And now, part two of the National College Basketball Mailbag — starting with every fan's biggest question.
Does anyone have inside information on how much a player will earn upon transfer? $300,000? $600,000? One million? — Richard T.
It's a great question that a lot of people are thinking about right now, but the consensus for college basketball this spring is that the price (sorry, uh, I mean the expected name, image, and likeness deals) will be Let's just say that it has become more expensive. I investigated some of the movers and shakers in the sport: two of the majors' most powerful head coaches, another member of the majors' staff, a recruit insider, and some behind-the-scenes power brokers. All were granted anonymity in exchange for candor – to get a feel for the market.
First, it's “Baylor, Arkansas and Louisville helping the market,” one person said. Another cited those three states, plus Indiana, Alabama and Kentucky, as the biggest spenders this free agency season. That, combined with a sneaky asking price and a bit of lying poker, created this new reality. “Every kid has 'multiple girlfriend offers of $750,000.' That's every agent's opening line,” one person said.
Okay, so what? actual How much does it currently cost for a transfer to sign with a major program?
“Starters should be paid $200,000 to $250,000, All-Conference players should be paid $350,000, and All-Americans should be paid more than $500,000, but some are paying double that,” one source said.
“Starter: $200,000 to $300,000. All conference: $500,000 to $750,000. High end: $800,000 to $2 million,” says another.
“Starter: $500,000. All conferences: $800,000 to $1 million. Top players: well over $1 million. Some teams are also excited to raise money in the portal,” said a third. says the person.
“It depends on the position. An all-conference guard could be anywhere from $450,000 to $600,000, and even more rare because it's becoming rarer, so it could be $600,000 to $800,000.” “It used to be over $600,000 and now it's over $1 million,” said a fourth player.
“Starter: $200,000 to $400,000. All league potential: $600,000 to $800,000. Top players — over 1 million!!!” Source No. 5 says
Bottom line: If you have a big need to fill and plan to do it through the transfer portal, you're better off with at least a few million dollars in available NIL funds to assemble a competitive roster in the current situation. would be better. – Kyle Tucker
If you were to take over a (mid-major) school in an era where the gap between the haves and have-nots is rapidly widening, what would be your strategy for rebuilding the program? VCU, Butler, Wichita State Are the days of gaining national recognition and making a big breakthrough in March over? — Sidney T.
First of all, no, I don't think those days are over. A year ago, Florida Atlantic and San Diego State reached the Final Four. When it comes to strategies for programs in that tier, most of which won't be able to compete with the big players in the NIL and end up being stolen by power programs via the transfer portal, it seems like a no-brainer.
As affluent college graduates become obsessed with this portal and spend less time, attention, and resources than ever on evaluating and recruiting high schools, step one is to try to outdo them in that area. is. Sure, you might lose that kid in one, two, three years, but if you're always in recruiting and developing mode, there's always fresh talent ready to step up. And step two is using portals, contrary to what everyone thinks today. While higher majors may poach the players you've spent time developing, you can offer players further down the ladder at big programs the chance to take on a bigger role in your field. .
The path to building rosters has changed, and keeping a team together in the mid-majors has never been more difficult (though not impossible, as FAU proved after reaching the Final Four). But the fundamental truth still remains. That means the coach who is best at picking the right players will always win, no matter where the players come from or how long they've been with the team. — tucker
How many players do you expect to go undrafted? If there are around 180 potential players, I would expect over 100 to return to college on NIL contracts. agree? — Dave L.
There are currently 145 Division I players who have declared for the draft. Of that group of players, 60 are in the portal or have already transferred to another school, 59 are seniors (who would normally be ineligible) and 36 are expected to remain in the draft. .
We are already seeing the impact of NIL on portals and these decisions. Last year, 183 of his D1 players declared. Of these, 104 dropped out to return to school and 35 transferred.
The most interesting decisions to me are projected second-rounders like Pere Larsson, P.J. Hall, Peyton Sandfort, Mark Sears, and Trey Alexander. I think they all remain in the draft except for Sears. As for Sears, I'm sure the University of Alabama has set aside a significant amount of money for him to go to college. If that happens, the Crimson Tide will be one of the favorites to win the national championship.
These are tough decisions that players in that range have to make right now. A player at this level could potentially earn more in college next season than a guaranteed NBA contract. They are likely to earn more in college than if they went on to play two-way in the NBA. And they would definitely make more money if they didn't get some kind of guaranteed deal. While not every decision is strictly financial, the financial factor is likely to keep more borderline draft picks in school than ever before. There has also been an increase in submissions to the portal.
