https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-players

Looks like it's nearly official once a judge approves it formally with an expected Fall 2025 start date of revenue sharing.

Quote:

---

The NCAA and its leagues are moving forward with a multibillion-dollar agreement to settle three pending federal antitrust cases. The NCAA will pay more than $2.7 billion in damages over 10 years to past and current athletes, sources told ESPN. Sources said the parties also have agreed to a revenue-sharing plan allowing each school to share up to roughly $20 million per year with its athletes.

---

How will this affect Cal or our existing NIL efforts?

StillNoStanfurdium said:

---

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40206364/ncaa-power-conferences-agree-allow-schools-pay-players

Looks like it's nearly official once a judge approves it formally with an expected Fall 2025 start date of revenue sharing.

Quote:

---

The NCAA and its leagues are moving forward with a multibillion-dollar agreement to settle three pending federal antitrust cases. The NCAA will pay more than $2.7 billion in damages over 10 years to past and current athletes, sources told ESPN. Sources said the parties also have agreed to a revenue-sharing plan allowing each school to share up to roughly $20 million per year with its athletes.

---

How will this affect Cal or our existing NIL efforts?

---

It remains to be seen how this plays out, but I don't see this as a good development for Cal. Cal is one of the "P5" that can least afford to pay this settlement or pay players from our revenues going forward.

The current NIL situation is good for Cal, but it is a temporary transition period. Once the P4 inevitably start paying players from their media earnings we will be at a severe competitive disadvantage until will get our full ACC payout. A decade of attempting to compete with the reduced earnings we were lucky to get due to our failed leadership (even with Calimony) will set us up poorly for the next round of realignment when the current ACC GORs ends.

Our only hope is that we have visionary leaders who see the potential to build a huge fan base in the East Bsy and throughout California as semi-professional team, generating our own income streams, inspiring our large wealthy alumni base to contribute what we currently call NIL. As I've said before, I think that works best with the revenue sports outsourced to an alumni run organization that can hire the professional sports managers and marketers to build the brand and excite alums and other fans to buy tickets and contribute.

calumnus said:

---

As I've said before, I think that works best with the revenue sports outsourced to an alumni run organization that can hire the professional sports managers and marketers to build the brand and excite alums and other fans to buy tickets and contribute.

---

That's kind of the hope . . . that the success of the NIL collective helps convince the school to just outsource most of this stuff to people like that. They clearly don't care that much about managing it themselves.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/ncaa-settlement-qa-how-will-schools-distribute-revenue-what-is-the-future-of-nil-collectives-and-more-125519681.html

$20M salary cap across all sports and all schools are treated equally?
Do I have that right?

Ohio State's budget is $250M, the article says.

This "deal" will no doubt change significantly. Seems like the floodgates have been ripped open now.

College sports is now Pro sports.
Maybe some prominent school with no football will give all its dough to Olympians. The Ivy's?

I hope FSU and Clemson enjoy sharing Cal's revenue with their athletes.

concordtom said:

---

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/ncaa-settlement-qa-how-will-schools-distribute-revenue-what-is-the-future-of-nil-collectives-and-more-125519681.html

$20M salary cap across all sports and all schools are treated equally?
Do I have that right?

Ohio State's budget is $250M, the article says.

This "deal" will no doubt change significantly. Seems like the floodgates have been ripped open now.

College sports is now Pro sports.
Maybe some prominent school with no football will give all its dough to Olympians. The Ivy's?

---

Wonder what school this administration quoted in the yahoo article works for?

Quote:

---

"The whole reason we are in this scenario is because we've been funneling money from football to pay for country club sports," said an associate athletic administrator at a power conference.

The administrator was referring to a traditional structure of athletic department finances: Revenues often related to football and men's basketball (TV contracts, ticket sales and donations) are used to fund Olympic sports that, at many schools, lose a combined $30 million or more annually.

---

Also, the article says that the $22 million cap number is actually 22% of the average revenue per p5 school. It sounds like it is the same for each school, but it seems to me that schools/conferences with more revenue might want to base it more individually. They are saying it will be many months before details are worked out. From the players side, it would mean more revenue to players for schools like Ohio State to be able to pay more because the lesser revenue schools will not hit that cap or come close. That could only be a short term benefit - enough people losing interest in CFB when their school is left behind could harm viewership and revenue long term.

