ADVERTISEMENT

Back to Square Zero - Men’s Hoops

You are certainly correct. It brings in around $12M in revenue and $6M in profit every year.

http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2016/06/who_are_the_most_and_least_pro.html


Interesting numbers. The PSU basketball profit is $6 million per year (and that does not include money from tv rights or March madness that the conference splits up). PSU has double the profits of Minnesota and Purdue and triple the profits of Iowa and Nebraska.

PSU basketball, on its own, brings in a $6 million profit. Where does that money come from (with an apathetic fan base, mostly empty arena, etc)?

How does Northwestern have nearly $9 million in profit (with a small fan base, tiny 8,000 seat gym, and higher expenses than PSU)?
 
Last edited:
Interesting numbers. The PSU basketball profit is $6 million per year (and that does not include money from tv rights or March madness that the conference splits up). PSU has double the profits of Minnesota and Purdue and triple the profits of Iowa and Nebraska.

PSU basketball, on its own, brings in a $6 million profit. Where does that money come from (with an apathetic fan base, mostly empty arena, etc)?

How does Northwestern have nearly $9 million in profit (with a small fan base, tiny 8,000 seat gym, and higher expenses than PSU)?
Those numbers are definitely including the NCAA $ that's split up. That's a key part to why we turn such a big profit (and what makes it so laughable when people say things like "we should just drop basketball").
 
Interesting thread. I see more than a few comments of WISHING and HOPING that Pat can get the program moving the the right direction. WISHING and HOPING that Pat's in game coaching can improve.

But big time college basketball, just like football, is a competitive business. And in the business world there is a saying:
HOPE is not a business strategy.

The PSU BB program is really about results. And the results clearly indicate that Pat is not getting the job done.
 
Those numbers are definitely including the NCAA $ that's split up. That's a key part to why we turn such a big profit (and what makes it so laughable when people say things like "we should just drop basketball").


Maybe it’s an error but the article states more than once that these figures do not include conference tv money (listed as $32 million per school).

Either way, I guess I’d still question how Northwestern made $3 million more than PSU (while having higher expenses than PSU). How does that happen?

Also Michigan St has been the most successful big ten team the last decade or so yet they have $7 million in profit. In comparison, Indiana has almost doubled that at $13 million (while also having the highest expenses of $11 million).

Wisconsin made $14 million and OSU $15 million in profits. How did that happen or are there creative accounting measures here that are skewing the figures?

EDIT- Running the PSU numbers, (knowing the highest expense team was $11 million and PSU (and Rutgers) spend the least on basketball), these numbers can’t include the $32 million conference payout.
 
Last edited:
You think transfers are more likely if we keep Chambers than if we get rid of him and bring in someone new?

For me, transfers (and the incoming class) would be about the biggest reason to keep him more than a reason to get rid of him.

Keeping him might prevent transfers.. but if they don't win, how the heck is he going to get future good recruits? How much attachment does this group actually have to Chambers? I honestly don't know. Maybe a new coach wouldn't cause any transfers if the players don't have strong loyalty to Chambers. Maybe it would be welcomed provided the right coach.
 
Whatever the reason, should Chambers have ignored the academic transgressions so that we might have beaten indiana? Is that how it works at Penn State?

When we do that, we become no different than the other BB factories some people here rip with single digit graduation rates. You may as well fire Chambers and hire Rick Pitano ASAP. This is why I have no interest in college BB, it's nothing more than a weigh station for kids to get the sneaker $. If you have BB talent and you go to college, it's sure as hell not to get an education. We will have a program of importance in BB if and when we decide to cast that mantra aside. Money talks and with it comes corruption.
 
Regarding PC and next year. I wonder whats going to happen with the PG situation. Carr should still be here, Wheeler has proved to be a very good back up, especially on the defensive end. Next year a good PG recruit in Rasir Bolton will arrive. I dont think he signed with the intent to redshirt, where are his minutes going to come from?
 
Regarding PC and next year. I wonder whats going to happen with the PG situation. Carr should still be here, Wheeler has proved to be a very good back up, especially on the defensive end. Next year a good PG recruit in Rasir Bolton will arrive. I dont think he signed with the intent to redshirt, where are his minutes going to come from?
Shep leaving opens up plenty of minutes at the 2, plus we are already playing Car too many minutes. I'd love to see Carr spend more time off the ball.
 
I agree with that but, what Im asking is does PC actually do that.
 
Maybe it’s an error but the article states more than once that these figures do not include conference tv money (listed as $32 million per school).

Either way, I guess I’d still question how Northwestern made $3 million more than PSU (while having higher expenses than PSU). How does that happen?

