The current state of our Hoya basketball program

[EtomicB]

Aug 5, 2024 10:21:41 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Aug 5, 2024 9:29:19 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

3?

I would have overpaid for Styles

I have no idea how you can be certain about this when you don't know the ask nor do you know the budget or NIL allocations.

You've basically made an assumption about what the ask was ("quibble") that you have no real idea if it is true.

it's hard to put a price on continuity & consistency

Well, you have to. You have a limited budget. You can't simply overpay for subjective reasons.


There's an opportunity cost to every dollar spent.

You're right I have no idea what his ask was but I think I can reasonably assume it wasn't outrageous or Styles would have been out the door as soon as the season ended so I have zero issues saying I would have overpaid for him to stay.

I also think it's reasonable to assume since Styles left shortly after Peavy committed that he probably learned Peavy was getting more than him & wanted a similar bump.

As I stated in my previous post, I have a hard time taking the "limited budget" talk seriously when the staff chased CO until the very end. I'm sure a small part of that leftover budget went to Burks but what of the rest?

[jwp91]

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, but I don't share it.

Last year's team wasn't good enough to finish better than 10th, and they were shockingly close to 11th.

We desperately needed to improve the defense. Adding perhaps the best perimeter defender in the country was a big move to improve. I would rather see the Hoyas win than cheer for last year's team to somehow improve. With the addition of Mack and Peavy, we are clearly better than we were.

Regarding the budget, sometimes an alumnus is willing to write a big check for a certain player but those funds are not otherwise available. I am not sure if that was the situation, but I have read that it exists.

[conshyhoya]

Aug 5, 2024 12:37:14 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

Aug 5, 2024 10:21:41 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

I have no idea how you can be certain about this when you don't know the ask nor do you know the budget or NIL allocations.

You've basically made an assumption about what the ask was ("quibble") that you have no real idea if it is true.



Well, you have to. You have a limited budget. You can't simply overpay for subjective reasons.


There's an opportunity cost to every dollar spent.

You're right I have no idea what his ask was but I think I can reasonably assume it wasn't outrageous or Styles would have been out the door as soon as the season ended so I have zero issues saying I would have overpaid for him to stay.

I also think it's reasonable to assume since Styles left shortly after Peavy committed that he probably learned Peavy was getting more than him & wanted a similar bump.

As I stated in my previous post, I have a hard time taking the "limited budget" talk seriously when the staff chased CO until the very end. I'm sure a small part of that leftover budget went to Burks but what of the rest?

Didn't we get a significant NIL donation after Styles left but before we pursued CO? Maybe at the time we did have limited budget and we still needed to add a center at the very least.

[hoyasaxa2003]

Aug 5, 2024 12:37:14 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

Aug 5, 2024 10:21:41 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

I have no idea how you can be certain about this when you don't know the ask nor do you know the budget or NIL allocations.

You've basically made an assumption about what the ask was ("quibble") that you have no real idea if it is true.



Well, you have to. You have a limited budget. You can't simply overpay for subjective reasons.


There's an opportunity cost to every dollar spent.

You're right I have no idea what his ask was but I think I can reasonably assume it wasn't outrageous or Styles would have been out the door as soon as the season ended so I have zero issues saying I would have overpaid for him to stay.

I also think it's reasonable to assume since Styles left shortly after Peavy committed that he probably learned Peavy was getting more than him & wanted a similar bump.

As I stated in my previous post, I have a hard time taking the "limited budget" talk seriously when the staff chased CO until the very end. I'm sure a small part of that leftover budget went to Burks but what of the rest?

I thought the timing was that Peavy got a fair amount of NIL, Epps renegotiated and got more, and then Styles wanted to renegotiate and get more and did not get what he wanted, and so he looked for another landing spot?

As others have said, I think the disconnect is treating players like they are student-athletes, when in reality they now are paid players (who happen to go to class) who have extremely high levels of freedom and do not have to exhibit much, if any, loyalty to their program.

That said, I do think we should focus on keeping the people we have, especially now that those people happen to have more talent. And I would have liked to keep Styles and Cook, but not at any cost. And since I have no idea what they asked or demanded (and I am not assuming those demands were realistic because I think at least for Cook, if they were, he'd be coming back), I will leave it there on those two.