As for the title ix implications, the NCAA president is saying he thinks there could be unequal distribution between men and women if opportunities for women remain the same. But I think the first school that does unequal distribution would face a title ix lawsuit as there is no precident at the moment. I could see Cal not wanting to be that school getting sued at the start. Someone has to be that sacrificial guinea pig, or Congress and/ or the Dept of Education need to act quickly to clarify.

Ha! T'is but a rounding error!

ColoradoBear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/ncaa-settlement-qa-how-will-schools-distribute-revenue-what-is-the-future-of-nil-collectives-and-more-125519681.html

$20M salary cap across all sports and all schools are treated equally?
Do I have that right?

Ohio State's budget is $250M, the article says.

This "deal" will no doubt change significantly. Seems like the floodgates have been ripped open now.

College sports is now Pro sports.
Maybe some prominent school with no football will give all its dough to Olympians. The Ivy's?

---

Wonder what school this administration quoted in the yahoo article works for?

Quote:

---

"The whole reason we are in this scenario is because we've been funneling money from football to pay for country club sports," said an associate athletic administrator at a power conference.

The administrator was referring to a traditional structure of athletic department finances: Revenues often related to football and men's basketball (TV contracts, ticket sales and donations) are used to fund Olympic sports that, at many schools, lose a combined $30 million or more annually.

---

Also, the article says that the $22 million cap number is actually 22% of the average revenue per p5 school. It sounds like it is the same for each school, but it seems to me that schools/conferences with more revenue might want to base it more individually. They are saying it will be many months before details are worked out. From the players side, it would mean more revenue to players for schools like Ohio State to be able to pay more because the lesser revenue schools will not hit that cap or come close. That could only be a short term benefit - enough people losing interest in CFB when their school is left behind could harm viewership and revenue long term.

As for the title ix implications, the NCAA president is saying he thinks there could be unequal distribution between men and women if opportunities for women remain the same. But I think the first school that does unequal distribution would face a title ix lawsuit as there is no precident at the moment. I could see Cal not wanting to be that school getting sued at the start. Someone has to be that sacrificial guinea pig, or Congress and/ or the Dept of Education need to act quickly to clarify.

---

You pulled a gem quote out of the article there.
I suppose the thinking is that country club sports are white privileged? Only good for a certain segment of the population?
Whereas football is a game EVERYONE can and will enjoy their entire lives, so let's keep all the money there?

The argument could have been made differently, as such:
"I believe the revenue earners should receive their full share of money, and not divide the money elsewhere - that would be unjust."

But no, they said "country club sports". That's a dog whistle for race and class division, which is a worse way to make one's point.

Why do I think the school's payments to players getting worked out and finalized is going to coincide with the TV money disappearing and a dramatic reduction in overall revenue?

I do know this, if I'm raising a 5 year old, I am not banking on an athletic scholarship in an obscure sport. I see athletic departments getting cut in half in another 10 to 15 years.

golden sloth said:

---

Why do I think the school's payments to players getting worked out and finalized is going to coincide with the TV money disappearing and a dramatic reduction in overall revenue?

I do know this, if I'm raising a 5 year old, I am not banking on an athletic scholarship in an obscure sport. I see athletic departments getting cut in half in another 10 to 15 years.

---

More likely 5 or less.

59bear said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Why do I think the school's payments to players getting worked out and finalized is going to coincide with the TV money disappearing and a dramatic reduction in overall revenue?

I do know this, if I'm raising a 5 year old, I am not banking on an athletic scholarship in an obscure sport. I see athletic departments getting cut in half in another 10 to 15 years.

---

More likely 5 or less.

---

Yes, once market forces are unleashed they can act very quickly.

concordtom said:

---

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/ncaa-settlement-qa-how-will-schools-distribute-revenue-what-is-the-future-of-nil-collectives-and-more-125519681.html

$20M salary cap across all sports and all schools are treated equally?
Do I have that right?

Ohio State's budget is $250M, the article says.

This "deal" will no doubt change significantly.

---

It has to change. The part of the settlement about enforcing "true NIL" is ridiculous. Future college athletes who are not part of this settlement can't be forced to agree to limit their outside NIL to some mythical "fair market value".

If some booster wants to give a football player $1 million, and the NCAA tries to use this settlement to force the player to say no, then that player could and should sue for the right to take that $1 million. The NCAA is still trying to live by the fiction that these athletes are not employees, correct? If the athlete is a mere student, then they can take the money, just like a non-athlete could take money if a booster wants to pay him or her to study electrical engineering at School X instead of School Y.

