of the NCAA is to provide students opportunities and they are failing in a macro sense.

100% it's coming unfortunately. They may keep the non-revenue sports but they will never be fully funded the way they need to be to compete.

Absolutely true. How will a majority of schools be able to fund track, volleyball, field hockey, golf, tennis, etc if a great majority of the funds are directed towards football in the all out attempt to chase those rainbows? Obviously every program wants to compete and many continue to be delusional with their $1.5m pay for pay pots of cash. Will those other “minor” sports get relegated to club level? When is the last time anyone even heard a peep from the NCAA regarding any school doing something wrong?

I do wonder if some of the non P5 universities (especially the privates) that do not have football/or FCS are at an advantage. You are seeing some non traditional teams in many sports making deeper runs in the NR sports. Also the powers to be at each school are saying these are the sports we are focusing on and the rest will get the bare minimun.

[JTApps1]

Which sport would we drop IF it becomes necessary? We're only one above the minimum right now and there's no way we'll drop a women's sport. The SBC requires us to carry Football, Basketball, and Baseball.

That leaves Outdoor Track, Cross Country, Golf, and Wrestling. Golf has the worst history, but it's dirt cheap to operate. Nothing gained financially by dropping it. The others all have a long history so feelings will get hurt one way or another. Wrestling actually generates some revenue and they're consistently in national rankings either as a team or individually. That means dropping Outdoor Track (also Cross Country since they go hand in hand) as it would free up a ton of costs given roster size. We'd be below the minimum so the next move is to bring back Men's Tennis.

[Appmountaineers19]

Which sport would we drop IF it becomes necessary? We're only one above the minimum right now and there's no way we'll drop a women's sport. The SBC requires us to carry Football, Basketball, and Baseball.

That leaves Outdoor Track, Cross Country, Golf, and Wrestling. Golf has the worst history, but it's dirt cheap to operate. Nothing gained financially by dropping it. The others all have a long history so feelings will get hurt one way or another. Wrestling actually generates some revenue and they're consistently in national rankings either as a team or individually. That means dropping Outdoor Track (also Cross Country since they go hand in hand) as it would free up a ton of costs given roster size. We'd be below the minimum so the next move is to bring back Men's Tennis.

I'm not saying drop any BUT be prepared to have these types of seasons and temper expectations in all sports. APP sports are average at best and it's going to be difficult moving forward to continue playing at a high level until something changes.

[JTApps1]

Which sport would we drop IF it becomes necessary? We're only one above the minimum right now and there's no way we'll drop a women's sport. The SBC requires us to carry Football, Basketball, and Baseball.

That leaves Outdoor Track, Cross Country, Golf, and Wrestling. Golf has the worst history, but it's dirt cheap to operate. Nothing gained financially by dropping it. The others all have a long history so feelings will get hurt one way or another. Wrestling actually generates some revenue and they're consistently in national rankings either as a team or individually. That means dropping Outdoor Track (also Cross Country since they go hand in hand) as it would free up a ton of costs given roster size. We'd be below the minimum so the next move is to bring back Men's Tennis.

I'm not saying drop any BUT be prepared to have these types of season and temper expectations in all sports. APP sports are average at best and it's going to be difficult moving forward to continue playing at a high level until something changes.

We have four options- 1)Hire some amazing fund raisers unlike we've ever had. 2) The University will have to heavily increase their subsidy which likely means increasing student fees. 3) Go bare minimum on funding non-revenue sports and adjust expectations accordingly. 4) Drop the most expensive non-revenue sports we're allowed to drop and replace with low cost options.

[Appmountaineers19]

Which sport would we drop IF it becomes necessary? We're only one above the minimum right now and there's no way we'll drop a women's sport. The SBC requires us to carry Football, Basketball, and Baseball.

That leaves Outdoor Track, Cross Country, Golf, and Wrestling. Golf has the worst history, but it's dirt cheap to operate. Nothing gained financially by dropping it. The others all have a long history so feelings will get hurt one way or another. Wrestling actually generates some revenue and they're consistently in national rankings either as a team or individually. That means dropping Outdoor Track (also Cross Country since they go hand in hand) as it would free up a ton of costs given roster size. We'd be below the minimum so the next move is to bring back Men's Tennis.