That said, coaches cannot be in binds where they have to cave to player demands simply to keep their roster. To take NIL out of it, let's say you had a mediocre point guard who told his coach, "I will stay for my sophomore year, but you need to promise me I will start every game, only play as PG, and play 30 minutes a game." I think most people would see that as an unrealistic demand for any such player to make. Yet for some reason, when it comes to money, people view it differently.

[EtomicB]

Aug 5, 2024 13:29:40 GMT -5 conshyhoya said:

Aug 5, 2024 12:37:14 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

You're right I have no idea what his ask was but I think I can reasonably assume it wasn't outrageous or Styles would have been out the door as soon as the season ended so I have zero issues saying I would have overpaid for him to stay.

I also think it's reasonable to assume since Styles left shortly after Peavy committed that he probably learned Peavy was getting more than him & wanted a similar bump.

As I stated in my previous post, I have a hard time taking the "limited budget" talk seriously when the staff chased CO until the very end. I'm sure a small part of that leftover budget went to Burks but what of the rest?

Didn't we get a significant NIL donation after Styles left but before we pursued CO? Maybe at the time we did have limited budget and we still needed to add a center at the very least.

This post was from March 22nd, folks were linking Gtown & CO before he entered the portal.

[cnyhoya]

It's truly the Wild West. Much less regulated the even pro sports. No salary cap; no multiyear contracts; no disclosure of finances. It will evolve over time. But for now it is truly unbelievable.

[SFHoya99]

Aug 5, 2024 12:37:14 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

I think I can reasonably assume it wasn't outrageous or Styles would have been out the door as soon as the season ended

I don't know that that is a reasonable assumption. He may have waited to when Peavy got his number or when Epps or Mack got his and made a significant ask.

As I stated in my previous post, I have a hard time taking the "limited budget" talk seriously when the staff chased CO until the very end. I'm sure a small part of that leftover budget went to Burks but what of the rest?[/quote]

But Styles went to NC State in April. You would rather have not pursued any bigs? That's not a good decision in the moment.

The reality is that in any allocation of NIL, you're going to have to have guidelines for how much you are going to spend on certain positions, on starters versus backups, etc.

I think it's perfectly valid to say that you would have retained Styles over Epps or getting Peavy or Mack on ability. You may be right; the staff may be right. I can see an argument for Styles over one of Epps or Mack. I can see the counter.

But just saying that we should have retained him with no real understanding of what everyone makes, what he was asking, what bigs were asking, seems silly to me. I don't think the staff made a bad decision to pursue bigs instead of re-signing Styles even though they didn't get one of the bigs -- it was and is a more clear need.

And I really think the "pushed out" terminology is outdated and there's simply too many unknowns to use that term. What if Styles was told he was welcome back at the same NIL and he simply chose to leave?

Teams without insane budgets are going to have to be very choiceful.

[SFHoya99]

Julius Halaifonua, 7' Kiwi center out of the NBA Development Academy, just committed. We have a third big man, and this one has some very nice offensive moves.

[sportsastroguy]

Aug 5, 2024 15:16:16 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Julius Halaifonua, 7' Kiwi center out of the NBA Development Academy, just committed. We have a third big man, and this one has some very nice offensive moves.

Prob won't be a star but will do the little things that could help this team make a nice jump next year. If he transforms his body a la Sorber he could be a problem down the line.

[calhoya]

Take away Epps and Mack and this is suddenly a very big team.

[EtomicB]

Aug 5, 2024 15:13:18 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Aug 5, 2024 12:37:14 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

I think I can reasonably assume it wasn't outrageous or Styles would have been out the door as soon as the season ended

I don't know that that is a reasonable assumption. He may have waited to when Peavy got his number or when Epps or Mack got his and made a significant ask.

As I stated in my previous post, I have a hard time taking the "limited budget" talk seriously when the staff chased CO until the very end. I'm sure a small part of that leftover budget went to Burks but what of the rest?

