NIL, Big 10 Expansion, and General Musings Q&A
Figured with all that is going on in college sports, I could stop by to help answer any board questions. For the folks who do not know me-- I have been around the board for a little while popping up when I have knowledge on specific subjects, or other general knowledge. I'm not an insider, and I don't claim to have inside info about the team. My knowledge comes from a long time working in the industry and is from people all over: agents, coaches, current/former players, and support staff. So it is mostly an amalgamation of all of that info and not just one specific thing that I am hearing.
- My knowledge of the team is more on a few specific players. So I don't know who's been getting reps, nor do I know any super secret breakout players.
- I imagine I will be getting the most questions on NIL, but I've posted extensively on this in the past, so I may refer to go back to some of my answers from last summer to avoid putting the same thing out there.
- One big takeaway from all things NIL is that the current system is untenable. What is happening right now will not be the way it operates going forward. I can promise you that-- the structure is going to change.
- NIL in general is great in getting kids money that deserve it, but there's a negative trickle down effect and without any regulations it has made teenagers ripe for exploitation.
- Big 10 and other college expansion is one big game of telephone. A few people know and those people certainly aren't telling anyone. USC and UCLA both didn't even know the other was applying to the Big 10 until a few weeks ago. So this idea that people have intimate knowledge of the landscape is whimsical. That being said there are people who know a few things about a few programs. Just be leery of someone who claims to know what the Big10 is thinking.
I'm happy to do my best to answer any questions throughout the day today. Feel free to leave them below and I will get to them when I have some breaks.
New umgoblue11 sportsblog?
I unfortunately don't have the time. My schedule won't allow it, but I wish I could write more. It's hard to sit down uninterrupted for an hour or so and write. A lot of my diary posts take me weeks to write, because I spend a little bit of time on it when I am free.
Appreciate the insight. And great pic! One of the best shows.
Are you the same person as umbig11?
No. I asked the same question a few years ago. Per happenstance that his handle is close to umbig11
Odds ND can break their ACC tie-in? Is that the only team the Big 10 would give special consideration? ex. full-share upon initial entry, waive buy in fees,
Thanks for taking time out of your day to drop some knowledge.
ND from what I hear can get out of it-- it may have to get creative in some aspects and there's some doubts on if they want to be the ones to break up the ACC. It's a bit of a Mexican standoff. They don't want to join a conference and I'm sure they definitely don't want to join the Big 10, but it may be their only option. What forces ND hand is if they don't get playoff access, but if it's just two conferences and the SEC says to ND we will do whatever we can to give you access so that you don't have to join the Big 10, well then I don't think ND would join. SEC vs. Big 10 is about to be biggest rivalry in sports.
From the Big 10's perspective what if there were a way to ND feel special ala keep them on NBC in the new deal? Do a deal with NBC that gives them all ND home games + one other Big 10 game a week and I think that would be enough to move the needle.
The ACC put themselves in a bit of a pickle-- it's great that they tied down those rights for so long, but if one team leaves or another joins from what I heard it means that the GOR voids. So it keeps the group together, but they can't expand. In this climate they are a sitting duck.
Couldn’t the big 10 call Norte dame’s bluff about aligning with the sec? If the big 10 and the sec created a playoff, the big 10 could squeeze any notion of a 3rd party team being in the playoffs unless the sec wants to give up one of their selections in the playoffs to Norte dame. There’s no way the SEC would give up a spot for a non-conference member. And there’s no way Norte dame joins the SEC.
I don't see the SEC being willing to give ND special status and exclusive media rights if they weren't willing to do it for Texas (e.g. their Longhorn Network)... and this is the way *any* conference should do it. One of the worst ways to run a conference is to grant special privileges and favor - it just breeds disunity and makes others look for the door (e.g. what Texas did to the Big XII and ND is doing to the ACC).
In the long run, ND makes sense to be in the Big Ten more than any other conference, but it's not worth treating them different than any other school.
No you're right, but the SEC doesn't need to do anything but block the Big 10. The enemy of my enemy is my friend type of deal. SEC knows ND won't join, but why not help prevent them from being forced to join the Big 10.
