The Advantage of Hugh Freeze

[TigerOne 1,143]

6 hours ago, JerryAU said:

Great post, I agree 100%.

That wide open transfer portal is the devil.  It's got to feel near impossible for coaches to budget & plan his roster when he has no idea which player will bolt if the player doesn't get the PT they want OR if another program offers more $$ and competes for championships. 

Player can reach out to any number of programs to see who's interested in their services.  There's nothing stopping a player from shopping. Auburn recently signed a few hot skill players, but what if our QB position doesn't pan out, what if the WR is slow to acclimate to college speed, can't get the timing down, or doesn't grasp the offensive scheme fast enough?  Do they become disenfranchised and move on, or are they willing to wait their turn and develop within the system to gain experience for the future? 

Just now seeing this? The best players go to the highest bidder. Don’t play enough or start? Pay up or I’m gone!

[cbo 7,853]

7 hours ago, JerryAU said:

Great post, I agree 100%.

That wide open transfer portal is the devil.  It's got to feel near impossible for coaches to budget & plan his roster when he has no idea which player will bolt if the player doesn't get the PT they want OR if another program offers more $$ and competes for championships. 

Player can reach out to any number of programs to see who's interested in their services.  There's nothing stopping a player from shopping. Auburn recently signed a few hot skill players, but what if our QB position doesn't pan out, what if the WR is slow to acclimate to college speed, can't get the timing down, or doesn't grasp the offensive scheme fast enough?  Do they become disenfranchised and move on, or are they willing to wait their turn and develop within the system to gain experience for the future? 

Would have been nice to see NIL instituted without the wide open transfer portal at the same time. 

[GreenTiger 1,006]

IMO I’m surprised college athletics has been so slow to adopt a more player centric transfer portal as freedom and autonomy is a core value of both education and capitalism. I’m fascinated how a person or group can hold these values ( freedom and autonomy) so tightly for themselves but get upset when other individuals or groups want the same. 

[Auburn93 540]

2 hours ago, GreenTiger said:

IMO I’m surprised college athletics has been so slow to adopt a more player centric transfer portal as freedom and autonomy is a core value of both education and capitalism. I’m fascinated how a person or group can hold these values ( freedom and autonomy) so tightly for themselves but get upset when other individuals or groups want the same. 

It has to do with loyalty, not the free market. It has to do with the collegiate sport when you played for the team, not the free market. We would like to have a relationship with our team and our players. That is what I'm for.

Edited April 3 by Auburn93

[Mikey 16,605]

42 minutes ago, Auburn93 said:

We would like to have a relationship with our team and our players. That is what I'm for.

Sadly, I think those days are gone.

[fishepa 1,904]

This is just me spit balling here, but if I was a recruit where I chose to play would be something like:

80% how much are you going to pay me

20% "family environment" and "relationship"

[CoffeeTiger 5,108]

1 hour ago, Auburn93 said:

We would like to have a relationship with our team and our players. That is what I'm for.

 

Good News Auburn93! For a one time donation of $899.99 to the AU NIL Superfund you can go out on an exclusive dinner date with any football player of your choice (excludes starting players. 2 hours maximum. Includes restaurant napkin signed by the player. All expenses covered by you separately. Spots limited)

 

 

[TexasTiger 12,896]

15 minutes ago, fishepa said:

This is just me spit balling here, but if I was a recruit where I chose to play would be something like:

80% how much are you going to pay me

20% "family environment" and "relationship"

But if you take a job primarily based on pay and end up hating the work environment, don’t you look for something in the same financial ball park that you find a more enjoyable fit?

[aucom96 1,618]

5 hours ago, GreenTiger said:

IMO I’m surprised college athletics has been so slow to adopt a more player centric transfer portal as freedom and autonomy is a core value of both education and capitalism. I’m fascinated how a person or group can hold these values ( freedom and autonomy) so tightly for themselves but get upset when other individuals or groups want the same. 

The players benefitted from a transaction where they got a free education of considerable value, free training, facilities, food, room and board also of considerable value and a forum to showcase their abilities to a professional industry at no charge to them. All of the above is still expected in addition to professional level pay with no contracts, terms or conditions. Eventually, either these players are going to find themselves in a professional employment infrastructure or we're going to continue this chaotic state we're in now, which over time, will result in bad football, lack of parity, reduced fan interest and subsequently, less pay available to these players. The golden goose will die and they can ply their trade with the Birmingham Stallions or their city semi-pro team for minimum wage. 