But Styles went to NC State in April. You would rather have not pursued any bigs? That's not a good decision in the moment.

The reality is that in any allocation of NIL, you're going to have to have guidelines for how much you are going to spend on certain positions, on starters versus backups, etc.

I think it's perfectly valid to say that you would have retained Styles over Epps or getting Peavy or Mack on ability. You may be right; the staff may be right. I can see an argument for Styles over one of Epps or Mack. I can see the counter.

But just saying that we should have retained him with no real understanding of what everyone makes, what he was asking, what bigs were asking, seems silly to me. I don't think the staff made a bad decision to pursue bigs instead of re-signing Styles even though they didn't get one of the bigs -- it was and is a more clear need.

And I really think the "pushed out" terminology is outdated and there's simply too many unknowns to use that term. What if Styles was told he was welcome back at the same NIL and he simply chose to leave?

Teams without insane budgets are going to have to be very choiceful.
[/quote]

That's not what I was saying at all, I mentioned CO to answer the "limited budget" reasoning folks were using to justify why players left last season. My point was/is if you're in the hunt for a player who was reportedly offered 2 million dollars then you don't really have a limited budget.

Seton Hall has a limited budget, reports were their top offer to Richmond was 500K(Fanta tweeted that).

Butler too has a limited budget, that's why they lost their backcourt to Dayton & Washington.

Gtown isn't in the same category as these two peers, neither of whom would have tried to get into the CO sweepstakes.

[SFHoya99]

Aug 5, 2024 17:37:33 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

That's not what I was saying at all, I mentioned CO to answer the "limited budget" reasoning folks were using to justify why players left last season. My point was/is if you're in the hunt for a player who was reportedly offered 2 million dollars then you don't really have a limited budget.

Seton Hall has a limited budget, reports were their top offer to Richmond was 500K(Fanta tweeted that).

Butler too has a limited budget, that's why they lost their backcourt to Dayton & Washington.

Gtown isn't in the same category as these two peers, neither of whom would have tried to get into the CO sweepstakes.

I don't think our offer to CO was $2M, but that's neither here nor there.

I'm not using 'limited' to describe our budget relative to most of the Big East. When I use limited here, what I mean is that there's a finite amount. Every dollar spent is a dollar not spent elsewhere. And I think there's a pretty good chance we're having to overpay a decent amount given recent history -- I bet Styles went to NC State for probably less than he asked us for; winning and heading home likely factored in.

We may have been saving a million plus for a big, and that's money we couldn't spend on Styles. And that 100% makes sense given the information at the time. A big was a higher priority.

We don't need to be Seton Hall to be running up close to our budget.

I think this is all stuff that we have no real idea.

[Gammo]

Aug 5, 2024 15:16:16 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Julius Halaifonua, 7' Kiwi center out of the NBA Development Academy, just committed. We have a third big man, and this one has some very nice offensive moves.

This feels like a strong addition to a hugely improved team. I think post depth was needed and Julius is big and skilled.

Hoya Saxa baby!! I need to schedule more US trips this upcoming season!!!

[hoyarooter]

Aug 5, 2024 17:46:31 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Aug 5, 2024 17:37:33 GMT -5 EtomicB said:

That's not what I was saying at all, I mentioned CO to answer the "limited budget" reasoning folks were using to justify why players left last season. My point was/is if you're in the hunt for a player who was reportedly offered 2 million dollars then you don't really have a limited budget.

Seton Hall has a limited budget, reports were their top offer to Richmond was 500K(Fanta tweeted that).

Butler too has a limited budget, that's why they lost their backcourt to Dayton & Washington.

Gtown isn't in the same category as these two peers, neither of whom would have tried to get into the CO sweepstakes.

I don't think our offer to CO was $2M, but that's neither here nor there.

I'm not using 'limited' to describe our budget relative to most of the Big East. When I use limited here, what I mean is that there's a finite amount. Every dollar spent is a dollar not spent elsewhere. And I think there's a pretty good chance we're having to overpay a decent amount given recent history -- I bet Styles went to NC State for probably less than he asked us for; winning and heading home likely factored in.

We may have been saving a million plus for a big, and that's money we couldn't spend on Styles. And that 100% makes sense given the information at the time. A big was a higher priority.

We don't need to be Seton Hall to be running up close to our budget.

I think this is all stuff that we have no real idea.

Also, won't some of our remaining NIL funds go to Julius? Or is he not eligible for that? In any case, I agree totally with the Wild West reference above. I would have liked to retain Styles, but dealing with the NIL budget over the offseason introduces a whole new and, to me at least, unanalyzable variable into the process. We may not agree with every decision that Cooley and the staff make, but I think we have no choice but to let it play out and hope for the best.

[SFHoya99]

Aug 5, 2024 18:45:19 GMT -5 hoyarooter said:

Also, won't some of our remaining NIL funds go to Julius? Or is he not eligible for that? In any case, I agree totally with the Wild West reference above. I would have liked to retain Styles, but dealing with the NIL budget over the offseason introduces a whole new and, to me at least, unanalyzable variable into the process. We may not agree with every decision that Cooley and the staff make, but I think we have no choice but to let it play out and hope for the best.

As a foreign player, he may not be able to receive them? I'm not sure. But even if he can't, you can't be sure that the big you were going to find would be international.

We're all going to analyze and opine; we're on a sport message board. I just think we all need to acknowledge the massive uncertainty in that analysis, especially if you are going into the territory where you question someone's ethics.

Definite statements about decisions with insufficient information ("we should have overpaid" By how much? What even is overpaying?) don't make a lot of sense to me.

Keeping Styles would have been nice. He was a good shooter last year and it'd be nice to have another upperclassman. But we have so little context.

[jwp91]

Aug 5, 2024 17:24:13 GMT -5 calhoya said:

Take away Epps and Mack and this is suddenly a very big team.

Imagine this set for a possession or 2.

2-3 Zone

Caleb Williams. Drew McKenna


Sorber - Halaikonou. - Fielder


Caleb has been primary ball handler at times. Not that you would want to put him into that situation often, but wouldn’t this be an unusual, tough, surprise look on defense at the end of a half?

[prhoya]

Aug 5, 2024 21:33:41 GMT -5 jwp91 said:

Aug 5, 2024 17:24:13 GMT -5 calhoya said:

Take away Epps and Mack and this is suddenly a very big team.

Imagine this set for a possession or 2.

2-3 Zone

Caleb Williams. Drew McKenna


Sorber - Halaikonou. - Fielder


Caleb has been primary ball handler at times. Not that you would want to put him into that situation often, but wouldn’t this be an unusual, tough, surprise look on defense at the end of a half?

Peavy has to be in any end-of-half defensive lineup.

[prhoya]

I don’t know if this was posted, but enjoy:

[blueandgray]

Aug 5, 2024 19:39:16 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Aug 5, 2024 18:45:19 GMT -5 hoyarooter said:

Also, won't some of our remaining NIL funds go to Julius? Or is he not eligible for that? In any case, I agree totally with the Wild West reference above. I would have liked to retain Styles, but dealing with the NIL budget over the offseason introduces a whole new and, to me at least, unanalyzable variable into the process. We may not agree with every decision that Cooley and the staff make, but I think we have no choice but to let it play out and hope for the best.

As a foreign player, he may not be able to receive them? I'm not sure. But even if he can't, you can't be sure that the big you were going to find would be international.

We're all going to analyze and opine; we're on a sport message board. I just think we all need to acknowledge the massive uncertainty in that analysis, especially if you are going into the territory where you question someone's ethics.

Definite statements about decisions with insufficient information ("we should have overpaid" By how much? What even is overpaying?) don't make a lot of sense to me.

Keeping Styles would have been nice. He was a good shooter last year and it'd be nice to have another upperclassman. But we have so little context.

Foreign players can absolutely receive NIL and it varies state to state. Much of what they have to do to receive their NIL has to occur out of the country.

[SSHoya]

Aug 6, 2024 1:08:31 GMT -5 blueandgray said:

Aug 5, 2024 19:39:16 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

As a foreign player, he may not be able to receive them? I'm not sure. But even if he can't, you can't be sure that the big you were going to find would be international.

