Don't shoot the messenger or ask how they identified. I'm just reporting what Matt Norlander (who, by the way, is also a Drew confidant) is saying in his article. He usually sources most of his info directly from coaches, ADs and SIDs, so I'd be surprised if he's too far off.

The Schools with rosters of $10 million or more committed and driving the market of escalating NIL deals (alphabetical, not by amount):

1. Arkansas
2. BYU
3. Duke
4. Indiana
5. Kentucky
6. Louisville
7. Michigan
8. North Carolina
9. St John's
10. Texas Tech

Just below this tier in the $8 million to $10 million range (alphabetical, not by exact amount):

1. Auburn
2. UConn
3. Florida
4. Houston
5. Kansas
6. Kansas St
7. Miami
8. Purdue
9. Tennessee
10. Texas
11. UCLA
12. USC
13. Villanova
14. Virginia

No Baylor anywhere to be found on either list. So, maybe some of the schools being held up as shining examples of being able to retain players are actually retaining existing players for reasons other than the coaching staff. I notice several of those shining examples on this list. And others complain because they don't see us in the mix for many High Major transfers. I think this list helps explain that.

No Arizona either. That's interesting to me.

No iowa state. And k state outspending us is insane. Why did Drew choose to stay?

If based solely on existing deals, Baylor still has one "big ticket" deal remaining to be completed and 1-2 smaller but significant deals to complete.

Comping the current budget of Baylor's 8 players to other schools with 11-12 players can easily mislead.

Of course, the only thing that really matters is the results.

Baylor is a private university, they can choose to not disclose their NIL budget.

Oso del lago said:

---

No iowa state. And k state outspending us is insane.

---

K-State spent big last year and didn't even make the tournament. Don't take this silly, premature list as gospel. Houston is on there and Sampson is crying about not even having a private jet.

Gmak said:

---

Baylor is a private university, they can choose to not disclose their NIL budget.

---

I think NIL is paid through collectives and not through the schools themselves. I believe technically everyone's NIL budget could be private. From what I gather, there are no hard numbers out there. It's just all conjecture and estimates.

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

If based solely on existing deals, Baylor still has one "big ticket" deal remaining to be completed and 1-2 smaller but significant deals to complete.

Comping the current budget of Baylor's 8 players to other schools with 11-12 players can easily mislead.

Of course, the only thing that really matters is the results.

---

So, if we could manage to play with just four, we could load up on 5stars.

Interesting interview I listened to with "Woj", Adrian Wojnaroski, who left ESPN to become GM for the basketball program at his alma mater, St. Bonaventure. He referred to the current era of NCAA mbb as perpetual free agency. If you think about it that way, you see Baylor as being in a similar position to a mid market mlb team: completely outspent by the Dodgers and Yankees, and probably that second tier of teams as well. As the Astros and Rangers have shown, you can do pretty well in that environment, focusing on longer term, developing young talent that fit the system. Adding strategically when needed. Here's the problem with that and the current NCAA:
in Baseball, and every other professional sport you can name, the big teams are limited in what they can do to acquire talent. They may be taxed for overspending. Small market teams are given by contract a 5 year window to retain and develop talent. Free agency is not perpetual or unlimited. In College basketball right now, you can find a diamond nobody else notices, get him to campus for a year, and then watch when the big money school grabs him away for $3mm+. You can make a deal in the portal and still be outbid by a team despite the contractual agreements made.

TWD 1974 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

If based solely on existing deals, Baylor still has one "big ticket" deal remaining to be completed and 1-2 smaller but significant deals to complete.

Comping the current budget of Baylor's 8 players to other schools with 11-12 players can easily mislead.

Of course, the only thing that really matters is the results.

---

So, if we could manage to play with just four, we could load up on 5stars.

Interesting interview I listened to with "Woj", Adrian Wojnaroski, who left ESPN to become GM for the basketball program at his alma mater, St. Bonaventure. He referred to the current era of NCAA mbb as perpetual free agency. If you think about it that way, you see Baylor as being in a similar position to a mid market mlb team: completely outspent by the Dodgers and Yankees, and probably that second tier of teams as well. As the Astros and Rangers have shown, you can do pretty well in that environment, focusing on longer term, developing young talent that fit the system. Adding strategically when needed. Here's the problem with that and the current NCAA:
in Baseball, and every other professional sport you can name, the big teams are limited in what they can do to acquire talent. They may be taxed for overspending. Small market teams are given by contract a 5 year window to retain and develop talent. Free agency is not perpetual or unlimited. In College basketball right now, you can find a diamond nobody else notices, get him to campus for a year, and then watch when the big money school grabs him away for $3mm+. You can make a deal in the portal and still be outbid by a team despite the contractual agreements made.

---

One important current limit to roster poaching: portal windows. So free agency is more biannual than perpetual.

The NIL Era is new. Each of MLB, NBA, and NFL has gone through a myriad of economic/competition models. Each has landed in different spots. And each is likely to continue changing incrementally with an occasional foundational shift.

The NCAA seems unimportant. The dead body in the corner that folks simply forgot to bury.
What seems more important are the ACC, B12, and the mid and lower tiers of the B10 and SEC.
Using your point as a starter, will those schools willingly accept a MLB model when they can likely force an NBA or NFL model?

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

TWD 1974 said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

If based solely on existing deals, Baylor still has one "big ticket" deal remaining to be completed and 1-2 smaller but significant deals to complete.

Comping the current budget of Baylor's 8 players to other schools with 11-12 players can easily mislead.

