Players Era Festival

[UConnTrumbull]

Will the Players Era Festival one day grow to the point of competing with the NCAA tournament/replacing it entirely? The Big 12 just signed a deal to have a stake in the tournament and a “qualifying process” from the previous year to the next. Some are saying it cuts out the middle man (ncaa).

 

[WrenchFan69]

Very interesting to read that our own Jalen Gaffney played a part in making this a reality

 

[JVN]

From the article:

"It's also conspicuous that most blue bloods (Duke, Carolina, Kentucky, UConn, UCLA) haven't committed to this point, though Berger and Orefice have certainly been diligent in their recruiting efforts there."

and

"Kentucky, for example, would need to be paid close to $5 million for just three games alone to make up for the revenue it would lose by not having those three games at home, Wildcats coach Mark Pope told CBS Sports. Players Era can't commit that much money to one school."

 

[ZooCougar]

I’m skeptical. The crowds at these games are non existent, the blue bloods haven’t given buy in, and it’s at the end of the college football season when the CFP selection and the Coaching Carousel are at the peak.

 

[UConnJim]

For the basketball schools with big traveling fanbases, the Players ERA in Las Vegas doesn't make economic sense. I would think that Duke, UConn, Kentucky,... would make more money playing neutral site games at Boston Garden, MSG, Atlanta,... or even home games.

That said, the concept of the Players ERA has some merit and it could threaten the NCAA Tournament in the future. Right now, the NCAA pockets most of the March Madness revenues so there is an opportunity for someone to offer better economics to schools than the NCAA.

 

[CL82]

It sounds like they're taking a page out of the NCAA's playbook. They were originally the "also-ran" tournament behind the NIT and eventually eclipsed it. Early on the goal is to establish your brand and a presence while building the logistical skill to run a tournament. That may give you the credentials to run a tournament in March at some point in the future.

 

[ZooCougar]

And they are paying a bunch of media types to hype it all up.

 

[Kolumbo]

I'm not sure the top programs are going to want to front-load their schedule like this. Teams are much better in March than they are in November, especially with the transfer portal and restocking your roster. UConn lost to Arizona with its best 2 players out and a freshman Reibe trying to pick up the slack. That loss is going to be used in rankings and comparisons.

 

[ZooCougar]

another media hack

 

[superjohn]

Will the Players Era Festival one day grow to the point of competing with the NCAA tournament/replacing it entirely? The Big 12 just signed a deal to have a stake in the tournament and a “qualifying process” from the previous year to the next. Some are saying it cuts out the middle man (ncaa).

Lolz, no

 

[upstater]

How do you recruit top players if you forego the NCAA tournament and it's platform for visibility.

So, great, you pay your entire roster $8m and then you go for a $4m payout by nixing the NCAA tourney. You also forego the conference payout for NCAA payouts, which means your money is reduced by $2m

The economics make no sense.

 

[visitingcock]

For the basketball schools with big traveling fanbases, the Players ERA in Las Vegas doesn't make economic sense. I would think that Duke, UConn, Kentucky,... would make more money playing neutral site games at Boston Garden, MSG, Atlanta,... or even home games.

That said, the concept of the Players ERA has some merit and it could threaten the NCAA Tournament in the future. Right now, the NCAA pockets most of the March Madness revenues so there is an opportunity for someone to offer better economics to schools than the NCAA.

But it may make sense in a recruiting/NIL sense.

Lets look at Kentucky. The House settlement limits the schools total NIL that it can pay to all sports teams through profit sharing to 20.5 million. Their present total basketball "salary' is supposedly 22million. . So, they have to cut out a half a million and have nothing to spend on football and other sports, (and that would kill them in Football - an SEC no-no).

BUT THERE ARE OTHER SOURCES THAN revenue sharing. Third parties can pay athletes money that doesn't count against the 20.5 maximum. Players Era may be one of them.

The following is an excerpt from an AI article and one must be careful of such. So, FWIW:


"Players Era is an example of
third-party NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) deals, not direct revenue sharing. The Players Era festival provides teams with a guaranteed $1 million in NIL funds, which is a third-party payment for their participation, distinct from the revenue-sharing model where schools directly pay athletes from their athletic department's budget. Athletes are already benefiting from both systems simultaneously.

Players Era (Third-Party NIL)

• What it is: An event where a third-party company (Players Era) provides a guaranteed amount of money to athletes for their participation and performance.
• How it works: Players Era pays the $1 million to each participating team's NIL collective, and the funds are then distributed to the athletes.
• Source of funds: Third-party companies and their sponsors, similar to brand endorsements."

I wish I had a better source for this, and If someone has something that refutes this, please post. I am interested in women's basketball. It looks like most SEC schools are going to limit WBBs share of revenue sharing to approximately 5% of the 20.5 million - or about 1 million dollars. (SEC Football is a greedy and expensive addiction ). If the million dollars South Carolina gets from Player's Era does not count as revenue sharing, it doubles the NIL money for SCar's wbb ten-player roster from $100 thousand to $200 thousand per player - not counting other third party sources!