Regardless, the product that gave us NIL will ultimately be destroyed by NIL. 

[ArgoEagle 1,788]

39 minutes ago, aucom96 said:

The players benefitted from a transaction where they got a free education of considerable value, free training, facilities, food, room and board also of considerable value and a forum to showcase their abilities to a professional industry at no charge to them. All of the above is still expected in addition to professional level pay with no contracts, terms or conditions. Eventually, either these players are going to find themselves in a professional employment infrastructure or we're going to continue this chaotic state we're in now, which over time, will result in bad football, lack of parity, reduced fan interest and subsequently, less pay available to these players. The golden goose will die and they can ply their trade with the Birmingham Stallions or their city semi-pro team for minimum wage. 

Regardless, the product that gave us NIL will ultimately be destroyed by NIL. 

Good job! Love it***

[japantiger 4,051]

This has been fun to follow.  Here's my 2 cents:

Relationship building matters less than it did 5 years ago; or even 3 years ago.  If you weren't talking to stud HS players when they were in either the 9th or 10th grade, you were left behind as a coaching staff.   Long term relationship was 80-90% of what drove recruit choice

Relationship still matters; but now it's below 50%.  Relationship gets you to your senior year and drives the recruit top 3 or 5 schools...after that, it's an NIL bidding game now

For current rostered players; relationship is less than 20%...1) am I getting playing time 2) will I get playing time 3) NIL $$ amounts vs my other options drive decisions now ... 

2023 NCAA rosters were 21% transfer players; that number was 6% in 2019; half of D1 teams played a transfer QB (57%)

The last data point I had before the playoffs were over had the average number of transfers per team in the SEC and Big10 over 20 (I think it was 22; but + or - two).  Any staff will have to be able to replace minimally 1/4 of their program via transfers going forward + sign a new recruiting class.  So basically, you have to be able to replace over 1/2 your roster every year thru a combo of recruiting and transfers.  The number of transfer players will increase as we go forward; not decline (in spite of the risk of not landing on a roster being quite high now)

So, given this environment, what matters is being able to both recruit effectively and replenish the obvious transfers that are going to happen.  I don't think relationship has much to do with any of this any longer.  The "rules" or lack of rules, makes this highly transactional now.  The only school I see bucking this trend at present is UGA (I think they had less than 8 transfers).

Talent management success will be determined by how effective the organization built can manage these dynamics.  And, you have to be able to coach the actual games, while doing all of the above.

The verdict is still out on CHF.  He needs to deliver an actual winning season before declaring him "better" than others at this new world.  

 

[TexasTiger 12,896]

14 minutes ago, japantiger said:

The verdict is still out on CHF.  He needs to deliver an actual winning season before declaring him "better" than others at this new world.  

I agree the verdict is definitely out. To clarify, I didn’t say he was better at it. I did say he may be better “suited” for the new climate and it’s demands that coaches less willing to bend to it.

”But he may be better suited for the current college football climate than many other coaches, including Nick Saban.”

[Hank2020 3,202]

16 minutes ago, japantiger said:

This has been fun to follow.  Here's my 2 cents:

Relationship building matters less than it did 5 years ago; or even 3 years ago.  If you weren't talking to stud HS players when they were in either the 9th or 10th grade, you were left behind as a coaching staff.   Long term relationship was 80-90% of what drove recruit choice

Relationship still matters; but now it's below 50%.  Relationship gets you to your senior year and drives the recruit top 3 or 5 schools...after that, it's an NIL bidding game now

For current rostered players; relationship is less than 20%...1) am I getting playing time 2) will I get playing time 3) NIL $$ amounts vs my other options drive decisions now ... 

2023 NCAA rosters were 21% transfer players; that number was 6% in 2019; half of D1 teams played a transfer QB (57%)

The last data point I had before the playoffs were over had the average number of transfers per team in the SEC and Big10 over 20 (I think it was 22; but + or - two).  Any staff will have to be able to replace minimally 1/4 of their program via transfers going forward + sign a new recruiting class.  So basically, you have to be able to replace over 1/2 your roster every year thru a combo of recruiting and transfers.  The number of transfer players will increase as we go forward; not decline (in spite of the risk of not landing on a roster being quite high now)

So, given this environment, what matters is being able to both recruit effectively and replenish the obvious transfers that are going to happen.  I don't think relationship has much to do with any of this any longer.  The "rules" or lack of rules, makes this highly transactional now.  The only school I see bucking this trend at present is UGA (I think they had less than 8 transfers).

