OT: Football Talk

[Eielson]

Lane Kiffin agrees.

Dabo does not.

 

[BCSooners]

Dabo does not.

Dabo has changed his tune quite a bit.

 

[BCSooners]

Biggest issue with just going for transfers is you wind up with a bunch of mercenaries who’s priorities lie only in their personal interest. But it’s also best to acquire proven talent.

 

[cbertus6]

If r mason stays… edge will be fine.

All resources to qb, another wr just in case and OL

You can never have enough pass rush, and honestly outside of a few spurts here and there, even R Mason was a non factor at times. We need more than one guy that can get to the QB on the edge to protect our secondary which has not proven to be incredibly sticky through 3 years under BV. Eli Bowen is promising at corner and getting Gentry back next year will help, but our corners have been lackluster for years.

 

[hoopsaustin]

Biggest issue with just going for transfers is you wind up with a bunch of mercenaries who’s priorities lie only in their personal interest. But it’s also best to acquire proven talent.

You think the high schoolers aren't mercenaries too? They may even be worse imo

 

[WaymanFan]

Interesting debate about transfers vs high school phenoms. Clearly, both strategies have merit. If we keep paying a ton of money for 4* and 5* high school players and they don't pan out, it's obviously money poorly spent. However, it's not fair to make that call after one season. Let's use DT David Stone as Exhibit A. For a guy who came in with Tommie Harris credentials, it's fair to say we were expecting a lot more in his freshman year. However, what if he does develop and becomes that Tommie Harris or Gerald McCoy- type player over the next two years? Then, it's money well spent. On the flip side, it would seem grabbing people from the portal who have already proven themselves is a safer bet...but how many of these great players are truly entering the portal and why? Until there is more data, I like the idea of continuing to try to build through the high school system while supplementing the portal with critical areas of need.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Biggest issue with just going for transfers is you wind up with a bunch of mercenaries who’s priorities lie only in their personal interest. But it’s also best to acquire proven talent.

Yep.

I think the ideal model is to recruit like normal but leave a few open slots to fill needs. It is just more sustainable than relying on the portal.
And then plus the intangibles like BCSooners stated. You want to build a program and program guys that have a stake in the university. You don't want 1 year players that are in it for the money. Atleast you don't want them to make up the majority of your roster.
All those portal guys were once high school recruits. Get them early, coach them up, instill the culture, and sprinkle in transfers where needed

 

[SoonerBounce13]

I think 10 years from now, you are going to look back and see that the successful sustaining programs were those that still put more emphasis on recruiting HS. I think those that rely more on portals will not be stable programs and will come and go with success

 

[BCSooners]

You think the high schoolers aren't mercenaries too? They may even be worse imo

If a high school recruit is mostly talking about $$$ that’s an easy pass. Hasn’t proven anything at the college level and probably won’t help for at least a year. I’ll spend my $$$ on someone proven.

 

[steverocks35]

If a high school recruit is mostly talking about $$$ that’s an easy pass. Hasn’t proven anything at the college level and probably won’t help for at least a year. I’ll spend my $$$ on someone proven.

What if they're all mostly talking about money?

 

[BCSooners]

Interesting debate about transfers vs high school phenoms. Clearly, both strategies have merit. If we keep paying a ton of money for 4* and 5* high school players and they don't pan out, it's obviously money poorly spent. However, it's not fair to make that call after one season. Let's use DT David Stone as Exhibit A. For a guy who came in with Tommie Harris credentials, it's fair to say we were expecting a lot more in his freshman year. However, what if he does develop and becomes that Tommie Harris or Gerald McCoy- type player over the next two years? Then, it's money well spent. On the flip side, it would seem grabbing people from the portal who have already proven themselves is a safer bet...but how many of these great players are truly entering the portal and why? Until there is more data, I like the idea of continuing to try to build through the high school system while supplementing the portal with critical areas of need.

That’s what makes this so tough. You don’t know what each player is making. You definitely want Stone, but if he’s asking for all-conference $$$ before he plays a down I say you move on.