I'm not saying drop any BUT be prepared to have these types of season and temper expectations in all sports. APP sports are average at best and it's going to be difficult moving forward to continue playing at a high level until something changes.

We have four options- 1)Hire some amazing fund raisers unlike we've ever had. 2) The University will have to heavily increase their subsidy which likely means increasing student fees. 3) Go bare minimum on funding non-revenue sports and adjust expectations accordingly. 4) Drop the most expensive non-revenue sports we're allowed to drop and replace with low cost options.

I agree but until the powers to be change the way they do things currently all we can do is vent on the message board.
(Things may never change as much as we want. Me personally - I have already relegated myself to that idea in all sports when the changes starting happening 5 years ago)

[BambooRdApp]

As he was only here a short time and I only met him once in passing.. so do not know the day to day of working with him or overall personality... the Patrick guy (now at Missouri St. now maybe).. during his tenure, there seemed to be more outreach or proactive contact regarding fund raising. I may not have agreed with all the ideas, I will give him credit (if he was the mastermind behind it while here) for trying.

[MrCraig]

Remember when some here warned of the impact on non-revenue sports. We are a couple years away from schools dropping programs and thus limiting the number of opportunities available.

The goal of the NCAA is to provide students opportunities and they are failing in a macro sense.

I think the courts have failed the students and athletes.... The NCAA, while inept at times, has it's hands tied these days. Judges are making some mind boggling rulings these days.

I believe the opposite is true. The NCAA failed the students and athletes by not being proactive. They knew that if a case ever made the Supreme Court, they'd lose and have to allow players to start making money, transferring, etc. Instead of preparing for the change and establishing rules and regulations, they buried their heads.
The courts are just interpreting the law.

[t4pizza]

Remember when some here warned of the impact on non-revenue sports. We are a couple years away from schools dropping programs and thus limiting the number of opportunities available.

The goal of the NCAA is to provide students opportunities and they are failing in a macro sense.

I think the courts have failed the students and athletes.... The NCAA, while inept at times, has it's hands tied these days. Judges are making some mind boggling rulings these days.

I believe the opposite is true. The NCAA failed the students and athletes by not being proactive. They knew that if a case ever made the Supreme Court, they'd lose and have to allow players to start making money, transferring, etc. Instead of preparing for the change and establishing rules and regulations, they buried their heads.
The courts are just interpreting the law.

I do not think the NCAA, or anyone else for that matter, knew that that Supremes would upend their world. The Alston case reversed YEARS of precedent and, despite what people think, that rarely happens. The Supremes completely gutted the entire notion of amateurism that had been in place for decades. This was not a known conclusion. It is important to remember that Alston was NOT a case involving NIL but rather dealt with education related benefits. A few legal scholars may have believed that the Supremes would finally decide it was an anti trust violation, but it surely was not a majority or even a consensus at that time.

What was known was that many states had enacted NIL laws that would go to the very heart of the amateurism fight and the NCAA failed to address those laws prior to any legal action. Alston essentially rendered those non existent measures of the NCAA moot.

[Stonewall]

Patrick Ransdell. And golf alumni basically fund that program.

[rbarthle17]

I am curious about how the portal is going to shake out for us, more in terms of who's going than coming. It's my belief that, given the current financial realities of college athletics, any player who has a statistically good season or better should be at least doing their due diligence in terms of seeing what opportunities are out there. Even if they end up staying, nobody should fault them for taking advantage of their situations.

I would love to say let's go find culture players, kids willing to stick around and be part of something bigger than them. That's who we used to get. I'm not sure those players exist in any meaningful way anymore. So we need to embrace our status as "train station in the middle of the route" and understand that we are the proving ground for players coming from both ways, but none of them should be thought of as building blocks other than their short term success will lead others to consider coming here for the same.

Great observation; not sure we can assume the rising stars from the 2025 squad will stick around for another spin on the carousel. But that’s the case for most G5’s, right?

It is, even for the best funded G5's. But I have no doubt that we are not alone in terms of having a not-insignificant portion of our fanbase hanging onto delusions of it being otherwise. Outside of maybe a dozen schools, are there any that are really thriving in these early days of the portal/NIL era?