Talent management success will be determined by how effective the organization built can manage these dynamics.  And, you have to be able to coach the actual games, while doing all of the above.

The verdict is still out on CHF.  He needs to deliver an actual winning season before declaring him "better" than others at this new world.  

 

Had pretty much same deal when coaches pay started going up. They were just as unmanaged as the recruits are now. It’s why buyouts came to be(we see them as negative bc we are usually trying to get rid of them rather than holding on to them). I remember when they started demanding to see budget amounts/facility promises/coaching staff budgets. We think there should be some measures restricting recruits but at this point we don’t restrict coaches.

[Auburn93 540]

10 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

Good News Auburn93! For a one time donation of $899.99 to the AU NIL Superfund you can go out on an exclusive dinner date with any football player of your choice (excludes starting players. 2 hours maximum. Includes restaurant napkin signed by the player. All expenses covered by you separately. Spots limited)

 

 

Sounds awesome!

[TigerOne 1,143]

10 hours ago, aucom96 said:

The players benefitted from a transaction where they got a free education of considerable value, free training, facilities, food, room and board also of considerable value and a forum to showcase their abilities to a professional industry at no charge to them. All of the above is still expected in addition to professional level pay with no contracts, terms or conditions. Eventually, either these players are going to find themselves in a professional employment infrastructure or we're going to continue this chaotic state we're in now, which over time, will result in bad football, lack of parity, reduced fan interest and subsequently, less pay available to these players. The golden goose will die and they can ply their trade with the Birmingham Stallions or their city semi-pro team for minimum wage. 

Regardless, the product that gave us NIL will ultimately be destroyed by NIL. 

Nil (aka fans held hostage for ransom)

Is semi pro football. Wonder how long before college semi pro teams affiliate with Nfl teams?

[TigerOne 1,143]

12 hours ago, fishepa said:

This is just me spit balling here, but if I was a recruit where I chose to play would be something like:

80% how much are you going to pay me

20% "family environment" and "relationship"

You forget the last requirement…pay up or I’m going somewhere else.

[TigerOne 1,143]

7 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I agree the verdict is definitely out. To clarify, I didn’t say he was better at it. I did say he may be better “suited” for the new climate and it’s demands that coaches less willing to bend to it.

”But he may be better suited for the current college football climate than many other coaches, including Nick Saban.”

He’s just in it for the money, just like the players. Oh yeah he will try and want to but he doesn’t have to produce a winning team. If he gets fired (and will), still becomes a multi millionaire.

Harsin is the perfect prototype. Colleges and fans are getting played big time.

[GreenTiger 1,006]

18 hours ago, aucom96 said:

The players benefitted from a transaction where they got a free education of considerable value, free training, facilities, food, room and board also of considerable value and a forum to showcase their abilities to a professional industry at no charge to them. All of the above is still expected in addition to professional level pay with no contracts, terms or conditions. Eventually, either these players are going to find themselves in a professional employment infrastructure or we're going to continue this chaotic state we're in now, which over time, will result in bad football, lack of parity, reduced fan interest and subsequently, less pay available to these players. The golden goose will die and they can ply their trade with the Birmingham Stallions or their city semi-pro team for minimum wage. 

Regardless, the product that gave us NIL will ultimately be destroyed by NIL. 

Yes. Players benefited. No debate. But clearly the players and the courts did not see the transaction as fair. Does this have negative implications for the sport??? Of course. Did the former system have issues??? Absolutely. 

Were the former transactional benefits limited and lop sided???? Absolutely and it needed addressing. Are the current changes fair and have they fixed the problems??? Probably depends on who you ask 

[aucom96 1,618]

31 minutes ago, GreenTiger said:

Yes. Players benefited. No debate. But clearly the players and the courts did not see the transaction as fair. Does this have negative implications for the sport??? Of course. Did the former system have issues??? Absolutely. 

Were the former transactional benefits limited and lop sided???? Absolutely and it needed addressing. Are the current changes fair and have they fixed the problems??? Probably depends on who you ask 

Yeah, the courts have made their decision. That's fine. Now the athletes will have to deal with the full brunt of "it's just business". 

