We're officially doomed

[Eight Legger]

it's probably all coming from the school.
they want a successful basketball program. it's important. they tried to do it on the cheap this year. it failed.
increasing NIL doesn't guarantee anythying, but paying 40% of what the top teams in the league pay is a losing proposition.

If this is true, and I think it probably is... That makes the issue 1000x worse in my mind, because it would mean all of the following is true:

• the university has been holding back available funds that it could have put toward the basketball program before now;
• it has enough in these reserves to simply buy out Mooney and hire someone new (who also would come at a lower price tag) but is choosing not to do so;
• the powers that be have decided that MONEY and not MOONEY is the real problem here.

 

[Spider17]

I don’t think it’s all from the school. The school will subsidize the rest to get to the number the AD has determined necessary to not embarrass ourselves, which I believe will be around $4-5 million. Wasn’t explicitly stated but heavily implied we’re going to have a considerable payroll increase next season. But I do agree Eight, that it shows we have the money to buyout Mooney’s contract but instead are choosing to stick with him.

The cynical view is that they want Mooney for life and will help with funding it necessary for him to do well enough to stay here.

The optimistic view is that the university is really committed to the success of this program and want us to be at the top. Mooney has done well in the past and they want to see if he can continue that success with a high payroll.

The practical view is the cost of giving Mooney a payroll increase is still cheaper than buying out his contract the next 3 years. They recognize these results aren’t where we want them to be, but because of Mooney’s history here not only of success in the past but relationships he’s built, they are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and another chance with a top level A10 budget. If he produces another mediocre season, it will be the final straw.

 

[sman]

If this is true, and I think it probably is... That makes the issue 1000x worse in my mind, because it would mean all of the following is true:

• the university has been holding back available funds that it could have put toward the basketball program before now;

this year is the 1st year schools could contribute to the NIL.

 

[Eight Legger]

this year is the 1st year schools could contribute to the NIL.

Correct, but it apparently could have contributed more this year. Or it could have bought Mooney out after last year. Or now.

 

[MrTbone]

I think what sman said about we'll be better with better players is fair, but I'll be shocked if we're dramatically better next year even with better players. The returning players are pretty dubious other than Argabright. I like Robinson personally but he didn't get a ton of time, and a lot of what he got was out of his position group. I don't see any dramatic jumps from Mikkel or Colin. Maybe Harper?

So you're gonna have to bring at least 3 new starters, and you're gonna face all the same problems we've historically had from a system perspective.

Plus, we just don't play defense. So, there's that.

 

[SpiderTrue]

paying 40% of what the top teams in the league pay is a losing proposition.

I have said similar things and was ridiculed.

 

[RichmondNative]

So you're gonna have to bring at least 3 new starters, and you're gonna face all the same problems we've historically had from a system perspective.

Exactly and this new team is going to have to have good team chemistry for this one year turnaround. It is going to take more than one year with Mooney. At least two. So whatever is invested next year is going to have to be repeated the following year, etc. Of course, you have to retain the players with eligibility too. One year doesn’t look that costly, but keep adding on the subsequent years.

At STL it took 2 years with money and a new coach. STL, VCU and Dayton are the teams that supposedly are spending big money and I don’t think it is a guarantee that any of them win the autobid. Time will tell. Personally I am rooting for St Joe’s. I want to hear the powers that be explain their way around that one.

 

[vt4700]

it's probably all coming from the school.
they want a successful basketball program. it's important. they tried to do it on the cheap this year. it failed.
increasing NIL doesn't guarantee anythying, but paying 40% of what the top teams in the league pay is a losing proposition.

"On the cheap". Really? We probably spent the 4th most NIL this year in the A-10. Man, u love the NIL excuse. We lost 11 games this year to Q3/Q4 teams that I feel pretty confident saying spent way less money than the 2 million we did. 11!!!!! NIL wasn't a losing proposition to those teams. Just think if we had a coach who could beat Q3 and Q4 teams. Shoot, I will even give u 3 of the 11 as losses, and we would be 23-8 right now with just a decent coach.

And, stop pretending like SLU, Dayton, and VCU are these juggernaults. The A-10 has 2 bubble teams right now, not 3 juggernauts. Liberty, LaSalle, Rhode Island, Mason, and St Joe's, all who spent less NIL than we did, had wins against one or more of these teams. Guess who didn't? Shocker.....us.

 

[RichmondNative]

And, stop pretending like SLU, Dayton, and VCU are these juggernaults. The A-10 has 2 bubble teams right now, not 3 juggernauts. Liberty, LaSalle, Rhode Island, Mason, and St Joe's, all who spent less NIL than we did, had wins against one or more of these teams. Guess who didn't? Shocker.....us.

Totally agree and one of the lower spend teams could get the autobid too.

 

[URFan1]

I don’t think it’s all from the school. The school will subsidize the rest to get to the number the AD has determined necessary to not embarrass ourselves, which I believe will be around $4-5 million. Wasn’t explicitly stated but heavily implied we’re going to have a considerable payroll increase next season. But I do agree Eight, that it shows we have the money to buyout Mooney’s contract but instead are choosing to stick with him.

The cynical view is that they want Mooney for life and will help with funding it necessary for him to do well enough to stay here.

The optimistic view is that the university is really committed to the success of this program and want us to be at the top. Mooney has done well in the past and they want to see if he can continue that success with a high payroll.

The practical view is the cost of giving Mooney a payroll increase is still cheaper than buying out his contract the next 3 years. They recognize these results aren’t where we want them to be, but because of Mooney’s history here not only of success in the past but relationships he’s built, they are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and another chance with a top level A10 budget. If he produces another mediocre season, it will be the final straw.

I'm sure they think if they buy him out they will still need to give replacement elevated NIL money.