Jump to content

Coach/Senator Tubs on Outkick


Recommended Posts

Senator Tuberville has had enough and intimated that politicians may have to get involved with NIL. I had no idea that some coaches are now required to raise funds to pay certain athletes. College football is going down the wrong road. 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





What is Tuberville even talking about? What schools are only signing "10" high school players and bringing in 15 Transfers? 

And those transfers have to come from some other school who has to rebuild their roster so those college football scholarships aren't going away from High school players, they're just moving around to different schools. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What is Tuberville even talking about? What schools are only signing "10" high school players and bringing in 15 Transfers? 

And those transfers have to come from some other school who has to rebuild their roster so those college football scholarships aren't going away from High school players, they're just moving around to different schools. 

Ole Miss. This IS a real issue. Some high school kids are absolutely being left out.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ole Miss. This IS a real issue. Some high school kids are absolutely being left out.

Ole Miss took 18 High school commits last season, almost a full regular class worth. 

And my point was the transfers they bring in still have to be filled from the other school. The scholarship isn't going away.

It may mean fewer slots for high school players at a few certain schools that take in a bunch of transfers in any given year, but I'm not seeing it decrease the total number of incoming high school players into college ball by any significant measure like tubs was alluding to. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ole Miss. This IS a real issue. Some high school kids are absolutely being left out.

If this does happen, more kids will end up at G5 programs, but then will get poached in the portal, so the G5 schools will constantly be playing with underclassmen and losing their stars. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ole Miss took 18 High school commits last season, almost a full regular class worth. 

And my point was the transfers they bring in still have to be filled from the other school. The scholarship isn't going away.

It may mean fewer slots for high school players at a few certain schools that take in a bunch of transfers in any given year, but I'm not seeing it decrease the total number of incoming high school players into college ball by any significant measure like tubs was alluding to. 

A 3* with a year or 2 of decent college film will almost always be taken over the 3* out of highschool. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ole Miss took 18 High school commits last season, almost a full regular class worth. 

And my point was the transfers they bring in still have to be filled from the other school. The scholarship isn't going away.

It may mean fewer slots for high school players at a few certain schools that take in a bunch of transfers in any given year, but I'm not seeing it decrease the total number of incoming high school players into college ball by any significant measure like tubs was alluding to. 

I don’t know that that’s true.

Let’s take a look at how signing classes used to work in the SEC: 25 high school kids. Now let’s be conservative and estimate that each school brings in an average of 7 transfers per seasons, which cuts the HS slots down to 18 per class.

So in the SEC alone, 98 high school kids per year who would normally be getting a scholarship, now won’t be.

Maybe these kids go to G5 schools instead? But remember, the same process is happening there. So now G5 prospects are getting pushed out. The trickle down goes on.

The bottomline is HS kids’ options become a lot slimmer and a lot less practical. Diamonds in the rough aren’t being found because the recruiting focus is shifting to transfers. It’s not good for the sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don’t know that that’s true.

Let’s take a look at how signing classes used to work in the SEC: 25 high school kids. Now let’s be conservative and estimate that each school brings in an average of 7 transfers per seasons, which cuts the HS slots down to 18 per class.

So in the SEC alone, 98 high school kids per year who would normally be getting a scholarship, now won’t be.

Maybe these kids go to G5 schools instead? But remember, the same process is happening there. So now G5 prospects are getting pushed out. The trickle down goes on.

The bottomline is HS kids’ options become a lot slimmer and a lot less practical. Diamonds in the rough aren’t being found because the recruiting focus is shifting to transfers. It’s not good for the sport.

So no kids are transferring OUT of SEC schools? No SEC schools are replacing some of the out transfers with high school kids? 

 

From my view it seems to just be more or less evening out with some schools bring in a lot of transfers, while some schools lose more transfer players than they bring in and replace them with HS talent. 

Edited by CoffeeTiger
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt that a lot of what Tubbs said was uninformed but the general idea that what we now have is lacking in regulation is true. I personally don't think Congress is the place to address it.  That said there needs to be some modification to control what is happening and to help the the young people in college athletics and not just the stars. 

I am not quite sure who should be modifying it and how it should be done to help all college scholarship players while still allowing the stars who bring in the most money to get a larger share. It will never be a 100% fair it never has been in the past some schools through their boosters just have more resources then others.