If this is where it's going, in a 2- super conference playoff agreement & set-up, I don't see why it would be in the SEC's best interest in trying to undermine the B16 for ND. The B16 has to agree to the terms to even create a playoff, so it's not in the SEC's best interest to show ill intentions towards the B16.
More realistic to me I could see the SEC saying to the B16 "take-'em", Notre Dame is your problem to figure out...Good luck with that.
In order to block the big 10, the SEC would have to guarantee a path to the playoffs. So how does the SEC accomplish this without sacrificing one of their spots for a non-conference member? With no playoff access, ND’s hand is forced.
to hell with notre dame
Always the right answer!
F Notre Dame is also acceptable.
Judges? Yes, we will accept F Norte Dame!
I prefer FUCK Notre Dame. And for a very, very long time their football team has been as Catholic as my German Shepherd...
Any inside info on how Minter is doing or the defensive side of the ball in general?
Nothing specific, but I did hear it's very similar to what we ran last year. He was schooled in the same Ravens system. And he's grown up around coaching with his Dad, so even if it's a B+/A- defense, we should be okay for this year. One thing that will definitely improve is subs/playcalling speed. Coach Mac first time ever calling plays took some time for him to get used to. Minter has been a DC before so that should help.
As pleased as I was overall with the results of MacDonald's defense last year, I have to say his ability to adjust to tempo (especially in the MSU game) hurt Michigan so bad at times. There had to have been at least 3-4 separate occasions where Michigan couldn't even get set by the time MSU snapped the ball and it seemed to cost them every time. Probably gave up at least one score because of it.
Anywho, I'll be curious as to how Minter is able to account for that part of the game. The fact that he's been a DC previously and has done so at multiple stops definitely helps ease those particular concerns.
It's not just experience Minter has as a DC, he has SEC experience - so he's seen fast paced offenses. I feel better from that aspect than if we had MacDonald coming back.
I definitely would've been curious to see how Minter's defense would've been this upcoming season if he had another year at Vanderbilt.
Have to believe they would've improved, but they were 118th out of 130 last year. That is b-a-d, BAD. Like GERG-level bad. But it was his first year as DC and Vanderbilt is far and away the worst team in the SEC on a year in, year out basis. Seems like minus the James Franklin years they have perpetually been the SEC equivalent of Rutgers under Chris Ash. Completely talentless, rudderless, and just all around hopeless against the best conference in the country. I wonder if that was the result his defense was destined for no matter what he did.
I wonder what he'll be able to do with better talent and a better team handling a more manageable schedule.
Also, does NIL just completely take UM out of the running for some recuits? It feels that way, and if so how do they correct that without changing the approach to get freshman to come to Michigan without an upfront payout? I agree it's unsustainable, but how many cycles until it gets cleaned up, and how far is Michigan behind at that point?
Yes, but I don't know why people act like this isn't the exact same thing as before? There's not a whole group of guys that are now unattainable-- it was the same under the old system. It may feel that way, but I don't think Michigan sees this as anything but a blip on the radar. Listen, I am all about firing the money cannon-- Michigan has plenty of boosters that would do so, but the ROI isn't there for them yet. Let's wait to see how some of these schools do before we start passing judgement on what we should and shouldn't be doing. If A&M goes 8-4 next year, why in the hell would you try to replicate what they've been doing?
I think a lot of it is the previous classes were still top 15.
Now we're barely top 50.
So it feels like the top top 5* guys were always unattainable, but now even mid to high 4* guys also won't give us the time of day.
Just my perception.
Still way too early IMO to judge anything. Our lowest rated class was the backbone to a Big 10 championship team this past year.
Just be patient, look at how many guys we closed late in the cycle last year. What if ND goes 8-4 next year? What if A&M goes 7-5, or Oregon looks lost on offense with Bo Nix? I wouldn't award any trophies to who's leading recruiting in July.
Even if A&M goes 7-5 (unlikely), it's because their monster recruiting class would have been all true Fr. If they go 7-5 3 years from now (after getting top 5 classes for 4 years in a row), then... recruiting rankings don't matter.