Also Michigan St has been the most successful big ten team the last decade or so yet they have $7 million in profit. In comparison, Indiana has almost doubled that at $13 million (while also having the highest expenses of $11 million).

Wisconsin made $14 million and OSU $15 million in profits. How did that happen or are there creative accounting measures here that are skewing the figures?

EDIT- Running the PSU numbers, (knowing the highest expense team was $11 million and PSU (and Rutgers) spend the least on basketball), these numbers can’t include the $32 million conference payout.
Conference money is the same, but schools make money on ticket sales, etc. We don't come close to filling the BJC and we have some of the cheapest ticket prices. There's also money from alumni that varies greatly from school to school.
 
From a distance it appears that there is no real senior leadership within the team. You look at the football team, hockey team, WVB and other teams on campus and you can see the more senior and/or star players being mentors, leaders, helping teach and coach. The men's BB teams seems like just a bunch of guys other there trying to give 90%.
That's probably true but you do realize that there is only 1 senior and 1 grad student on the team. The senior starts and the gs hardly plays. People here don't want to accept it but it's still a pretty young team with a pretty bright future.
 
it's still a pretty young team with a pretty bright future.

How many times do we have to be subjected to that broken record?

Here's an interesting article about Ohio State and their new coach and unexpected success:

https://sports.yahoo.com/chris-holtmann-ohio-state-atop-big-ten-rebuilding-season-043515417.html

While I despise Ohio State, I do have to respect their ability to run their athletic program. Thad Matta wasn't a bad coach for OSU (certainly much better than Chambers has been for PSU) but OSU took a chance, made a change, and is now having success. While we have fans worried that after firing Chambers, things might get worse!
 
The last 5 minutes of play is how this team needs to play. Toughness and confidence is lacking in long stretches for this team. Challenge the defense and go at em. When Reaves is absent this team lacks swagger. he challenges all comers.
 
Who suggested dumbing down any standards? Those NCAA standards aren't in lieu of school standards. They are on top of them. They are put in place in order to establish a minimum that all schools must meet. Every student-athlete must meet the individual eligibility requirements that are in place at their particular school. So every Penn State athlete must meet the minimum standards that PSU has in place for all of their students. The NCAA standards are there so that there is some sort of level playing field that all schools must meet.
The standards have been lowered. Compare rosters of 40 years ago to today's. I'll send you a 1978 Pitt vs. Penn State football program. Something has changed.
 
THEECOACH you may have hit the nail on the head with your "smoke screen" observation. Talk around PSU people in the DMV is that "smoke" is a regular extra curricular activity with this team.
Bess money I have some familiarity with some of the Philly players as a result of knowing their kin. An apple doesn't fall to far from the tree. It's a culture thing.
 
Interesting thread. I see more than a few comments of WISHING and HOPING that Pat can get the program moving the the right direction. WISHING and HOPING that Pat's in game coaching can improve.

But big time college basketball, just like football, is a competitive business. And in the business world there is a saying:
HOPE is not a business strategy.

The PSU BB program is really about results. And the results clearly indicate that Pat is not getting the job done.
Why are you yelling at us?
 
Is it passing 24 or 18 credits in the Fall & Spring Semester? Or does the 24 credits only apply to Frosh?

Passing 24 credits in two semesters is a low standard. Passing 18 credits in two semesters is an extremely low standard. The standard of 'must pass six credits in the Fall' is a laughably low standard. That means that you can fail half of your classes, possibly more than half, and still be eligible in the Spring.

I'll say it again. If a full time student is unable to pass at least 12 credits in a semester, they should not be in college. Apparently, after your first year, you only have to pass 9 credits per semester to remain eligible with the NCAA.

And yes, I know that some majors and some schools have higher standards. I also know that many athletes are doing well as students. However, these NCAA minimum standards are pathetic.

Yes 24 credits only applies to freshman. No just passing 9 credits a term won't keep you eligible forever

You also keep picking one individual requirement, extrapolate it out in total disregard to the other standards that are in place, and make some bold grandiose statement like "if a full time student is unable to pass at least 12 credits in a semester, they should not be in college".

For example, you state "apparently, you only have to pass 9 credits per semester to remain eligible with the NCAA". That ignores the progress toward a degree requirement. Only pass 9 credits a semester and you will very rapidly fail to meet the academic progress requirement.

And your "don't belong in college statement"? I know plenty of very successful people, who for one reason or another happened to hit a bad patch and struggled for a semester. Evidently, you'd have kicked all of them out of school for that one bump in the road.

Those NCAA rules are there for two reasons. One, to provide minimum standards that athletes at all schools must meet (the academic progress requirements). Two, to plug loopholes that might be exploited if the NCAA simply allowed each individual school to set its own standards (the six credits a semester, 18 credits per year requirements).