BearSD said:

---

concordtom said:

---

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/ncaa-settlement-qa-how-will-schools-distribute-revenue-what-is-the-future-of-nil-collectives-and-more-125519681.html

$20M salary cap across all sports and all schools are treated equally?
Do I have that right?

Ohio State's budget is $250M, the article says.

This "deal" will no doubt change significantly.

---

It has to change. The part of the settlement about enforcing "true NIL" is ridiculous. Future college athletes who are not part of this settlement can't be forced to agree to limit their outside NIL to some mythical "fair market value".

If some booster wants to give a football player $1 million, and the NCAA tries to use this settlement to force the player to say no, then that player could and should sue for the right to take that $1 million. The NCAA is still trying to live by the fiction that these athletes are not employees, correct? If the athlete is a mere student, then they can take the money, just like a non-athlete could take money if a booster wants to pay him or her to study electrical engineering at School X instead of School Y.

---

I think what they are saying is that the money which is going to the students is basically about 50% of the revenue for tickets, tv revenue and sponsorship dollars - basically a 50/50 revenue share with the players. The idea is that the total amount of revenue in these categories for the 60 or so soon to be Power 4 conferences is 100 million, and so 50% is 50 million. The average scholarship costs, extended benefits already paid, etc works out to about 28 million, and so the 22 million is the difference. It will be adjusted as it moves forward. They already have a 4% escalator in the deal for the first 3 years. So by the third year it will be almost 25 million.

Schools do not have to pay the 22 million, but then they will not really get the good players.

As for NIL - they are saying they do not want collectives anymore. It is not clear that they can actually ban them, but based on this case, they are trying to throw that in. Only "True" NIL - meaning a deal with a business, or social media money, etc. So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

The big issue is Title 9 - does the money have to be divided evenly between mens and women's sports? It seems like the court will have to adjudicate this in the future - either way it will be litigated.

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

concordtom said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

---

And why just the P4? Still, this is the opening for schools to pay/have to pay athletes from their media and ticket revenue. It was/is inevitable. And when it comes Cal will be in a horrible position given the minimal revenues we are receiving relative to the rest of the P4. I don't see how we will be able to compete.

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

---

And why just the P4? Still, this is the opening for schools to pay/have to pay athletes from their media and ticket revenue. It was/is inevitable. And when it comes Cal will be in a horrible position given the minimal revenues we are receiving relative to the rest of the P4. I don't see how we will be able to compete.

---

couldn't the collective just buy something from the AD, making it AD revenue? most expensive t-shirt ever, but revenue is revenue

bencgilmore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

---

And why just the P4? Still, this is the opening for schools to pay/have to pay athletes from their media and ticket revenue. It was/is inevitable. And when it comes Cal will be in a horrible position given the minimal revenues we are receiving relative to the rest of the P4. I don't see how we will be able to compete.

---

couldn't the collective just buy something from the AD, making it AD revenue? most expensive t-shirt ever, but revenue is revenue

---

Right now, it is our collective vs everyone else's collective. We are competing well, with Top 10 portal classes.

However, once schools can use their media revenues to pay players, it will be our our collective + Cal AD vs every other P4 teams' collective + their AD.

I may have the numbers wrong but it is something like: B1G schools make $70 million, SEC schools $60 million(?), ACC schools make $40 million and Big-12 schools make $30 million.

Cal will make $10 million from the ACC plus up to $10 million from Calimony, but currently fields far more non-revenue sports than most schools and has a huge deficit.

While theoretically our collective can "just pay more" that effectively means our collective will be operating at a $20 million or more per year disadvantage against our own ACC competition for years until we start receiving our full ACC payout. The challenge will be surviving the next 5 years when we need to be thriving.

calumnus said:

---

bencgilmore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

---

And why just the P4? Still, this is the opening for schools to pay/have to pay athletes from their media and ticket revenue. It was/is inevitable. And when it comes Cal will be in a horrible position given the minimal revenues we are receiving relative to the rest of the P4. I don't see how we will be able to compete.

---

couldn't the collective just buy something from the AD, making it AD revenue? most expensive t-shirt ever, but revenue is revenue

---

Right now, it is our collective vs everyone else's collective. We are competing well, with Top 10 portal classes.

