Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="huskymedic, post: 5264181, member: 549"] In today’s Mike Anthony article (separate thread) - AD Dave is quite skeptical w/ that narrative: [URL="https://the-boneyard.com/threads/how-uconn-is-preparing-for-revenue-sharing-with-its-athletes-mike-anthony-hearst.207387/#post-5264044"]How UConn is preparing for revenue sharing with its athletes (Mike Anthony @ Hearst)[/URL] -> The suggestion has been floated that Big East programs will be better suited to spend and remain competitive in basketball because so much of the revenue-sharing pool in power conferences will be devoted to football, which drives most everything in college sports. “I think the whole narrative around the fact that the Big East has this massive advantage is comical, in a way,” Benedict said. “And maybe it will play out that way. At this point, I’m very skeptical of that narrative. I’m not so sure that’s not just a narrative that is helping support individuals who are actually spreading that narrative to try to make sure they don’t fall behind, versus what the realities are. Because the suggestion that a group of universities that are getting probably 10 percent of what those [power conference] institutions are getting in media value — and we’re talking about tens of millions of dollars difference — that the schools getting 10 percent of what they are, are at a financial advantage is somewhat comical to me. The realities are, you can spend more of the cap on a particular sport. Well, you’d have to have the money first to be able to spend it. So yes, there is potential based on the formula and how things work, that you would have an easier time spending direct revenue share because you don’t have the massive investment that football requires. But you still have to have the money. <- [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach