who may not aware, the Knight-Newhouse College Athletics Database (https://knightnewhousedata.org) works to increase financial transparency and provide a better understanding of athletics revenues and expenses. The information is pretty straightforward, and informative. For my own interest, I've started a spreadsheet tracking the data available there for Sac State & UCD. Just curious how things change for the two schools over the next few years.

I know, I really need a life. Too many years teaching HS economics, I guess, and being married to a PhD in economics. :>)

Anyway, I sent a couple of questions, and thought the reply might interest some of the people who post on AST.

"We will be uploading the FY 2025 data starting next month, which will include most of the public
Division I institutions. We will publish the rest at the beginning of the summer. On the NIL data, the
new FY 2025 reports include a new item, item 44, titled "Institutional NIL Revenue Share." We will
start including this as an expense category; however, you should not expect a lot of data from this
category for this year because the House settlement was not implemented until after FY25 ends for
most institutions.

"This information will likely be more valuable next year when FY26 reports come out and more
institutions include it as expenses.

"On the source for this NIL money, we do not know where it comes from. Also, and this might
answer another question you have, because we cannot file Freedom of Information Act requests,
we do not have information about third-party NIL deals.

RE the final paragraph, it looks like there will still be room for lots of hidden money in the system

Of the players on the Pepperdine roster, 3 of 12 are grad transfers; 4 others are undergrad transfers. 8 of 12 are from out of country, 3 from Australia. All 5 starters and 2 of 3 primary subs are transfers.
Starters are Guards: 5'6' Maria Sta, 5'11 Ellie Guiney, 5'10" Meghan Fiso, 6'2" Lina Falk & Forward 6'1" Shorna Preston
Primary subs are Guards 5'10" Selah Harmon, 6'0" Bella Green, and 5'10" Ivory Finley

Leading scorers are Guiney (14.0), Falk (11.7) and Fish (11.2).
Leading rebounders are Preston (8.4), Green (5.6) and Fish (4.9)
Sta & Guiney average 3 assists each.

Pepperdine (9-12, 10-8 WCC).
Common opponents:
Beat Fullerton (84-70; 1st game of season) and CSUN (69-63 just before Christmas),
Lost at Gonzaga (52-75 on Dec 30
Stats:
FG: 44% 3PT: 34% FT: 75% Reb: 39/game Assists: 16/game TO: 16/game Steals: 6/game
Score: 71
Opp. Stats:
FG: 38% 3PT: 33% FT: 74% Reb: 35/game Assists: 14/game TO: 14/game Steals: 9/game
Score: 66

UCD Stats:
FG: 41% 3PT: 31% FT: 76% Reb: 39/game Assists: 15/game TO: 15/game Steals: 7/game
Score: 69
Opp. Stats:
FG: 38% 3PT: 32% FT: 72% Reb: 37/game Assists: 11/game TO: 13/game Steals: 9/game
Score: 64

Notes:
About 1/3 of Pepperdine's FG's are 3-pointers, while about 1/2 of UCD's shots are 3 pointers. Pepperdine shoots fewer FT's than their opponents, while UCD shoots more FT's than their opponents.
Pepperdine is 13-3 at home; UCD 9-6 on the road - 12-7 if you count neutral court.
Pepperdine has 3 players who average between 30-32 min/gane; UCD has 4 averaging 31-36 min/game.
Pepperdine average attendance: 334; UCD average attendance: 963 (609 if Idaho game - Field Trip Day - attendance not included)

Maybe looking at rankings (NET, RPI, etc.)? Probably the potential attendance figures in.? UCD in midst finals, so some students would be gone. Pepperdine not on qtr system.

Pepperdine 19-12, 10-8 WCC; 6th place in conference. 127 in Massey ratings - below UCI, UCSD & Hawaii. Definitely a winnable game. Davis 152 in Massey ratings.

UCD at Pepperdine (19-12) on Thursday, 3/19

UCSD down early to Hawaii, but now up by 12 with ):15 left. I THINK this assures UCD of an invitation to the WNIT.

Aggies go down fighting, 84-79.

Gotta be rooting for UCSD to beat Hawaii in tomorrow’s championship. If Hawaii wins, they go to the NCAA, Irvine gets the bid to the WBIT, and San Diego gets the WNIT invite. Aggies odd team out. As we know a 17-16 SEC or A10 school will somehow be deemed more deserving.

Good response.

I think it really started to change at the college level when UCLA recruited Lew Alcindor, later Kareem. I remember hearing that Lucius Allen and Kenny Shackelford went to UCLA specifically to play with Kareem. Allen had all but committed to Kansas if I remember correctly. That started a parade of top players to the Bruins who attracted other top players.

At the same time, wealthy LA area businessman, Sam Gilbert, became heavily involved with the Bruin program. Wooden personally kept a distance, but the AD, and probably Wooden let Gilbert have lots of direct involvement with players, their families and influential friends.

I imagine other schools started to allow the same thing as far as boosters, if only to compete with UCLA. Not that it helped much. As John Madden said of Wooden, "He can take his and beat yours, then take yours and beat his." But after that, the "blue bloods" became even more dominant. I can only remember Marquette under Al McGuire and Georgetown under John Thompson being like La Salle and UTEP. Probably forgetting some.