However, once schools can use their media revenues to pay players, it will be our our collective + Cal AD vs every other P4 teams' collective + their AD.

I may have the numbers wrong but it is something like: B1G schools make $70 million, SEC schools $60 million(?), ACC schools make $40 million and Big-12 schools make $30 million.

Cal will make $10 million from the ACC plus up to $10 million from Calimony, but currently fields far more non-revenue sports than most schools and has a huge deficit.

While theoretically our collective can "just pay more" that effectively means our collective will be operating at a $20 million or more per year disadvantage against our own ACC competition for years until we start receiving our full ACC payout. The challenge will be surviving the next 5 years when we need to be thriving.

---

The ACC paid out ~45 million/school for 2022-2023. Will likely hit 50+ million for 2024-25. Cal supposedly gets 30% of the tier 1 tv contract, but equal shares of the rest of revenue. I think that puts Cal at around 35 million. + calimony. (Minus travel). Men's tourney money will take a hit if the settlement goes. Equal loss for all ACC members.

ColoradoBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

bencgilmore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

---

And why just the P4? Still, this is the opening for schools to pay/have to pay athletes from their media and ticket revenue. It was/is inevitable. And when it comes Cal will be in a horrible position given the minimal revenues we are receiving relative to the rest of the P4. I don't see how we will be able to compete.

---

couldn't the collective just buy something from the AD, making it AD revenue? most expensive t-shirt ever, but revenue is revenue

---

Right now, it is our collective vs everyone else's collective. We are competing well, with Top 10 portal classes.

However, once schools can use their media revenues to pay players, it will be our our collective + Cal AD vs every other P4 teams' collective + their AD.

I may have the numbers wrong but it is something like: B1G schools make $70 million, SEC schools $60 million(?), ACC schools make $40 million and Big-12 schools make $30 million.

Cal will make $10 million from the ACC plus up to $10 million from Calimony, but currently fields far more non-revenue sports than most schools and has a huge deficit.

While theoretically our collective can "just pay more" that effectively means our collective will be operating at a $20 million or more per year disadvantage against our own ACC competition for years until we start receiving our full ACC payout. The challenge will be surviving the next 5 years when we need to be thriving.

---

The ACC paid out ~45 million/school for 2022-2023. Will likely hit 50+ million for 2024-25. Cal supposedly gets 30% of the tier 1 tv contract, but equal shares of the rest of revenue. I think that puts Cal at around 35 million. + calimony. (Minus travel). Men's tourney money will take a hit if the settlement goes. Equal loss for all ACC members.

---

Correct.

Another way to look at it: Cal (and Stanford), for the next 7 academic years, will get a full share of ACC revenue minus 70% of the $24 million per team "Tier 1" payment from ESPN. Whatever an ACC full share is, Cal's conference revenue will be that amount minus $16.8 million. It's not great, but it's far better than the alternative of staying with the Pac-2.

BearSD said:

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

bencgilmore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

---

And why just the P4? Still, this is the opening for schools to pay/have to pay athletes from their media and ticket revenue. It was/is inevitable. And when it comes Cal will be in a horrible position given the minimal revenues we are receiving relative to the rest of the P4. I don't see how we will be able to compete.

---

couldn't the collective just buy something from the AD, making it AD revenue? most expensive t-shirt ever, but revenue is revenue

---

Right now, it is our collective vs everyone else's collective. We are competing well, with Top 10 portal classes.

However, once schools can use their media revenues to pay players, it will be our our collective + Cal AD vs every other P4 teams' collective + their AD.

I may have the numbers wrong but it is something like: B1G schools make $70 million, SEC schools $60 million(?), ACC schools make $40 million and Big-12 schools make $30 million.

Cal will make $10 million from the ACC plus up to $10 million from Calimony, but currently fields far more non-revenue sports than most schools and has a huge deficit.

While theoretically our collective can "just pay more" that effectively means our collective will be operating at a $20 million or more per year disadvantage against our own ACC competition for years until we start receiving our full ACC payout. The challenge will be surviving the next 5 years when we need to be thriving.

---

The ACC paid out ~45 million/school for 2022-2023. Will likely hit 50+ million for 2024-25. Cal supposedly gets 30% of the tier 1 tv contract, but equal shares of the rest of revenue. I think that puts Cal at around 35 million. + calimony. (Minus travel). Men's tourney money will take a hit if the settlement goes. Equal loss for all ACC members.

