Here’s a re-written version of the article, expanding on the key themes and providing more context, while adhering to the requested formatting.
The Shifting Landscape of College Basketball: Revenue Sharing and the Hope for Non-Football Schools
The roar of the crowd, the squeak of sneakers, the tension of bracket predictions – March Madness is upon us once more. As America tunes in to witness the drama of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament, a stark reality becomes immediately apparent: the dominance of schools hailing from the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS), and particularly those belonging to the "power conferences," is undeniable. These institutions, fueled by massive football revenue, have traditionally held a significant advantage in the world of college athletics, casting a long shadow over programs that prioritize basketball.
This year’s selection committee offered a glimpse of this disparity. Of the 37 at-large bids extended, a mere five found their way to leagues that don’t sponsor football. The Big East secured four of these coveted spots, with the West Coast Conference claiming the remaining one. This isn’t an isolated incident; it’s a trend solidified over recent years. In the past five NCAA tournaments, non-FBS leagues garnered only 28 at-large bids, a figure that pales in comparison to the 38 they received in the five tournaments prior.
However, this decline may not be a permanent fixture of the college sports landscape. A potentially game-changing settlement in the House vs. NCAA lawsuit looms on the horizon. Expected to be approved in April, this agreement would usher in an era of revenue-sharing with athletes, a seismic shift that could reshape the competitive balance and potentially favor schools and conferences that prioritize basketball over the gridiron.
“I really look at where we’re positioned as a huge advantage,” declared VCU athletics director Ed McLaughlin, whose school stands as the Atlantic 10’s sole representative in this year’s tournament. His optimism stems from the unique financial flexibility that revenue-sharing could offer institutions like VCU.
The settlement is poised to establish a de facto salary cap exceeding $20 million that schools can allocate to their athletes. While the exact figures remain uncertain, the implications are clear. Football powerhouses will inevitably funnel a significant portion of these funds to their football programs, the primary revenue drivers. The University of Georgia, for instance, has already announced its intention to allocate 75% of its revenue-sharing funds to football, leaving 15% for men’s basketball, 5% for women’s basketball, and the remaining 5% for other sports. If the cap reaches $22 million, Georgia’s men’s basketball program would receive approximately $3.3 million.
This is where basketball-centric schools like VCU could gain a competitive edge. Unburdened by the financial demands of a football program, they can potentially dedicate a larger percentage of their revenue-sharing funds to their basketball programs.
“We fully anticipate the revenue-sharing number for us next year to be between $4 (million) and $5 million,” McLaughlin stated. “I think we are positioned from strength as this goes forward because we can share revenue with our men’s and women’s basketball student-athletes at an incredibly high competitive level, to make sure we are a top 25 program. We will never get to the bigger cap, and that’s OK. But we will certainly be able to invest at a high level for the programs that matter financially the most to us.”
The current Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) landscape has been characterized by chaos and a lack of transparency. The new revenue-sharing system, if implemented effectively, aims to streamline player compensation and phase out the influence of booster collectives. A third-party clearinghouse would oversee "true NIL" deals, ensuring that athletes are compensated fairly for endorsing products and companies.
While schools will undoubtedly seek loopholes and ways to gain a recruiting advantage, the new system could still create a more level playing field. Despite appearances, some coaches suspect that schools with large fan bases will find ways to subtly supplement revenue.
For schools whose athletic departments heavily rely on men’s basketball success, this potential shift is particularly significant. For two decades, these institutions have struggled against the financial might of schools with lucrative football programs. While a few, like Gonzaga, have managed to maintain national relevance, they often find it difficult to sustain their success due to being outspent in areas like coaching salaries, recruiting budgets, and facilities.
Revenue-sharing could alter this dynamic, making administrative commitment to player acquisition the ultimate determining factor. As one power conference head coach anonymously confessed, the lack of recruiting budget made them consider a move to an A-10 school.
"The Daytons, the VCUs, they’ve always been good jobs," a source connected to multiple coaching searches noted. "But they’ll have money to compete with the so-called blue bloods. Schools like Florida State or Miami, they’re not going to resource basketball at that level. There are coaches in the Big Ten saying, ‘Hey, I think football’s going to swallow up all my money and I may need to get out.’"
The exact financial allocations remain a guessing game, with only a few schools publicly announcing their percentages. Most institutions are keeping their budgeting plans private pending the final approval of the settlement.
Greg Christopher, the athletics director at Xavier, doesn’t anticipate a dramatic change in the financial investment of Big East schools in their basketball programs. Based on discussions with colleagues in the autonomy conferences, he believes the Big East has been competitive in NIL and will maintain that competitiveness under revenue-sharing.
"I sense top to bottom that we’re probably directionally in the same bucket," Christopher said. "I haven’t heard of anybody being (an outlier) one way or another. But we have sat around a table and talked through that basketball is our highest priority from a revenue-sharing standpoint. It’s probably a little early for us to get down to a Xavier-specific number, but I would say that from what I’ve heard this year for NIL purposes in our league, the bandwidth is generally in that $3 (million)-$5 million range."
The implementation of the settlement will be closely watched. The potential for schools to generate additional revenue and invest it in their basketball programs, especially those with large arenas like Creighton and Marquette, could lead to further shifts.
It’s a new frontier in recruiting, where schools without football may allocate 90% or more of their revenue-sharing budget to men’s basketball, potentially resulting in more NCAA Tournament bids for leagues like the Big East and A-10.
However, the system could also trigger conference realignment if some schools opt into revenue-sharing while others don’t. If a conference’s power ratings are negatively impacted by schools not offering revenue-sharing, the league’s ability to secure multiple NCAA Tournament bids could be jeopardized.
This is why American Athletic Conference commissioner Tim Pernetti has established a minimum standard, requiring every school except Army and Navy to provide a total of $10 million over the next three years. Other leagues may follow suit to address the competitive implications.
"You want everyone in your league to be trying to win at a high level because all of the sudden, what happens is your numbers are naturally just going to be better overall and you’re going to be more competitive nationally," VCU coach Ryan Odom emphasized.
Given VCU’s commitment to men’s basketball, along with fundraising efforts like Steph Curry’s $10 million donation to Davidson, the Rams and other A-10 schools should be well-positioned.
Despite the evolving financial model, schools with a genuine commitment to basketball should possess the resources to compete at the highest level, even without the backing of football revenue.
“Our basketball focus in some ways has allowed us, schools in the Big East, to punch above their weight in some ways for a long time," Christopher concluded. "I think that will remain true to some degree. We don’t have football, so we don’t have the expenses that come with that. We also don’t have $70 million in annual media-rights revenue. But if the governor is ultimately the (revenue-sharing cap) and not having to feed football and all that comes with that, it does help us prioritize our basketball programs.”