Of course, the only thing that really matters is the results.

---

So, if we could manage to play with just four, we could load up on 5stars.

Interesting interview I listened to with "Woj", Adrian Wojnaroski, who left ESPN to become GM for the basketball program at his alma mater, St. Bonaventure. He referred to the current era of NCAA mbb as perpetual free agency. If you think about it that way, you see Baylor as being in a similar position to a mid market mlb team: completely outspent by the Dodgers and Yankees, and probably that second tier of teams as well. As the Astros and Rangers have shown, you can do pretty well in that environment, focusing on longer term, developing young talent that fit the system. Adding strategically when needed. Here's the problem with that and the current NCAA:
in Baseball, and every other professional sport you can name, the big teams are limited in what they can do to acquire talent. They may be taxed for overspending. Small market teams are given by contract a 5 year window to retain and develop talent. Free agency is not perpetual or unlimited. In College basketball right now, you can find a diamond nobody else notices, get him to campus for a year, and then watch when the big money school grabs him away for $3mm+. You can make a deal in the portal and still be outbid by a team despite the contractual agreements made.

---

One important current limit to roster poaching: portal windows. So free agency is more biannual than perpetual.

The NIL Era is new. Each of MLB, NBA, and NFL has gone through a myriad of economic/competition models. Each has landed in different spots. And each is likely to continue changing incrementally with an occasional foundational shift.

The NCAA seems unimportant. The dead body in the corner that folks simply forgot to bury.
What seems more important are the ACC, B12, and the mid and lower tiers of the B10 and SEC.
Using your point as a starter, will those schools willingly accept a MLB model when they can likely force an NBA or NFL model?

---

Problem with that is the discrepancy in revenue between the conferences, especially when looking at a possible revenue share solution. Other potential roadblocks are the existing NIL agreements which the settlement is trying to supersede. There is going to be a lot of legal action back and forth on that one. I don't see us getting out of this mess entirely in a year.
To your point, I have surmised there have been some quiet reaching out within the conferences about the current situation--the Robert Wright issue being one that should raise the alarm bells for a lot of schools. I would like to see conferences return to some transfer limitation. The elimination of the scholarship--with its one year renewable limitations--can help safeguard multi year player agreements. Negotiating parties--agents or player reps, and NIL collective managers should be registered, and bound to abide by rules such as no contact windows, etc. Much of that has been in place, but teams have long used buffers, people not in an official capacity with the program as go between with a player signed or playing elsewhere. I think it's time to shore up the loopholes on that one.

No one with a robust NIL is going to keep it secret.

It's possible Baylor spent $7.99 million, just barely missing the second list. I'm guessing. Baylor's NIL budget might be less than $5 mil.

Baylor won't publish Nil budget because that will hurt with negotiations. Think about the situation in they are ok now where they really have only one player to spend the of their budget on. Also drew explained last year he went back to the donors at the end to get more money for Celestine so it's a little more fluid than a fixed budget.

Ewalker80 said:

---

Baylor won't publish Nil budget because that will hurt with negotiations. Think about the situation in they are ok now where they really have only one player to spend the remainder of their budget on. Also drew explained last year he went back to the donors at the end to get more money for Celestine so it's a little more fluid than a fixed budget.

---

Ewalker80 said:

---

Baylor won't publish Nil budget because that will hurt with negotiations. Think about the situation in they are ok now where they really have only one player to spend the of their budget on. Also drew explained last year he went back to the donors at the end to get more money for Celestine so it's a little more fluid than a fixed budget.

---

Given the injury history since the 2021/2022 season, seriously doubt that Baylor MBB won't be adding both a 1 and another 4 (who can swing to 5 on an As Needed basis).

Ewalker80 said:

---

Baylor won't publish Nil budget because that will hurt with negotiations. Think about the situation in they are ok now where they really have only one player to spend the of their budget on. Also drew explained last year he went back to the donors at the end to get more money for Celestine so it's a little more fluid than a fixed budget.

---

Baylor is a private Institution that takes the privacy seriously. I have never heard them mention Coaches salary, so I would be shocked if they mentioned NIL budget. Also, revealing an Individual's NIL agreement would be a violation of the student athletes privacy.

Of course the NIL is fluid. People seem to think this is money Baylor can set aside. This is donor collective money, and is a moving target. Complicating it all is the big pretend: name, image, likeness suggests value based on what those elements of a player are worth in the forms of advertising, merchandising, etc. The formulas often created are based upon the social media presence of the athlete, which is why Roach had an NIL $ of over $1mm. Playing for Duke gets you that. Unfortunately, that market value may not translate to Central Texas. Because the NIL is dependent on the size of the Collective, a private school like Baylor is forced to constantly go to the donor list to ask for money. Donors can be driven by ego, and have their own preferences on where their money is given. Some may be more interested in helping out with the 5* guard than the power forward coming off the bench.

Definitely a 1. The guy from rice is a backup 4 or 5. Rataj is starting 4. Bono bono starting 5. Tounde could play some 4. I agree they will likely get one more big but probably won't be much money spent on him. That will go to the 1.

Ewalker80 said:

---

Definitely a 1. The guy from rice is a backup 4 or 5. Rataj is starting 4. Bono bono starting 5. Tounde could play some 4. I agree they will likely get one more big but probably won't be much money spent on him. That will go to the 1.

---

Little chance that Powell is logging significant minutes at the 4.
The backup 4 will cost anywhere from 400k to 900k [based upon what other programs are spending on non starting key rotation pieces].

Not a huge amount but more than "won't be much money".