The prevailing attitude here is that it's crazy to give a college basketball player millions of dollars to come and play here. However, the monetary return can be well worth it and it might even be a great investment saving millions of dollars for UCLA.
How much is a star player getting $5 million or more really worth monetarily? Payments to basketball players come from two sources: NIL (funds generated through endorsements and marketing from outside third parties) and revenue sharing (funds paid directly by the university). The amount of revenue sharing funds are capped at about $21 million per school. UCLA spends about 75% on football, 20% on basketball and the rest on the other sports. So the big money players have to be funded mainly from the NIL. St. John's paid Yessefou a combination of both. But since the total revenue sharing amount is capped, paying a recruit just changes the allocation of funds, not increases it. So paying a basketball player excessive revenue sharing might just mean a little less for the other sports/players and all revenue he generates is profit.
Some estimates from two ways a team can benefit:
(1) Further advancement in the NCAA tournament- Say a team can advance two more rounds with this player. What is that worth? The NCAA does not pay money directly to individual schools. Instead, it awards a "unit" to a team's conference for each tournament game the team plays. Each unit earned is currently worth approximately $2.1 million, but it is paid out over a six year period. Most conferences (such as the Big Ten) distribute the money evenly among all member schools. This amounts to roughly $350,000 per year per unit. So divide that by 18 member schools. That means the two extra games in the tournament worth $700,000 divided by 18 equals about $39,000 per year for six years.
(2) Increased home attendance- This one may be more difficult to estimate. Increased attendance is not all increased revenue. Higher attendance would mean more season ticket holders whose tickets are already paid for showing up as well as more students who don't pay a lot for their seats. Cronin's best team averaged about 2000 more fans than his other years. So figure half of that is the season ticket holders and students. That means 1000 more tickets sold per game. For a 18 game home schedule at an average of say $60 per ticket, that's about $1 million in extra revenue. Also, the athletic department gets a small percentage of concessions, merchandise and parking income.
There may be other sources of revenue as the result of adding a star player, but none are a direct result as the two above. Intangibles might include prestige for the program resulting in getting more high profile recruits and games for example and future elevation of the program, but not really a measurable figure.
The NIL funds paid by companies using the player to endorse their product can also be a good investment, especially if he becomes a star NBA player in the future. You might not see their ads on TV, but any player with a large social media following gives a company a very specific target audience for their products.
But where do the millions of dollar savings for UCLA come from? There is a posssible situation that makes this extremely cost effective. UCLA desperately wants Cronin to succeed and will do whatever is necessary to make that happen for this reason: If they have to fire him (and certainly there will be enormous pressure to do so if he produces poor to mediocre seasons) the buyouts are:
Before April 1, 2027: $18 million
Before April 1, 2028: $13.5 million
Before April 1, 2029: $9 million
Before April 1, 2030: $4.5 million
So if Kusturica significantly improves the team, even if it's by just enough wins to produce an above average season, he might be a real money saving bargain.