I’m just using Stone as an example. No idea the $ he’s making, his recruiting process, or his attitude in general. Seems like a phenomenal person & going to be a really good player.

 

[BCSooners]

What if they're all mostly talking about money?

They’re all going to talk about money. My point was if an unproven high school recruit is just going to the highest bidder and he’s asking for too much I’d just pass & use that money to bump an offer to a proven transfer.

 

[BoulderSooner]

What if they're all mostly talking about money?

i think the point is it can't ONLY be about money ..

OU pays in the top 10-15 schools in the country in NIL to players ..

they just don't pay the most ..

Fasusi got plenty of money from OU ..... but texas did offer him more ..

 

[hoopsaustin]

Interesting debate about transfers vs high school phenoms. Clearly, both strategies have merit. If we keep paying a ton of money for 4* and 5* high school players and they don't pan out, it's obviously money poorly spent. However, it's not fair to make that call after one season. Let's use DT David Stone as Exhibit A. For a guy who came in with Tommie Harris credentials, it's fair to say we were expecting a lot more in his freshman year. However, what if he does develop and becomes that Tommie Harris or Gerald McCoy- type player over the next two years? Then, it's money well spent. On the flip side, it would seem grabbing people from the portal who have already proven themselves is a safer bet...but how many of these great players are truly entering the portal and why? Until there is more data, I like the idea of continuing to try to build through the high school system while supplementing the portal with critical areas of need.

But what will we have to pay david stone for year 2 based largely on hype rather than what he's accomplished vs the odds we even keep the guy and another school doesn't fall for the 2nd time for his hype and 5 star ranking in HS

 

[SoonerBounce13]

But what will we have to pay david stone for year 2 based largely on hype rather than what he's accomplished vs the odds we even keep the guy and another school doesn't fall for the 2nd time for his hype and 5 star ranking in HS

Schools have a lot more bargaining power after the first year, especially in the situation you described. You can essentially tell them truthfully that they aren't increasing NIL until a bigger impact is seen on the field. If someone else is offering you more money, consider changing schools and teammates and schemes and all the headache of it all. And hopefully if you create a good culture, this won't be an issue.

 

[BoulderSooner]

But what will we have to pay david stone for year 2 based largely on hype rather than what he's accomplished vs the odds we even keep the guy and another school doesn't fall for the 2nd time for his hype and 5 star ranking in HS

if david stone went in the portal he would get 7 figure offers from a bunch of places ..

he had a very good year 1 in norman

 

[mict085]

I think 10 years from now, you are going to look back and see that the successful sustaining programs were those that still put more emphasis on recruiting HS. I think those that rely more on portals will not be stable programs and will come and go with success

I think 10 years from now, if there are no changes, we’ll see all top players entering the portal to renegotiate their deals for more money every year. The market will reset every year as HS players get CFB experience and the real players are distinguished from the busts.

If there are no guardrails, all players will test the market every year and their agents will push it. Under the current setup, any good player would be foolish not to test the market every year.

 

[BCSooners]

I think 10 years from now, if there are no changes, we’ll see all top players entering the portal to renegotiate their deals for more money every year. The market will reset every year as HS players get CFB experience and the real players are distinguished from the busts.

If there are no guardrails, all players will test the market every year and their agents will push it. Under the current setup, any good player would be foolish not to test the market every year.

There’s momentum going for a salary cap & contracts. Has to happen imo

 

[Sooner04]

if david stone went in the portal he would get 7 figure offers from a bunch of places ..

he had a very good year 1 in norman

In what way? I'm trying to think of a consequential play he made.
So often message board chatter gets dismissed as snark, but I'm genuinely curious. I just spent three minutes hunting for his statistics.

 

[steverocks35]

There’s momentum going for a salary cap & contracts. Has to happen imo

I don't see how there can be a salary cap since the schools aren't the ones putting up the NIL money. Technically, the kids aren't making salaries. They're contracting out with businesses to use their name, image, and likeness to advertise.