We're all going to analyze and opine; we're on a sport message board. I just think we all need to acknowledge the massive uncertainty in that analysis, especially if you are going into the territory where you question someone's ethics.

Definite statements about decisions with insufficient information ("we should have overpaid" By how much? What even is overpaying?) don't make a lot of sense to me.

Keeping Styles would have been nice. He was a good shooter last year and it'd be nice to have another upperclassman. But we have so little context.

Foreign players can absolutely receive NIL and it varies state to state. Much of what they have to do to receive their NIL has to occur out of the country.

NIL available but limited to "passive engagements." My shoot-from-the-hip opinion is that state NIL laws cannot supersede the F1 visa requirements because of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

Some reasons international student-athletes may be restricted from NIL deals include:

1. Visas: International students' visas may limit them to on-campus and limited off-campus employment at their institution.

2. NCAA bylaws: NCAA bylaws prohibit payment for work not performed.

3. State NIL laws: Most state NIL laws prohibit institutional payment, arranging, or deal-making for student-athletes' NIL.

As of May 2024, international student-athletes in the NCAA are generally not allowed to accept Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) money in the U.S.. However, they can sometimes profit from "passive" engagements, such as merchandise sales or licensing agreements. For example, former Purdue basketball star Zach Edey, who is from Canada, made $800,000 by partnering with the Purdue Team Store to release special edition hockey jerseys.

Senator Pete Ricketts of Nebraska introduced a bill in October 2023 to Congress that would allow athletes to sign endorsement contracts for the commercial use of their NILs through their F1 visas and employment authorizations.

“We want to make sure that we are not disincentivizing talented young people who come to the United States,” Ricketts said to Cronkite News in June.

Since introducing the bill, Ricketts and Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have continued to call upon the Department of Homeland Security to provide a plan to help international students access NIL deals.

news.azpm.org/p/news-topical-biz/2024/7/6/220876-international-athletes-watch-from-sidelines-as-us-peers-cash-in-on-nil-deals/#:~:text=While%20NIL%20opportunities%20are%20prohibited,sports%20video%20game%20licensing%20agreements.

Of the three visa categories specific to international students (F-1, M-1, and J-1), the F-1 visa is the most common for international student-athletes and deserves a brief background. In addition to requiring a full course of study, the F-1 visa places heavy restrictions on international students, under “the rationale . . . that international students are in the United States to study, not to work.” There is no single definition of “work” or “employment” that covers all situations or visa statuses. In general (some exemptions for off-campus employment), only three employment options are available to F-1 students, the most common of which is on-campus employment for up to 20 hours per week when school is in session (8 C.F.R. § 214.2(f)(9)(ii))). For students wishing to work off-campus or for more than 20 hours per week, additional USCIS authorization is required. That work is typically post-graduate work directly related to the student’s field of study, including Curricular Practical Training or Optional Practical Training (see US Citizenship and Immigration Services Students and Employment). This work is commonly performed as a paid internship in the student’s field or under a one-year work permit after graduation, and as such, does not fit well into NIL opportunities. Absent extreme circumstances, or action by Congress or DHS, no other types of employment is allowed.

International students’ visas limit them to on-campus and limited off-campus employment at their institution (8 C.F.R. § 214.2(f)(9)(i)) or passive income from valid NIL work, and the NCAA Bylaws prohibit payment for work not performed (see NCAA Bylaw 12.4.1(a) and NCAA Interim NIL Policy). Thus, international student-athletes are presented with a quandary: most state NIL laws prohibit institutional payment, arranging, or deal-making for student-athletes’ NIL. That means these students must trade 20 hours per week of NIL income from the school for 20 hours a week in the university library, bookstore, or cafe. And absent clear federal immigration guidance on NIL, the above-described regulatory scheme would preclude payment for any NIL activities in the U.S. where active income is received for work performed. Put differently, if the international student-athlete must do something requested by the entity/individual to get paid for use of their NIL, that would ideally be considered active income and subject to the above-described visa employment restrictions.

generalcounsel.uoregon.edu/name-image-and-likeness-international-student-athletes