BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Harky4 said:

---

Our level of NIL funding for our MBB program is rather dismal (likely bottom quartile or worse in the ACC). VA, for example, is reported to have had $14M or so to spend on its much improved roster this year (Duke, NC, Louisville and perhaps Syracuse, Miami and Clemson may be near or even exceed that amount). We had somewhere around $4M-$5M by comparison (as well as lacking a dedicated practice facility). Recruiting talent with NIL funds has a direct correlation to the degree of competitiveness and success that a team likely will have within a reasonable degree, with the level of coaching being another variable.

---

recruiting for the current season was tough with the basically unlimited NIL budgets for the top programs, but I don't think that will be possible for next season's recruiting.

Yes, Duke and UNC will have some legit NIL sponsorships, but the large gaps shouldn't be as dramatic. At least I don't think so.

However, we somehow need to get the dedicated practice facility. I haven't heard an update on that for a while now.

---

The NIL budgets are simply not going to go down. The theory behind that is naive

---

The theory is that NIL prices were especially high last year because many programs opted to empty their NIL coffers before the new rules take effect this year. Even if programs now decide to ignore the new rules, NIL prices shouldn't be as crazy as last year.

---

I know the theory

---

Another theory which I am just now making up is that some donors (somewhere), who are used to donating for capital improvements, are going to have to somehow wrap their heads around the fact that the 6 or 7 figure "NIL" donations from this year are going to have repeated next year... and the year after that... and the year after that and...

---

I do wonder how sustainable this is. Not just at Cal, but everywhere. How willing are donors to keep writing checks to pay athletes who will just up and leave the next year?

---

Well, right now with the K shaped economy the top 10% are flush in cash and spending a lot. People have been pretty irrational all my life about spending on sports. The next time they stop will be the first time.

No one really cares about players being committed to a school. They care about how many W's their laundry gets this year.

---

Not sure about the other posters but here is what I mean......

There are programs (your mileage will vary of whom and how many) that can sustsain this from their regular revenue streams. Those streams can be enhanced and modified to increase flow but does not require abnormal conditions.

Then their are others. Indiana and Mark Cuban are a good example. Yes. Cubans $$$ were instrumental in allowing them to get the cogs they needed. But it is the right question to ask whether he is writring a check every year for the next 10 years. Or, to be snarky, what happens to Michigan when Larry finds a new sugarbaby who goes to an SEC school.

That is the challenge for NIL. We are talking about so much money - and the challenges that every few years a new whale will arrive to make a spalsh - that we get these spikes in $$$ and new pecking order. But sustaining position in such a world is really difficult - and as fans we are going to have to calibrate to that.

---

Mark Cuban is being portrayed as a lot more instrumental than he was because his name is Mark Cuban

---