I think there's this prevailing attitude of fat cats versus poor, innocent athletes and that was never true. Scholarships costs students across the board their time, effort and other sacrifices as a trade-off for money toward an education. The courts, as I understand it, ruled that athletes have the right to profit off sales from their likeness/trademark. That's not what NIL has become and what it HAS become will greatly diminish the amount of training these players receive, the injuries their upprepared bodies take because they're paid to start, ready or not. It will raise the price across the board for fans and for most teams, will diminish their ability to compete. More and more college programs will cut their investments in these sports because it's just not sustainable for them. The larger programs will have trouble keeping boosters happy who are pouring money into rosters that turn over every single year. More of the top coaches will get sick of not having any leverage on a blue-chip freshman who is pulling down a 7 figure salary and doesn't feel the need to show up for practice. If ESPN finally keels over or is bought out - which has been somewhat expected for years, now - then this sport and these players are in for a major reality check. 

The courts opened a massive can of worms and left the NCAA and universities practically no ability to manage the fallout and that fallout is going to be bad for everyone who watches, profits from or plays the game. 

[SaltyTiger 7,812]

20 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

But if you take a job primarily based on pay and end up hating the work environment, don’t you look for something in the same financial ball park that you find a more enjoyable fit?

Yes and even less pay when older and with more life experiences. Dealing with kids here that probably don’t  understand benefits of a great work environment.
 

Real reality check prior to a game this year when I got trapped with the recruits at a Tiger Walk. Bunch of baby faces with big bodies. Personally hate what NIL has turned into and I have yet to hear a coach speak positively about it

Interesting subject and you are probably right on Freeze. Didn’t this stuff play a part or finalize Nicks retirement decision?

[GreenTiger 1,006]

8 hours ago, aucom96 said:

I think there's this prevailing attitude of fat cats versus poor, innocent athletes and that was never true.

Were you a D1 athlete? But to counter a portion of your argument… there is another prevailing attitude that somehow there were these generous “benefits” to having a athletic scholarship and while it’s easy for a bunch of boomers to believe that it doesn’t seem to resonate with those actually experiencing the “benefits”. Side note… I was a college professor/ department chair at a small university for 15 years and have worked with hundreds of student athletes. 

[aucom96 1,618]

12 minutes ago, GreenTiger said:

Were you a D1 athlete? But to counter a portion of your argument… there is another prevailing attitude that somehow there were these generous “benefits” to having a athletic scholarship and while it’s easy for a bunch of boomers to believe that it doesn’t seem to resonate with those actually experiencing the “benefits”. Side note… I was a college professor/ department chair at a small university for 15 years and have worked with hundreds of student athletes. 

What does "boomers" have to do with anything? Does a college tuition have a monetary value? Yes or no? Does food, board, training, coaching, national broadcast exposure plus a lot of other monetary benefits disclosed and undisclosed have monetary value? 

Now they get to fully participate in a "business". Part of that "business" is a product that people want to invest in and consume. The more this wild west show continues in college football, that product IS GOING to become less attractive and that will effect the money available both from boosters and those wanting to spend money for these player's likeness. It has nothing to do with boomers and it has nothing to do with your position with a university. 

[JuscAUse! 1,410]

You would have to ask all the good college professors I've known where they worked or what they did for a living .

The vast majority would announce their occupation to anyone around within 30 seconds of a conversation .

[GreenTiger 1,006]

2 hours ago, aucom96 said:

What does "boomers" have to do with anything? Does a college tuition have a monetary value? Yes or no? Does food, board, training, coaching, national broadcast exposure plus a lot of other monetary benefits disclosed and undisclosed have monetary value? 

Now they get to fully participate in a "business". Part of that "business" is a product that people want to invest in and consume. The more this wild west show continues in college football, that product IS GOING to become less attractive and that will effect the money available both from boosters and those wanting to spend money for these player's likeness. It has nothing to do with boomers and it has nothing to do with your position with a university. 

Well clearly you have spent a lot of time working with student athletes and fully understand their position and what they place value on. 

[aucom96 1,618]

11 hours ago, GreenTiger said:

Well clearly you have spent a lot of time working with student athletes and fully understand their position and what they place value on. 

You're dodging. Is there a significant monetary value to what college athletes were getting pre-NIL to play major sports? Obviously, they placed value on it or the sport would not have thrived from lack of participation. It isn't college football's fault that the NFL and to a lesser extent, NBA don't have the instant out of school developmental employment that baseball has. 

They can profit off their likeness now. Good. But the door has been left wide open to something that will benefit no one. I don't really care how much time you've spent working with student athletes. When the scholarships are no longer there and the booster money starts drying up from diminishing returns at these schools, I can promise you what they used to have won't seem so valueless anymore.