What would happen if that six credit criteria that you abhor so much wasn't in place? You'd have to fall back to each school's individual eligibility requirement. Let's take Penn State's, for example. What would happen at PSU if a normal student failed to get a satisfactory grade in six credits? Any student who has an individual semester GPA of under 2.0 gets an Academic Watch notice. To Penn State's credit, they don't kick the kid out of school which apparently you think is the correct mode of action. Basically Academic Watch requires them to have a sit down session with their adviser during which they are told that if their overall GPA falls below 2.0 for the following semester, they are in danger of being suspended from the university. They are allowed to stay in school.

So if the NCAA six credit criteria wasn't in place, you could have basketball players simply stop going to class, pull a 0.0 for the fall semester, continue to remain in school and continue to play ball (and, in all likelihood, continue to not go to class). At the end of the year, they could leave school to pursue other avenues (turn pro for example). That's one reason the six credit criteria is there. It makes kids be at least somewhat accountable every semester.

Same story with the 18 credit criteria, just on a larger scale. It ensures that you can't just take an entire year off and still maintain your eligibility. Joe College, can do that if he's built up a high enough overall GPA. Joe Athlete can't.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bison13 and LionJim
Lar, I know that there are other rules. However, I stand by my beliefs that the minimum of passing 6 credits in the Fall and a minimum of passing 18 credits between Fall & Spring are two low. The NCAA should raise them. In my opinion, the minimum should be passing 12 credits per semester.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbenedict
Lar, I know that there are other rules. However, I stand by my beliefs that the minimum of passing 6 credits in the Fall and a minimum of passing 18 credits between Fall & Spring are two low. The NCAA should raise them. In my opinion, the minimum should be passing 12 credits per semester.

That's practically being heartless. I'd hate to think how many kids across the country would become ineligible under your standards. It's too high a standard. Why would you want to make it so much higher than what universities have for their normal students? That's basically a zero-tolerance rule put in place just for athletes. Not at all fair.
 
That's practically being heartless. I'd hate to think how many kids across the country would become ineligible under your standards. It's too high a standard. Why would you want to make it so much higher than what universities have for their normal students? That's basically a zero-tolerance rule put in place just for athletes. Not at all fair.
Don't regular students have to earn 30+ credits per year in order to stay on track to earn their degree in 4 years? Where is a kid going with 18 credits per year much less 6 in a semester?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski
Requiring student athletes to pass 12 credits to be eligible is heartless? You know what happens with most normal students of they can't pass 12 credits in a semester? They cut back on their extra curricular activities and put their focus on their academics. What I think is heartless is that the NCAA allows student athletes to spend more time with their sport than they do in the classroom. Perhaps passing 12 credits in a semester wouldn't be such a heartless standard of they spent less time in practice so they could focus on their classes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski
Don't regular students have to earn 30+ credits per year in order to stay on track to earn their degree in 4 years? Where is a kid going with 18 credits per year much less 6 in a semester?

You are doing the exact same thing that I accused manatree of doing. You are extrapolating the 6 credits a semester and the 18 credits a year into something that they aren't. They are not there to set a standard that athletes are supposed to maintain for multiple years. That's what the academic progress rules are for.

There's tons of data that shows that the average student does not graduate in 4 years - they typically take 5-6 years (NY Times article for reference). I would hope that nobody in their right mind would ever suggest that a student who fails to maintain a 30 credit a year pace shouldn't be allowed to attend college.

Basically the NCAA says that athlete's must maintain a pace that would allow them to graduate in 5 years, which maybe not coincidentally happens to be the number of years that they have to complete their eligibility. So to be eligible as you start your sophomore year, you must have finished 20% of your graduation requirements. To be eligible as a junior, you must have finished 40%, to be eligible as a senior it's 60%, for a fifth year athlete, it's up to 80%. That keeps an athlete on track to graduate in five years, which is the time it takes for a typical student.

What do you think would happen if you tightened those standards up? Do you honestly want to say that the only way that you can come back for a fifth season is if you are in grad school? How well do you think that would work?
 
Requiring student athletes to pass 12 credits to be eligible is heartless? You know what happens with most normal students of they can't pass 12 credits in a semester? They cut back on their extra curricular activities and put their focus on their academics. What I think is heartless is that the NCAA allows student athletes to spend more time with their sport than they do in the classroom. Perhaps passing 12 credits in a semester wouldn't be such a heartless standard of they spent less time in practice so they could focus on their classes.

It's a higher standard than what the university requires for their normal students. That's not fair.
 
