Seems like a Juju Watkins/Hidalgo type of scoring threat. Any chance we can land her?
She wears a lot of UCLA swag…
She wears a lot of UCLA swag…
WBB Recruiting: Any Chance of getting A. Chavez?
- Thread starter Evilchicken
- Start date
Roll out the dough! Adding a lights out shooter is the perfect compliment to what we bring back next year. We need a superstar to compliment Edwards
Yeah, I know! It’s the only program that is currently bringing any prestige to this **** sandwich of an athletics program.
The orginal intent is most likely found today in NCAA D-III and NAIA. And Club teams.
True but there NIL valuations are a lot higher than what they used to be. You can’t just say I’m Dawn Staley come play for me anymore. The NIL space has to be competitive for women. Yes it’s just women’s basketball but this is not 1980s women’s basketball.
Actually, I don’t think it’s a loser. The university and the BOT have been using the basketball program as a loss lead to domestic degree for donors.
…,,, just think if you listen to new AD Jeremiah Donati on how far we are behind in luxury seating at our basketball venue and at our football venue. Season tickets for women basketball average about two dollars per ticket. That price has been around for a decade plus.
So you look at all that kind of stuff and you look at the financial statement and then you scratch your head and say this is fixable accounting loss in WBB. There is positive revenue there thats not accounted properly.
From a 1/16/25 article in The State regarding the coming revenue-sharing model:
Voodoo accounting wouldn't fix anything but perception. When it comes to money, that won't get it.
Yes, those would typify the original intent of college athletics, the original intent of NIL is a different topic. It did not envision collectives or school-administered slush funds, which is where we are and where we are headed.
This statement is not actually true. Season tickets that now sell for $200 each sold for $45 a seat three years ago. I love WBB and it has been and still is a deal. I do agree with your point. The “valuation” of the USC brand and goodwill is off the charts. It will never be a classic P&L winner but is immeasurable on the balance sheet and marketing our University.
The positive revenue is called "good will." The 5.1 million is an investment.
I attended the Mississippi game at CLA a year ago (my first visit to that venue). Tickets were selling at $25.00 a piece. Of course, that's just one game, not the average per game for a season package. Still, it's reflective of interest in the program. And I prefer watching the women play than the men. Even non-USC programs.
Excactly, King.
I merely point that out to thise who think that the college game is done is that it's D-I which is done. D-II, I'm not sure, as athletic scholarships are allowed in D-II, but are forbidden in D-III.
Well if you keep ticket prices on average less than $2 - the University chooses to lose $ in WBB. My point is their is no desire for our 501C to make any additional money in WBB.
Don't forget the free unadvertised dollars we get from the press based on WBB success. Everytime they mention university of South Carolina on television when our ladies play.
Soft dollars, virtually impossible to convincingly quantify. I'm somewhat of an expert on this, having written proposals using soft dollar potential to justify hard-dollar capital expenditures. Beyond a certain point, the hard-dollar business people are not moved. I wouldn't try to get it past Warren Buffett.
There's a chance the new NCAA tournament payout system with WBB will make it a money maker, or at least a program that could break even.
Does the money go to the players or the schools? If to the schools, do conferences fix the shares given to the schools? If the schools get the money and allocate it to the various sports, would the WBB share be high enough to offset its deficit? There's much to be determined.
I'm not sure on the specific details, but WBB will bring in a lot more revenue than it did in the past.
Women's college basketball teams to be paid for playing NCAA Tournament games
In a move to help close the pay gap between men and women in college sports, the NCAA will now pay Division I women's basketball teams who play in March Madness games starting this year.
www.cbsnews.com
Well, after reading the details, it won't be that much. The funds will go to the conference.
At least the SEC typically gets a lot of bids. If this gets us into the black, I'll be delighted, and somewhat surprised.I'm not sure on the specific details, but WBB will bring in a lot more revenue than it did in the past.
Women's college basketball teams to be paid for playing NCAA Tournament games
In a move to help close the pay gap between men and women in college sports, the NCAA will now pay Division I women's basketball teams who play in March Madness games starting this year.
Well, after reading the details, it won't be that much. The funds will go to the conference.
A lot of bids and having those teams win as many tournament games as possible will be the key to the payouts. But the dollar amounts really don't seem that big and once you split the money 16, 18, or 20 ways among super-conference members . . .
We got some notice, but as far as I'm concerned, we gave up half our cred in Orlando. Horrible.
I can't go any lower than 3/8, and it hurts to do it.I would say 1/4.