Michigan will fall behind because of their philosophy. Our hope is that the transfer portal can get us back on track fast. We can't keep up with teams pulling in top 10 classes for 3 years, while we are getting the #40-50 classes - UGA was a painful reminder of this.
Brian (and others) have already shown multiple times, that recruiting rankings matter. The new wrinkle is the transfer portal.
I agree this isn’t a one year test scenario. Get 2 or 3 top ten classes in a row and then you need to see what happens when they become upperclassman. What effect this all has on a team is a very fair question
What is different now is that more schools are doing it in the open and it is under the impression to the recruits that everything is legal. Many of those kids would have walked from the bag man. There is no doubt that reduces the pool of targets.
I don’t disagree this will likely pull back but how much and when? It falls back to who is the enforcement?
We know the limits of the transfer portal to UofM. We can’t just sign guys like other schools can. Not a good plan b imho.
Odds are we will get punished by the portal as big money teams poach our sophomores with promises of playing time, cash and cars.
We tie our own hands on both NIL and the Portal.
One or the other, we can't survive both for very long.
Appreciate your insight and time. Patience is not something we have around here. LOL. See the next 3 comments. Recruiting is now or never. We are doomed.
No, you don't award trophies in July and we were sucking a little bit at this time last year. But it feels different... Last year we weren't being stood up at the alter by a 5* QB with a last minute flight to Oregon, or a lifetime Michigan fan, legacy, and grandson of a legendary Michigan football coach. I'm not a big believer in recruiting mojo, momentum, or conspiracies, but there's something wrong with it this year.
That said, it's a combination of things, rather than just one thing. NIL, staff turnover, and the Vikings are all combining against us and it's hurting right now.
If A&M goes 8-4 next year, we still want to consider replicating what they've been doing because either Alabama or Georgia has had the #1 recruiting class in every year since 2008, with Texas A&M only occasionally cracking the top 10. But in 2022, Texas A&M had the best recruiting class in *college football history.* And every No. 1 class in the 247Sports Composite from 2011 through 2020 has played for a national championship, so they've got that going for them, which is nice.
So let me put it to you this way. With the way the rules are set-up, let's say you go all-in on paying for a recruiting class. You spend $14 million and get 6 five-star recruits. What do you think is going to happen when you don't play all of those guys all the time, or what if you suck that year? You're going to lose them to another team. If you live by this mantra, then you're going to die by this mantra. So my point is let's not act like that A&M is going to win a national title this year-- if they do this 4 straight years and keep these guys then that is a completely different story. Does anyone remember what a dumpster fire FSU was when Jimbo left? You have faith that he's going to be able to manage all of this?
Not just if the $14m guys don't play, what about if they do play? If you busted your ass for 2-3 years to be the starter and some guy comes in making $1m and you start losing snaps to him, what do you think? You probably don't believe he's better, just better paid.
Someone else in big time football will take your transfer.
Managing these rosters is going to be the key. This isn't Pro football where everyone is getting paid and the salaries are regulated to a point.
That's a good point. The NFL has contracts to keep the players tied to the team for a period of time. CFB has no such thing, in fact it offers a get-out-of-jail-for-free card in the form of the transfer portal. If a player decided he is no longer interested or someone else dangles more money in his face he can jump ship.
Now that money is beginning to flow to players in a big way, I fully expect that the people writing checks will want to attach strings to keep players tied to the program for the duration of their CFB stint. Big money always creates obligations, people will want a return on their investment.
Solution: pay everybody. Every rostered player gets $200K or whatever. U-M can afford it. Takes the sting off of high profile freshmen coming in with $2M deals.
Isn't this the Bama/ UGA problem? Bama has 4* guys backing up 5* guys, who are backing up senior 5* guys. It's the way it works.
Having too much talent isn't a negative. That's up to the coaches to manage the kids (that's why Saban is a God).