You also have to be careful that you don't hurt other areas while try to find the balance. If boosters are paying players indirectly through NIL will they be donating as much to building things like Performance Center or additions to Baseball fields or Jordon Hare. Even rich boosters have a limit on how much they will donate.

Edited by AuburnNTexas
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Senator Tuberville has had enough and intimated that politicians may have to get involved with NIL. I had no idea that some coaches are now required to raise funds to pay certain athletes. College football is going down the wrong road. 

 

 

This just didn’t make sense to dumb guy like me. If you take someone in the portal it is opening up a place for HS at the place the player left. Eventually HS player must backfill openings. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The more Tubs speaks as a politician the less I wish he was associated with AU. He’s a laughingstock for many in the CFB realm these days. 

He won’t  be if he gets something passed on NIl.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No doubt that a lot of what Tubbs said was uninformed but the general idea that what we now have is lacking in regulation is true. I personally don't think Congress is the place to address it.  That said there needs to be some modification to control what is happening and to help the the young people in college athletics and not just the stars. 

I am not quite sure who should be modifying it and how it should be done to help all college scholarship players while still allowing the stars who bring in the most money to get a larger share. It will never be a 100% fair it never has been in the past some schools through their boosters just have more resources then others.

You also have to be careful that you don't hurt other areas while try to find the balance. If boosters are paying players indirectly through NIL will they be donating as much to building things like Performance Center or additions to Baseball fields or Jordon Hare. Even rich boosters have a limit on how much they will donate.

I think you will see the arms race for facilities will slow down as it will not impact player’s decision as it has in past especially when compared to impact of NIL monies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don’t know that that’s true.

Let’s take a look at how signing classes used to work in the SEC: 25 high school kids. Now let’s be conservative and estimate that each school brings in an average of 7 transfers per seasons, which cuts the HS slots down to 18 per class.

So in the SEC alone, 98 high school kids per year who would normally be getting a scholarship, now won’t be.

Maybe these kids go to G5 schools instead? But remember, the same process is happening there. So now G5 prospects are getting pushed out. The trickle down goes on.

The bottomline is HS kids’ options become a lot slimmer and a lot less practical. Diamonds in the rough aren’t being found because the recruiting focus is shifting to transfers. It’s not good for the sport.

A Diamond in the rough is being found. It's hard to be a quality player and not be known in today's age. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No doubt that a lot of what Tubbs said was uninformed but the general idea that what we now have is lacking in regulation is true. I personally don't think Congress is the place to address it.  That said there needs to be some modification to control what is happening and to help the the young people in college athletics and not just the stars. 

I am not quite sure who should be modifying it and how it should be done to help all college scholarship players while still allowing the stars who bring in the most money to get a larger share. It will never be a 100% fair it never has been in the past some schools through their boosters just have more resources then others.

You also have to be careful that you don't hurt other areas while try to find the balance. If boosters are paying players indirectly through NIL will they be donating as much to building things like Performance Center or additions to Baseball fields or Jordon Hare. Even rich boosters have a limit on how much they will donate.

The fix is simple. The big boys break off from the NCAA and form a league. Hell, even using the Leach plan would fix most of the issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I had no idea that some coaches are now required to raise funds to pay certain athletes

Just like it was when Tubbs was a head coach. Damn hypocrite. 

I'm glad the alt right sports radio is pro govt regulation.  Free market for me, but not for thee

  • Like 2
  • Dislike 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So no kids are transferring OUT of SEC schools? No SEC schools are replacing some of the out transfers with high school kids? 

 

From my view it seems to just be more or less evening out with some schools bring in a lot of transfers, while some schools lose more transfer players than they bring in and replace them with HS talent. 

Can you find me an instance of a school brining in 35-40 high school kids in a class? Because that’s the only way to make the math work to counterbalance MOST D1 schools taking around a half dozen to a dozen transfers per class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A Diamond in the rough is being found. It's hard to be a quality player and not be known in today's age. 

That’s not true. Late bloomers and small school kids fly under the radar all the time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This just didn’t make sense to dumb guy like me. If you take someone in the portal it is opening up a place for HS at the place the player left. Eventually HS player must backfill openings. 

