The Shifting Sands of College Basketball Coaching: It’s All About the Roster
The landscape of college basketball is undergoing a seismic shift, and it’s not just about on-court strategies or recruiting prowess. The real game-changer lies in the burgeoning world of player compensation, reshaping how coaching jobs are evaluated and pursued. As Villanova and other programs navigate potential coaching changes, the primary focus has transitioned from the coach’s salary to the financial resources dedicated to building a competitive roster.
In recent weeks, Villanova has been discreetly assessing the coaching market, quietly gauging interest in the event they decide to part ways with current coach Kyle Neptune. While salary remains a factor, it’s not the defining one. What’s truly capturing the attention of prospective coaches is the promise of a well-funded roster, positioned to compete with the best in the increasingly pay-to-play environment of college basketball.
"The first question agents are asking is, what are they committed to in revenue-share this year and beyond?" revealed a source involved in multiple coaching searches. "It always used to be, ‘What do I have in facilities and recruiting and assistant salary pool?’ But now it’s, ‘How much can I spend on player acquisition?’"
This transformation has been brewing since 2021, when college athletes gained the right to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). However, the upcoming implementation of the House vs. NCAA settlement is poised to fully unleash the revolution. This settlement will usher in an era of revenue sharing, potentially dismantling the existing NIL collectives that have been the primary source of player funding.
Under the new system, a fixed percentage of revenue will be allocated to each sport, effectively creating a salary cap of sorts. However, schools will have the autonomy to decide how to distribute this money among their various athletic programs. For basketball coaches, this percentage becomes a critical indicator of a school’s commitment to winning. In a world often dominated by football, it offers a clear gauge of whether taking the job will be a career-enhancing move.
"It’s the first thing coaches want to know," according to an individual deeply involved in coaching searches. "If you’re at a school spending $3 [million] to $4 million on the roster and you’re looking at a perceived better job that isn’t going to spend that much, you’re not going to take it."
This new reality may explain recent coaching hires in the power conferences. Miami hired Jai Lucas, a 36-year-old Duke assistant; Florida State brought in Luke Loucks, a 34-year-old Sacramento Kings assistant and Seminoles alum; and Utah selected Alex Jensen, a 48-year-old Dallas Mavericks assistant. While these hires can be justified based on basketball merits and connections, it’s also evident that these administrations quickly opted out of pursuing established head coaches with proven track records in power conferences.
These schools are heavily invested in football, unlike Villanova, which is expected to provide its new coach with over $6 million for roster development. This commitment has garnered attention from successful coaches at reputable programs, even those with substantial salaries, who may not have access to such robust roster budgets.
The House vs. NCAA settlement, expected to be finalized in April, signifies a fundamental shift. Historically, coaching contracts were the primary economic narrative in college sports. However, the proposed settlement, allowing power-conference schools to allocate over $20 million directly to athletes, introduces a new metric for evaluating a school’s priorities and standing.
While some institutions, like Georgia, have announced their revenue-sharing plans (75 percent to football, 15 percent to men’s basketball, 5 percent to women’s basketball, and 5 percent to other sports), many others are still crunching the numbers. This uncertainty makes it an undeniable factor in any ongoing basketball coaching search.
Consider Indiana, a program that considers itself a basketball blue-blood with demanding fans. Mike Woodson recently stepped down due to pressure, despite potentially leading the Hoosiers to their third NCAA Tournament appearance in four years. Indiana’s boosters have aggressively funded NIL initiatives for basketball, but the proposed settlement could change things. Booster collectives may be phased out, and future NIL deals could be subject to a third-party clearinghouse to ensure compliance with market value.
The problem lies in the ambiguity of it all. There’s disagreement within the industry about how rigorously the rules will be enforced. While athletic directors hope for greater stability and budget parity, some coaches believe that the wealthy programs in the SEC and Big Ten will find ways to circumvent the proposed settlement and funnel more money to players.
"Even if the ADs are promising something, can they back it up?" questioned one source involved in coaching negotiations. "I don’t think they know. They’re all putting budgets and spreadsheets together, but it’s as the wind blows."
So, what does this mean for a coach considering the Indiana job? Do they see a program with unlimited resources for acquiring basketball players, or one that will face tough choices about allocating its revenue, especially with its football program’s newfound success?
"We’re in a world now where Auburn and Alabama are better basketball jobs than Indiana," remarked a well-connected college sports insider.
Indiana is at the forefront of coaching searches, along with Virginia. Other programs may soon join them. NC State recently fired Kevin Keatts, Texas is likely to move on from Rodney Terry without a deep tournament run, and a third consecutive missed NCAA Tournament for Neptune could force Villanova’s hand.
The appeal of a job and the caliber of coach it attracts will be based on the pool of money flowing directly from the athletic department to its players.
"Look at Louisville," noted a source connected to a potential opening. "There was a lot of talk last year that they were going to reset the (salary) market. Instead, they hired Pat Kelsey for ($2.3 million) and used the rest of the money to build the roster to give him a running start. That might be the (new model)."