First, I wasn't trying to be smart-ass. I just read that line last night, and liked it. So, apologies if it came across the wrong way.

A discussion of fairness in sports would be interesting. And probably a whole other topic I know that we, myself included, want to believe that 'fairness is a central tenet of sports', but I'm not sure that's accurate. Aren't upsets when an underdog defeats a team with "all the advantages"? Isn't that why we've loved Gonzaga? Boise State? Loyola of Chicago? They overcame the disadvantages, right?

If we acknowledge that some teams have a distinct advantage, like financial resources, facilities, etc, when it comes to obtaining/signing players and coaches - be it Alabama, USC, Ohio State or the Lakers (Showtime era), Yankees (1960's), 49ers (Eddie Debarolo era) or Patriots (Brady-Belichick era), how can we claim competing with them is fair - i.e a level playing field?

Doesn't NIL, by its nature, by and large do away with fairness? The whole discussion about NIL isn't about making it fair for all D1 schools, but making it manageable or at least marginally enforceable. It's been said in other thread on this site that the top 40 or so schools, don't want to share the pie.

Or prior to NIL, the booster networks at some schools that were already paying players under the table?

Even at the youth level, we hear about high schools recruiting players. About parents holding a chid back so that he/she is more mature for their grade level, and therefore have a competitive advantage. In youth soccer, it's an openly acknowledged fact that the better players (and/or their parents) gravitate toward the best teams...the good kids want to play with the other good kids. I've watched that happen on my granddaughter's club team, and listened to the conversations. Year after year, the top clubs field the strongest teams, while other clubs see their players move to those teams. None of that contributes to a level playing field.

What's fair or unfair, anyway? And who decides that? A UCD anecdote to illustrate: I remember watching the UCD men's basketball team win the D2 National Championship in 1998. During the telecast, the announcers repeatedly mentioned that Davis had an advantage - they didn't quite call it unfair, though it was obvious they meant it was - over ALL OTHER D2 schools because of the size of the school. They went so far as to say that UCD really needed to move to D1 because of school enrollment. Even though their opponent in that game, Kentucky Wesleyan, had already won 6 national championships, and had 16 D2 Final 4 appearances on its resume. UCD was in its 1st Final 4, but apparently had an unfair advantage.

Go figure.

A mystery I'm reading has a good line when one of the characters says something isn't fair. The main character, an attorney, replies, "Fair is where they sell cotton candy".

From a conference perspective, the Big West format does make a kind of sense for a perennial 1-bid conference. A conference wants their best team going to the Big Dance, since that team is probably the only one that might win a game or two...like UCSD almost did last year, only losing to #5 seed Michigan in the first round.

Winning 1 game is an extra $2 million for the conference.

A conference doesn't wanting a lower seed, like a 7 or 8, pulling an upset, and knocking out one of your top teams. Or worse, winning the whole conference tournament and then getting totally blown out in the first round.

Possibly contributed to UCD - UCR being called more closely? Which would benefit the Aggies.

If Riverside was following the recent script against the Aggies of aggressive, physical play, maybe it backfired?

Davis vs. UCSD Round 3.

The more important game might be Irvine vs. Hawaii on the other side of the bracket. An Anteater victory pretty much locks up a bid from the WBIT or WNIT for the Aggies.

The energy in the legs is the question, 100%. Davis has 4 players in the top 25 in the BW in minutes played; Riverside has 2. Bennett (#2) and Norris (#4) have the most. For Riverside, Wickstrom (#7) is up there as well, with Kaylani Polk (#16) comparable to Epps (#14) and Sussex (#21). Offensively, I think it's affected Sussex the most as her shots come largely from beyond the arc. Oddly, I think her defense has been better over the last part of the regular season.

Still on the same side as a team that swept us...UCSB. And the long minutes for Ryann, Nya, Megan & Avery are exacting a toll on their shooting. For the season, we shoot just under 31% from beyond the arc; last 3 games: 20.3%. Tired legs IMHO.

Santa Barbara has the best 3-pt defense in the conference, holding opponents to 26.1%. They've held us to 16.8% in the 2 games this season. Assuming UCSB beats Riverside, we'll play them on 1 day less rest than we're used to. Definitely don't like that matchup.

Also, not real optimistic about us playing games on consecutive days at this point. Not that Gross had an alternative to the long minutes if we were going to stay in contention, which we did until the last game.

UCSD 72 UC Santa Barbara 65. On Wednesday, the Aggies play the winner of Tuesday's Riverside - Santa Barbara matchup. Riverside split with the Gauchos in fairly close games. The Roadrunners beat UCSB on the road by 7, but lost by 4 at home.

The Aggies swept Riverside in the regular season, and were swept by Santa Barbara.

Go figure.

Megan is strong, but she’s no Audi Crooks; instead she’s pretty slender. Megan’s been facing 2, sometimes 3 players trying to box her out, as well as heavier players leaning on her for 29 games, 35 minutes a night. She’s had therapeutic tape on one or both legs since the first game. Megan’s pretty tough, but the constant banging takes a toll.

Amen to that!