Not if all those openings are also filled by transfers. Especially players coming UP from smaller schools to larger schools. Like I said, there would have to be a good chunk of schools taking 30-40 high school kids per class to balance this out, and I haven’t heard of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not if all those openings are also filled by transfers. Especially players coming UP from smaller schools to larger schools. Like I said, there would have to be a good chunk of schools taking 30-40 high school kids per class to balance this out, and I haven’t heard of that.

Each school has the same number of athletes on scholarship than before. Every athlete came from high school. So it has to even out in the macro. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That’s not true. Late bloomers and small school kids fly under the radar all the time.

I didn't say it never happens, just that it is rare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not if all those openings are also filled by transfers. Especially players coming UP from smaller schools to larger schools. Like I said, there would have to be a good chunk of schools taking 30-40 high school kids per class to balance this out, and I haven’t heard of that.

Sorry, I don’t follow. Transfers are leaving an opening when they go to another opening. Especially since they are only. Going with total number if schollys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sorry, I don’t follow. Transfers are leaving an opening when they go to another opening. Especially since they are only. Going with total number if schollys.

I (think) the overall number of high school kids is probably the same. Although I’m sure the COVID extra year guys messed up the numbers to a degree. But even with that, I’m not sure. Like I said, with most schools taking 5 to 10 less high schoolers per class, there have to be some schools out there taking 30 to 40 per class to counterbalance this.

Here’s a scenario to illustrate the way I think kids are being impacted.

Kid A - 3 star, Kid B - 2 star. Both from the state of Alabama.

Kid A, under the old system, would be a low priority take for an SEC school. Like Daniel Thomas coming out of Montgomery, who we offered as a fallback on NSD.

But in the new system, Auburn or the other SEC schools that would have taken Kid A in the past, already have those spots filled. So now Kid A is forced to drop down a tier and go to a G5 school like UAB.

Kid B is a typical, under the radar UAB recruit. But prospects like Kid A and other transfers fill what would have been as a scholly spot for him. Now HE gets bumped down too. 

I think it’s an issue of kids have less options and impractical options. If Kid B is an unheralded prospect, does he even get anymore offers outside UAB? If he does, what if it’s an impractical fit? If his only offer is Northern Iowa, does he go? Does it work out? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I (think) the overall number of high school kids is probably the same. Although I’m sure the COVID extra year guys messed up the numbers to a degree. But even with that, I’m not sure. Like I said, with most schools taking 5 to 10 less high schoolers per class, there have to be some schools out there taking 30 to 40 per class to counterbalance this.

Here’s a scenario to illustrate the way I think kids are being impacted.

Kid A - 3 star, Kid B - 2 star. Both from the state of Alabama.

Kid A, under the old system, would be a low priority take for an SEC school. Like Daniel Thomas coming out of Montgomery, who we offered as a fallback on NSD.

But in the new system, Auburn or the other SEC schools that would have taken Kid A in the past, already have those spots filled. So now Kid A is forced to drop down a tier and go to a G5 school like UAB.

Kid B is a typical, under the radar UAB recruit. But prospects like Kid A and other transfers fill what would have been as a scholly spot for him. Now HE gets bumped down too. 

I think it’s an issue of kids have less options and impractical options. If Kid B is an unheralded prospect, does he even get anymore offers outside UAB? If he does, what if it’s an impractical fit? If his only offer is Northern Iowa, does he go? Does it work out? 

Thx for the explanation. I fully understand your point. I agree that some may have to drop down in opportunity than what may have been without portal. That wasn’t Tubs premise though. His premise was a great deal of HS players that would normally have an opportunity would not due to number of portal moves. His claim wasn’t that they would be impacted.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thx for the explanation. I fully understand your point. I agree that some may have to drop down in opportunity than what may have been without portal. That wasn’t Tubs premise though. His premise was a great deal of HS players that would normally have an opportunity would not due to number of portal moves. His claim wasn’t that they would be impacted.

It’s still possible that is the case. I don’t fully understand it so I can’t say for certain. I would need to see how it’s impacting FCS programs. Maybe they’re the ones reeling in these super large HS classes, because a lot of FCS school lose kids who are leveling up to better programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...