---

Correct.

Another way to look at it: Cal (and Stanford), for the next 7 academic years, will get a full share of ACC revenue minus 70% of the $24 million per team "Tier 1" payment from ESPN. Whatever an ACC full share is, Cal's conference revenue will be that amount minus $16.8 million. It's not great, but it's far better than the alternative of staying with the Pac-2.

---

I was overjoyed that we got into the ACC. No one is doubting it is not the best we could do given the horrible situation we put ourselves in.

However, of all the Power 4 teams, what schools will be in a worse competitive situation when the schools start paying the players? Maybe Stanford and SMU, but as private schools with huge athletics endowments and less public scrutiny, I would argue Cal will be in the worst position in the Power 4, versus the current situation where we are getting Top 10 portal classes.

I don't see any way around the conclusion that Cal will have to cut sports.

calumnus said:

---

BearSD said:

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

bencgilmore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

So, if you are the local car dealer, you can still give cars away to every player as long as they advertise your product.

---

I think it's absurd to think there will be limits placed on how much players get.
I don't understand this deal but they want a $20M cap?
Yeah, right. The top schools are going to blow that out of the water.

This thing is going to get litigated and shredded in many ways, I feel. The title 9 issue. The employee issue, health care, retirement benefits for all athletes, liability for injuries or other workplace issues such as sexual misconduct, drinking/partying.
The ncaa is not talking about aspects that matter than the universities, and there will forever be cheaters to win.

Coaches making $5M and players making chump change comparatively.

Plenty of incentives to cheat still.
They're just trying to make lawsuits go away. But there will be more. It can't be as simple as this first stab.

Floodgates.

---

And why just the P4? Still, this is the opening for schools to pay/have to pay athletes from their media and ticket revenue. It was/is inevitable. And when it comes Cal will be in a horrible position given the minimal revenues we are receiving relative to the rest of the P4. I don't see how we will be able to compete.

---

couldn't the collective just buy something from the AD, making it AD revenue? most expensive t-shirt ever, but revenue is revenue

---

Right now, it is our collective vs everyone else's collective. We are competing well, with Top 10 portal classes.

However, once schools can use their media revenues to pay players, it will be our our collective + Cal AD vs every other P4 teams' collective + their AD.

I may have the numbers wrong but it is something like: B1G schools make $70 million, SEC schools $60 million(?), ACC schools make $40 million and Big-12 schools make $30 million.

Cal will make $10 million from the ACC plus up to $10 million from Calimony, but currently fields far more non-revenue sports than most schools and has a huge deficit.

While theoretically our collective can "just pay more" that effectively means our collective will be operating at a $20 million or more per year disadvantage against our own ACC competition for years until we start receiving our full ACC payout. The challenge will be surviving the next 5 years when we need to be thriving.

---

The ACC paid out ~45 million/school for 2022-2023. Will likely hit 50+ million for 2024-25. Cal supposedly gets 30% of the tier 1 tv contract, but equal shares of the rest of revenue. I think that puts Cal at around 35 million. + calimony. (Minus travel). Men's tourney money will take a hit if the settlement goes. Equal loss for all ACC members.

---

Correct.

Another way to look at it: Cal (and Stanford), for the next 7 academic years, will get a full share of ACC revenue minus 70% of the $24 million per team "Tier 1" payment from ESPN. Whatever an ACC full share is, Cal's conference revenue will be that amount minus $16.8 million. It's not great, but it's far better than the alternative of staying with the Pac-2.

---

I was overjoyed that we got into the ACC. No one is doubting it is not the best we could do given the horrible situation we put ourselves in.

However, of all the Power 4 teams, what schools will be in a worse competitive situation when the schools start paying the players? Maybe Stanford and SMU, but as private schools with huge athletics endowments and less public scrutiny, I would argue Cal will be in the worst position in the Power 4, versus the current situation where we are getting Top 10 portal classes.

---

It's still going to be about very generous boosters giving big bucks, whether to athletes directly or to an athletic department.

Oregon will be almost $40 million per year in conference revenue behind its Big Ten competitors, but will recruit better than most of them because they have Uncle Phil and friends.

To sycasey's point, the Ducks also run 10 fewer varsity sports than Cal. OTOH, though some will be cut at some point, each non-rev sport cut will save only about $1 million per year. It's a help, but it's not a cure-all, and it's not a substitute for whale donors.