Gonzaga could have unique advantage now that UW, WSU can’t get

College sports has officially entered a new world.

With the approval of the landmark $2.8 billion House v. NCAA settlement last Friday, colleges are now free to pay their athletes directly. Schools will be allowed to share up to $20.5 million with their athletes over the first year of the new revenue-sharing model, which begins on July 1 and runs through the 2025-26 school year.

After historic settlement, what’s next for college sports? A closer look

For most schools, the bulk of their allotted $20.5 million will go toward football, which is by far the biggest revenue-driving sport. According to The Associated Press, most projections estimate that football-playing schools will spend roughly 75% of their funds on the gridiron.

But what about schools that don’t have football programs?

According to ESPN senior writer Dan Wetzel, that’s where a program like Gonzaga men’s basketball could gain a unique advantage.

“Gonzaga doesn’t have football (and) can spend up to $20.5 million on their athletes,” Wetzel said Monday during an appearance on Seattle Sports’ Bump and Stacy. “University of Washington is going to (spend $20.5 million too), but they’re going to spend probably $16-17 million on football. Well, if you don’t have to (spend money on football) – if you could spend $16-17 million on your basketball roster legally – you would have a huge advantage.”

College basketball programs in the Big East are in a similar situation. Like Gonzaga, most Big East schools have a strong basketball tradition and no football program to support.

Wetzel pointed out that Gonzaga and most Big East schools are considerably smaller than their counterparts in the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC. And without football programs, their athletic departments bring in less revenue.

However, Wetzel said boosters could help fill that gap.

“Say you have one booster that says, hey, I’ll write that check $20 million a year and then you can legally take the $20 million and buy basketball players, right?” Wetzel said. “And the other schools out there would not have that money (to spend on basketball). They may only have $2-3 million allocated for their basketball program.”

Athletes are still allowed to make money through third-party NIL deals – although that process will be more strictly enforced in an attempt to eliminate the “pay-for-play” aspect.

Whether through NIL or another area, Wetzel expects schools to find ways to pay athletes beyond the $20.5 million revenue-sharing limit.

“Let’s say the Big East and Gonzaga and a couple of other schools are spending $15 million in their basketball roster,” Wetzel said. “Do we really believe that Big Ten and SEC schools will just sit back and go, oh, sorry, we’re no longer competitive? Or will their boosters find a workaround to meet that bit? And that’s what I would expect to happen.

“We’ve never seen college athletics where everyone’s like, ah, I guess I just can’t bid on that player. We’ve had generations of these things. There’s just so much unknown right now, but that’s kind of an interesting quirk that might work out.”

Kent native, Zags alum Vandersloot to miss rest of WNBA season

Related

Did Seahawks’ defense or Patriots’ mistakes decide opener?Drew Lock showed off his best trait in Seahawks’ Week 1 winStacy on NFC West: What Week 1 told us about Seahawks, Rams and 49ersWhat Bump learned about the Seahawks in Week 1Stacy on Seahawks: What I liked, didn’t love, and a big question after Week 1 winCougs Weekly: Kirby Moore reflects on Apple Cup, previews K-State