TexasTiger

It’s messy as hell. But you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

Player evaluation becomes more critical. Likely won’t sign many “projects,” which would be a shame. I can’t recall his name, but I remember an OT a few years back that was an obvious project. Didn’t fill out until his senior year, but finally started. And Dee Ford was only 190lbs in high school, but grew into a 1st rounder: https://www.auburnobserver.com/p/dee-ford-auburn-2013-sacks-pass-rusher-piano College football has provided a lot of kids opportunities to grow into pro athletes, but if they’re pros from the start, expectations will be different. With NIL they already are. 15-20 years ago if a freshman PG played like Aden fans and coaches would be much more patient and give him time to develop. When Sullivan and Beasley played freshmen couldn’t even play varsity ball. Freshmen got to develop outside the glare of the spotlight. In short, the most developed players will benefit financially immediately (like they are now with NIL), but a lot of kids will have to find their opportunities elsewhere— the have nots will be even more of a developmental league than they are now— which has to frustrate the hell out of those coaches.

I wonder if a pay plan results in other changes, like fewer scholarship athletes? 53 instead of 85? When you’re having to split revenue you reconsider the relative value of the guys who don’t play much. Will colleges have practice squads that make significantly less?

The IVY League has much lower athletic expenses and huge endowments and donors that can absorb the cost of programs. For example, Harvard Stadium was built in 1903 and seats 25K. There's no big Athletic facilities arms race. They don't tap their alums for NIL or lose players in the portal (to the same degree, unless that rare grad transfer is looking for a different experience/pay day. Huge Ivy League endowments tend to provide sustainability across the board. And the rich always get richer-- more big donations all the time. For the schools mostly interested in Olympic sports, that's great. Which ones do you have in mind? For schools fielding DI football teams, and to a lesser extent D1 basketball teams, the current model is not sustainable. Beach volleyball? Why not.

I think the NIL will exist at lower levels, but at…a lower level, e.g. Local stores. NIL will exist at the highest level, too— just like the pros, but it won’t likely be the de facto paycheck from the school. Top players will get legitimate endorsement deals.

We need to put a competitive product on the field in the near future, but our history and schedule puts us in the top half, IMO. And I further suspect that if it comes to it, state legislatures will get involved to assure that current big state schools don't get left behind if one gets an invite and another doesn't.

I question his judgment and understanding of his funding model.

Absent some total collapse, I'm confident we'll be in the "haves," but I think how it plays out is pretty up in the air. Right now, the P4 schools have long-term TV contracts so I think any new configuration (e.g. a super league that ditches the NCAA) would require some significant renegotiations. But the current model seems unsustainable and the basic premises underlying big-time college sports have unalterably changed. It seems to me the future has to involve some type of employment contract for players to manage transfers, "salary caps," etc., and restore at least some measure of stability/predictability to rosters. What we've evolved to at present will exhaust coaches and those bankrolling programs. The fact is, it's pro ball now with less rules. the pro part ain't going away. There's gotta be a push toward more order, I would think. I think the P4 schools, with maybe a handful of additions, leave the NCAA for at least football and form some type of association to manage it all.

And it makes sense, but I suspect it will come down to the haves and have nots— which schools have the lucrative media deals? Right now it’s the recently reduced Power 4. Very little for the group of 5. Zeno overestimates his worth at a school like UAB. If he shared their revenue he’d owe a ton of money.

He plays for a team that loses money: Quarterback Jacob Zeno said the move shows the players' growing interest in having a voice in a new model for college sports. "In a way, we've been cheated out of money, and decisions are being made behind our back," Zeno told ESPN. "It's not really fair because we do so much for the sport, for the school and the conference. We should at least deserve to know what's going on and what decisions are being made."

Many are. But most folks don’t have state pensions.

I have no real sympathy for the protesters. While I strongly take issue with Netanyahu and how Israel has prosecuted this war, I find most of the protesters interviewed to lack understanding and devoid of any nuance or logic. Unfortunately, I find most Republican critics just trying to exploit it. All that said, my point is how you keep referencing these professors with zero evidence so far.

No. Just decipherable syntax. When someone can’t do that on their own, there are technological aids. Oh, and lol.

We’re all going on memory here and there’s a ton of posts to sort through, but I recall a lot of criticism. I know I was shocked at his level of success at Oregon. I recall saying he was frenetic and didn’t expect him to ever be a high draft pick. I was wrong. Anyone who saw a better quarterback than his stats at Auburn reflected was right, weren’t they? I’ll eat crow and tip my hat to his defenders who saw what I didn’t. So what’s your larger point on this thread? This is a largely a congratulatory thread for a guy who played hard for Auburn for 3 years and went on to greater success. Why the need for some to derail that and rehash, ad nauseum, the same tired, petty arguments— especially when he proved his defenders…RIGHT? “Bo’s a first round draft pick? Well, he didn’t play that great here, but some of you guys insisted he was better than he played and it wasn’t his fault! You defended him as being a good quarterback!” Well, someone saying that is walking into one hell of a self own. The folks who defended him on this forum were right and the folks who harangued them for doing so have egg on their face and should be eating crow, but they’re so insistent on claiming their always right they can’t see what they’re doing so they’re STILL haranguing those who defended him. They’re so intent on whining they can’t even realize how illogical their criticism is in this case. Hats off to Bo and my apologies! Hats off to his defenders! I was wrong, you were right! - see that ain’t hard. Will he succeed in the NFL? Dunno. Many don’t. Pat Sullivan didn’t and you’ll never convince me he wasn’t a good quarterback for his era.

1897 for me— John Heisman’s only undefeated year on the Plains. That guy could flat-out coach. None this namby pamby stuff you get from some of these young whipper snappers today.

If Trump’s elected we’re guaranteed a sycophantic vp.

Saw the field more. Maybe he’ll get a FA deal, but not yet. So he and Bo have that in common, too. I just hope the NFL doesn’t treat them differently.

Little used TE for Louisville. And former AU QB with 54 career AU passing yards. He and Bo’s contributions are virtually indistinguishable, apparently.

Cole: “lol. lol. …childish, irrational insult with twisted indecipherable syntax. lol. lol. Go way. lol. Old man. lol.” I don’t require an invitation to any thread on this forum. Grow up. lol.

You’re childish in the extreme. You’re not man enough to talk to me. You make an obvious insult, but not directly. If you insist on posting the same moronic crap at every opportunity, folks may respond. Even those you don’t like. Your options are to 1) don’t post at all; 2) truly ignore me, not just taking indirect swipes. Lol. Lol.

lol. Take your meds. You seem particularly unstable today. lol. lol.

Could you run your posts thru a syntax check? lol

Sure. He was a 5 star QB recruit who started as a freshman. AU had high hopes. After 3 years folks thought he was way overrated, he bolts and ends up a Heisman finalist and 1st round draft pick. Few of us honestly saw that coming.

Dunno. But this guy was a Heisman finalist, an eyelash from being our 2nd leading all-time passer in less than 3 years and a first round draft pick, so it’s kinda insane to complain that we treat him differently than Joey Gatewood. Perhaps the stupidest comparison to demonstrate bias I’ve ever seen.

He’s treated like every other first round QB that’s played at Auburn.