The timeline for these decisions is also difficult for college teams. For schools with at-risk students, do they save some of the money in the NIL pot to entice them to return, or do they go ahead and spend it on transfers? The situation has completely changed and a recalculation will be necessary in a year's time when part of the talent pool (seniors on bonus years due to COVID-19) is no longer available. — CJ Moore
Which is more fake? What is the ranking of new high school students/transfers? — Dan H.
First of all, let me say that I hate rankings. We know it's good for business because fans love rankings (or rather, they love ranting about how stupid the people who make them are). It's an almost impossible task. And I said that after finishing my second year of ranking players on the portal. I believe Sam Veceny and I are more thorough than anyone else who does this. We monitor the tape of every prospect we rank. We deliver realistic scouting reports. And I hope fans read those reports and don't pay too much attention to each player's rankings. Because I admit that the only way I could comfortably rank these players is if I studied them for years, did background checks, and watched countless amounts of game film. . Basically I'm doing the Spark Notes version. Once a huge number of players reach the portal, it is impossible to dive deeper. I wish my process was basically a full-time NBA scout's job, but most scouts are locked into a smaller pool of players. And they aren't always correct. It is difficult to evaluate and predict what kind of player a player can become.
even deeper
Ranking the best players in the NCAA men's basketball transfer portal
Those who rank high school recruits spend at least a few years evaluating them, but there are too many players to look at them all. One of the luxuries for those of us who do portal player rankings is the opportunity to watch footage of college games against mostly legitimate competitors. Still, it's not easy. And it's difficult for college coaches to try to figure out who to target right away. That's why it wouldn't be a bad idea for colleges to start hiring his equivalent of an NBA scout in their programs to give themselves an edge in the portal. There are some college GMs out there, and I'm curious to know how much of their day-to-day work involves evaluating prospects who may be bound to the portal. — Moore
Do you think college players will end up with employment contracts? — Ryan H.
Since the season ended, most industry players I've talked to (coaches, handlers, NIL officials, NBA scouts) predict it's only a matter of time before college athletes become employees. Frankly, it's seen as inevitable. The NCAA currently faces several active lawsuits, all of which challenge various aspects of the association's long-standing “amateur” philosophy, but are under scrutiny as they relate to employee status. An important case to consider is Johnson v. NCAA. In that case, former Villanova football player Ralph “Trey” Johnson argues that under the Fair Labor Standards Act, college athletes should be university employees with the ability to bargain collectively. The NCAA won similar circuit court rulings on this issue in 2016 and 2019, but the Third Circuit heard oral arguments on the repeat in February, pointing to a major shift in college athletics in 2019 and beyond. Considering the change, i.e. the onset of NIL, the industry believes: The case is different.
even deeper
Change is coming as 'avalanche' hits NCAA as debate over player payments continues
A battle has already begun behind closed doors over who will represent college athletes' collective bargaining rights. It could be a favorable bargain, or a series of bargains, depending on where and how the employee's status is granted. Will athletes be employees of schools, conferences or larger organizations due to differing state labor laws? Those specifics are still up in the air, but momentum is strong at the moment. Even if that happens, NIL will still be an incentive, but revenue sharing from TV contracts and standardized “fees” should alleviate some of the portal madness. Additionally, consider the following: Can a player sign a multi-year contract with a school with penalties if the contract is terminated? That's at least theoretically possible, and a possible way to reintroduce roster continuity. — Brendan Marks
even deeper
What happens when a college athlete wins the battle to become an employee?
With increased roster fluidity thanks to the transfer portal, are major league coaches under pressure to avoid years of “rebuilding”?How much do these programs consider 2-3 years from now when creating their rosters? – Anonymous
Just ask Kenny Payne. He said in the ACC Tournament that he believed Louisville's rebuild would take three or four years, and he basically got laughed out of the room. Mr. Payne was fired shortly after making these comments, a quick remark that underscored how outdated the traditional “rebuilding” mentality is. Program he is not thinking about 2-3 years from now. Because you can't do that. How can you do that as a coach? You have to re-recruit your roster every offseason…and in some cases, even if you're happy with the players returning, a big check arrives from a different zip code and your plans quickly change. There is a possibility.
However, it goes both ways. In the past, if you signed a high school player who didn't produce results after two seasons, you would (usually) sign him for his entire career. Not so anymore. It's easier to clear the deck, so to speak, and move on from underachieving, regardless of recruiting pedigree. Duke University, for example, welcomed four former five-star recruits into the portal this offseason…which gives John Scheyer more complementary pieces around Cooper's flag and the rest of the top-ranked recruiting class. I was able to add it. Yes, there is certainly less leeway. But that's fair. Because he can build/buy his NCAA Tournament level roster in his one offseason in the portal. Different programs will be more or less patient, but if after two seasons the portal and on-court success don't speak for themselves, enjoy the buyout. — mark