Extreme Makeover: AD Edition

KC Smurthwaite is a consultant for Athletics Admin, specializing in revenue generation, licensing, marketing, and higher education. He has almost two decades of experience in collegiate athletics and the sports and entertainment industry. Smurthwaite is a fractional employee of several athletic departments across the country. He also teaches sports management and journalism as an adjunct professor. Follow him on Twitter or connect on LinkedIn. Smurthwaite can also be reached at [email protected].

The industry is changing.

And no — I’m not talking about Name, Image & Likeness or revenue sharing. There’s already plenty of that clogging up your social feed.

I’m talking about something a little quieter, but just as important: the role of the athletic director itself. 

Are we moving toward a world where athletic directors are now becoming President of Athletics? Or General Managers? Or even CEOs? Does the professional sports organization model even work in collegiate athletics? 

The overall scope of higher education isn’t even conducive to collegiate athletics itself.

But the recent hires and the soon-to-come hires are showing there are changes.

They are happening slowly, but it’s happening.

We still see plenty of traditional hires, like Georgia Tech’s recent move to bring in Ryan Alpert from Tennessee. But three other recent moves have really set this trend in motion. And make no mistake: people inside the industry are watching closely. People outside the industry? They’re intrigued, but most have no idea just how different the college athletics world really is.

Because here’s the thing: athletics may technically sit under a university umbrella, but it’s a whole different world. A multimillion-dollar “non-profit” world. Yes, you can argue that it’s a great marketing arm for the university’s mission — and, sure, that’s true. However, it’s also a very expensive one, and you can make a strong case that the return on investment isn’t nearly where it needs to be.

Let’s start with our friends in College Park…

In May, Maryland announced James E. Smith as its new Barry P. Gossett Director of Athletics.

Smith comes from the Atlanta Braves, where he served as senior VP of business strategy. His resume? 

Solid. 

More than two decades of experience in sports business, including the Braves, Falcons, Columbus Crew, AMB Sports & Entertainment, and Ohio State — where he wasn’t in athletics, but was president and CEO of the Alumni Association. There, he managed a team of 80, oversaw a $17 million budget, and boosted both revenue and engagement by double digits in just two years.

Not bad. But also… not in the athletic department. Which, to be fair, is fine.

OK, now to the next domino at Maryland.

If you read Maryland’s announcement, it’s clear they wanted someone to take charge of the massive task ahead: run the day-to-day operations of the department, managing revenue share implementation, negotiating contracts, scheduling football, creating operating efficiencies, enhancing the student-athlete experience, and serving as the primary liaison with the Big Ten. Basically, everything you’d expect from the athletic director of a Big Ten program in 2024.

Sounds like a pretty good summary of what James E. Smith was hired to do, right?

Well… not exactly.

Because everything I just listed? 

Those responsibilities actually belong to Diana Sabau. Not Smith.

And that’s where this move starts to make sense.

At first glance, Sabau leaving Utah State left a lot of people scratching their heads. Why would she walk away from a strong situation in Logan? She had the trust and support of President Elizabeth Cantwell, who gave her the runway to lead — and it was paying off. But when Cantwell herself departed after just 18 months to take the Washington State presidency, the usual domino effect began. In this business, when a president or AD leaves, more changes usually follow.

Even when it’s a colleague taking over as an interim president, the dynamics change. You find yourselves on different pages, seeing things through different lenses. What was once assumed now requires discussion. What used to be a simple conversation becomes, “I’m just the interim—maybe we should consult [enter entity here] before making that decision.”

Additionally, USU’s de facto number two in the department, Bobby Nash, is also departing in an unrelated move. Nash is an absolute rock star in the industry. He and his wife are heading back home, and I’m completely thrilled for him. I’ll let the industry—or Nash himself—share the rest of that story.

Lastly, on that note, USU has already explored one option for the interim tag but is now meeting with internal and external stakeholders to develop a broader plan as plan A did not work out.

On the surface, Sabau’s move to Maryland seemed puzzling — maybe even a step down to play second fiddle. But once you actually read the fine print, you see the reality: Maryland handed her the playbook of an athletic director.

Side note to all of this: Gene Smith, who was quoted in the official Maryland press release for Sabau’s hire, was the athletic director at The Ohio State while James E. Smith was president of the Alumni Association. 

And who was Gene Smith’s go-to person in the athletics department during that time? 

Diana Sabau.

Who do industry sources say was helping James E. Smith with this hire?

Gene Smith.

Confused yet? Or is it actually lining up?

(And for those who’ve asked what I think Diana will make at Maryland? From a contract standpoint, she would’ve finished her Utah State deal in 2027-28 at about $615k, with a current buyout of $500k. My guess? Her first year or two at Maryland will be modest — a sort of mutual agreement where Maryland covers her buyout in exchange for a lower salary. Think of it like the NBA veteran minimum. I wouldn’t be shocked if there’s a bigger number waiting for her in year two or three, but safe bet? Her true salary eventually lands in a very similar range to where she was at Utah State. Maryland already in their administration has multiple salaries in the $250,000+ range and the word on the street they are doubling down on talent in the administration. Having an elite leader like Diana alongside Smith is a great one-two punch.)

Rutgers and UNC are following the playbook as well…

This isn’t just a Maryland thing. Rutgers is leaning into the same concept, even if they haven’t officially announced their hire yet. Yes, the pick is in and has been for about a week.

Len Perna, who led their search, told NJ.com:

“I think Rutgers is pioneering the new phase of what athletic directors will look like… a really strong commercial background.”

He even brushed off the old “traditional vs. nontraditional” labels, saying today’s hires are “bespoke” — tailored to each school.

North Carolina is doing something similar. They brought in RFK Racing president Steve Newmark — yes, a NASCAR executive — to serve as “executive associate AD” and work alongside Bubba Cunningham before officially taking over in 2026.

UNC has also created GM roles for each major sport, hired a chief revenue officer, and even brought in Huron Consulting to reimagine their commercial strategy.

These departments are starting to look and act more like professional franchises.

So… Where Do We Go From Here?

Is this trend good for college athletics? Honestly… we don’t know yet.

On one hand, there’s so much money in play now — NIL, revenue sharing, media rights — that it makes sense to bring in seasoned, business-savvy leaders from the outside. But just from a fundraising standpoint, the pros and the college game are completely different. 

There is also campus politics, red tape, and all the unwritten rules of higher education can feel completely foreign — even hostile — to outsiders. Not saying it doesn’t feel that way going the other direction to professional sports.

As an anonymous source told CollegeAD:

“For those not working on campus, they don’t understand that it’s not the blind leading the blind… you eventually run into someone on campus who doesn’t like athletics or doesn’t get it. And they can stop you cold.”

So is this the right direction? 

Hard to say.

What’s clear is that the role of the AD has evolved. Remember when it was just the old football coach sliding into the office? Then it became a career path. Then a business-minded revenue generator.

Now? It’s evolving again — and this time it might stick, especially at the highest level.

CEO. President. GM. Whatever you call it — this is the new age of the athletic director. And everyone’s watching to see how it plays out.