Again, the equalizer is the transfer portal. Michigan will be fine in 2022 and 2023, it's after that, where not getting a top 5 QB, losing a few high 4/5* LBs... will hurt us, unless we hit the portal hard and NIL changes (which means, A&M, UT, Miami, OSU... will all get screwed - that will not happen).
Unless Michigan changes it's acceptance policies, the transfer portal won't help. It's okay for the occasional 5th year guy, like Olawutimi this year - but that's only for one year. It won't help one bit for 2nd, 3rd, or 4th year players unless they want to dump most of their credits and start over.
The Michigan Way. ::Harrumph::
Why do you assume M will be fine in 2023? If other teams offer more $$$ to our top players, our team could get emptied of talent quickly.
The Transfer Portal shifts the tides and fortunes of CFB faster than ever. MSU is a prime example. M can lose (and has) much more players and talent to the portal than it can receive. All we can hope for is a good grad transfer or two. We can't ever do what Tucker did at MSU last year with help from the portal. M lives and dies by recruiting HS players.
So much potential for locker room issues.
Just pay everyone $200K minimum salaries then. That's a drop in the booster bucket. Then pay bigger salaries to land the top recruits.
To this I'd add the dynamic of the NIL purchasers. They are essentially advertisers, paying players in exchange for the benefits (monetary or otherwise) that accrue from their association with each other. Do you think they will be happy seeing the athlete they "invested" 7 figures in riding the bench? And what will they do when that inevitably happens? Will they take it out on the athlete and seek to void their contract? Take it out on the program? Will the athlete sue the school for reneging on assurances made when they were being recruited? A lot still to shake out.
Will the athlete sue the school for reneging on assurances made when they were being recruited? A lot still to shake out.
This is an angle I hadn't considered before. No doubt much of recruiting relies on the art of bullshit and blowing smoke. "Yeah, sure kid, no red shirt and you'll be on the two deep the moment you arrive. Hey, check out this waterfall!"
When those "promises" start affecting people's money, lawyers will no doubt be involved.
Yeah, I get the argument of boosters / UM Leadership being leery of jumping in with both feet in an unstable situation. But the "stars don't matter" discussion doesn't really apply here since we aren't debating large, talented program's recruiting vs. the agencies. We're just trying to not be automatically excluded from a market of (roughly) higher caliber recruits from admin work - independent of coaches or programs.
What is your personal opinion of Harbaugh's / Warde's current approach to NIL? Will recruiting crater with the way they are handling this?
I agree with them 100%. Former players will tell you that rookies in the NFL need to pay their dues, if you come into the locker room as a #1 pick you better be prepared to shut up, work hard, and keep your head down, do what the vets say, and pay for huge ass rookie dinner. It's the idea that these kids come in without ever having done anything get special treatment. It's all about respect and honoring those that came before you. If the entire draft class made more money than the leaders on that team before they played a down in the NFL I can promise you that the team is not going to get along.
What Michigan is saying is it's not about the upfront money and more about the come in and make an impact and you WILL get paid A LOT. Harbaugh knows more about team building than almost anyone on the planet. If that's what he wants to happen then who are we to tell him he's wrong?
Why not pay everybody? We can pay JJ and the LB kid who decommitted. We can also weigh the payments to be towards the kids 3rd and 4th years at Michigan.
I am onboard with getting more aggressive with NIL, but it's not as simple as "pay everybody."
There's no pay cap or max deals in college sports. Would the seniors be OK with getting paid the same amount as incoming freshmen? If not, what would they want? And if you paid them more, would it be on the basis of seniority? Stats?
And for high school kids, how do you decide on their pay? Do 5* recruits get the same as 3* recruits? If not, then how do you decide what's a 5* recruit? Are we going to defer to 247 and On3 for pay slots?
Not to say that these questions are unanswerable, but I don't think the answers are straightforward or anywhere close to it.
Bingo. Pro sports have shown us that you need to have rules in place, or you're going to have chaos. Salary caps exist as cost controls and to prevent teams from spending outside their means to win a championship. Also in Pro Sports you only have one owner. Rules have to be put in place before a mega-rich booster *cough Yellawood CEO cough* takes complete control over a college team.