Last edited:
Requiring student athletes to pass 12 credits to be eligible is heartless? You know what happens with most normal students of they can't pass 12 credits in a semester? They cut back on their extra curricular activities and put their focus on their academics. What I think is heartless is that the NCAA allows student athletes to spend more time with their sport than they do in the classroom. Perhaps passing 12 credits in a semester wouldn't be such a heartless standard of they spent less time in practice so they could focus on their classes.
I agree that it's heartless to allow kids to fall behind academically. Relatively few make it in pro sports so their education should be a primary focus.

D1 sports are a major committment. I have no problem with a kid taking a light load in season as long as he keeps on pace to graduate by loading up in the summer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: krichards
Passing 12 credits in. It a light load. In all honesty, just passing 12 credits is still falling behind academically for most majors. I'm not saying they should be kicked out of school, just that they should be required to cut back on their athletic extracurricular time in order to focus on their classes. Like I had posted previously, the NCAA should reduce the max practice & training hours to be lower than the required minimum number of credits enrolled.
 
I agree that it's heartless to allow kids to fall behind academically. Relatively few make it in pro sports so their education should be a primary focus.

D1 sports are a major committment. I have no problem with a kid taking a light load in season as long as he keeps on pace to graduate by loading up in the summer.

FTR - that load that a kid is required to take is 12 credits, he can't take any fewer. Also, he can't use the summer term to make up any deficiencies that he might have. He can use it to get out ahead of the game though (in other words, if you take summer classes between your sophomore and junior years, those credits can't go toward meeting your 40% academic progress requirement to enter your junior year, but they can count toward your 60% requirement to enter your senior year). You also can't use the summer term to make up missing the six credit previous semester requirement nor the 18 credit previous year requirement. Miss either of those and your fall semester is shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnmpsu
Passing 12 credits in. It a light load. In all honesty, just passing 12 credits is still falling behind academically for most majors. I'm not saying they should be kicked out of school, just that they should be required to cut back on their athletic extracurricular time in order to focus on their classes. Like I had posted previously, the NCAA should reduce the max practice & training hours to be lower than the required minimum number of credits enrolled.

Passing 12 credits does put you behind if you plan on graduating in 4 years - but for many, if not most majors, it would be right on track for graduating in five years. But that's immaterial, because if an athlete is enrolled in a major that would require him to pass MORE than 12 credits a term to graduate in five years, then the academic progress rule would kick in. He would still have to pass whatever the 20% requirement would be. So if he's in a major that calls for 150 credits to graduate, then the kid must pass 30 credits a year.

The rules are in place to keep kids on track to graduate in five years but not harshly punish them if they happen to trip up one semester. It seems you want them to graduate in four and will drop the hammer if they have even one screw-up.
 
Last edited:
As a former athlete, albeit quite a long time ago, similar things happened then. Many athletes were taking a class in the summer immediately after their HS graduation to get ahead. It was normally English 15, Econ 2 or 4 or a PE. Spring athletes took 15 or so credits in the fall and 12 in the spring, reverse that for fall and winter athletes. Drop one of the classes and you are down to 9, and that happened quite a bit. You then again took either 1 or 2 classes in the summer and repeat the process until your junior year when classes in your major came in to play. Back then when not as many athletes stayed all year, guys would take classes at one of the branch campuses during the summer to make up the credits close to home. I could not fit in a good time for Chem 14 ( the lab for Chem 12) fall of my freshman year so I took it at Beaver campus along with Chem 13/15 so I got all the Chem out of the way at once that following summer. It was actually a great way to keep the GPA up as well. Its different now but Lar as a great grasp of what is needed and with the requirements of today's athletes, I see no problem with it.
 
I agree that it's heartless to allow kids to fall behind academically. Relatively few make it in pro sports so their education should be a primary focus.

D1 sports are a major committment. I have no problem with a kid taking a light load in season as long as he keeps on pace to graduate by loading up in the summer.
My son played a D-1 sport and carried at least 15 credits every semester (and carried over a 3.0). With the preferred scheduling and the amount of classes they’re allowed to miss, 12 credits should be easily achievable.
 
Passing 12 credits does put you behind if you plan on graduating in 4 years - but for many, if not most majors, it would be right on track for graduating in five years.

The rules are in place to keep kids on track to graduate in five years but not harshly punish them if they happen to trip up one semester. It seems you want them to graduate in four and will drop the hammer if they have even one screw-up.

Um, the reason I said that they should be required to pass 12 credits svery fall and 12 credits every Spring is because 12credits x 2 semesters x 5 years = 120 credits. 120 credits is in the ballpark for a 4 year degree.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT