Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2022 12:14:02 GMT -5
Well, no, of course, you cannot. By rule.
Have "bagmen" "purchased" football and basketball players? Certainly. Is that on paper possible for the SEC volleyball programs, sure.
But again that is all money that flows completely outside the athletic dept books. So it wouldn't matter how much revenue from football the athletic dept raised.
Officially, a school cannot offer compensation to a would be vball student-athlete beyond a full-ride, "full cost of attendance" scholarship.
NIL is effectively legalized bagmen. A school may not be able to pay a player, but a booster can through an NIL deal. Yes.
And, again like I said, that has no place in the discussion on athletic dept budgets. That all happens completely outside the athletic dept.
So, the athletic dept cannot buy a student athlete. At least, not yet. That day perhaps could be coming, too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2022 12:15:49 GMT -5
Texas A&M has had a top 5-6 recruiting class since Jimbo got there. NIL definitely had an impact on the #1 class, but I don't think it's accurate to say they got #1 solely because they "bought players..." I mean, it's obviously not the only reason. But it's definitely a factor. I agree that Jimbo is a bigger factor. And all the big schools do it. I'm not trying to single out Texas A&M or suggest that they're doing anything wrong. Just that the idea that players can't be bought is naïve. They can't be bought, by the athletic dept.
NIL and before that bagmen, were entirely outside the athletic dept.
So it's not a valid thing to say something like "Vandy's athletic dept doesn't spend enough on vball, so they can't compete for players with TA&M". The overall outcome might be the same, but it would have nothing to do with athletic dept spending.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Apr 26, 2022 12:18:06 GMT -5
NIL is effectively legalized bagmen. A school may not be able to pay a player, but a booster can through an NIL deal. Texas A&M has had a top 5-6 recruiting class since Jimbo got there. NIL definitely had an impact on the #1 class, but I don't think it's accurate to say they got #1 solely because they "bought players..." This is the common underground story. After Texas and OU joined the SEC, the A&M admin/alumni have become highly motivated to not be the #2 Texas school when Texas starts play in the SEC. The story is that A&M raised a slush fund of $30 million to spend on the 2022 recruiting class. The stories in this class are endless. Kids that had shown no interest in A&M, out of the blue went to A&M on an unofficial visit, and then committed to the aggies within days. There is a reason that many parents of aggie commits showed a sudden interest in crypto. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Apr 26, 2022 12:19:05 GMT -5
I mean, it's obviously not the only reason. But it's definitely a factor. I agree that Jimbo is a bigger factor. And all the big schools do it. I'm not trying to single out Texas A&M or suggest that they're doing anything wrong. Just that the idea that players can't be bought is naïve. They can't be bought, by the athletic dept.
NIL and before that bagmen, were entirely outside the athletic dept.
So it's not a valid thing to say something like "Vandy's athletic dept doesn't spend enough on vball, so they can't compete for players with TA&M". The overall outcome might be the same, but it would have nothing to do with athletic dept spending.
Sure, I agree that the athletic department isn't spending money on this directly. But I don't think the players care who exactly is paying them. |
|
|
|
Post by donut on Apr 26, 2022 12:26:13 GMT -5
Texas A&M has had a top 5-6 recruiting class since Jimbo got there. NIL definitely had an impact on the #1 class, but I don't think it's accurate to say they got #1 solely because they "bought players..." This is the common underground story. After Texas and OU joined the SEC, the A&M admin/alumni have become highly motivated to not be the #2 Texas school when Texas starts play in the SEC. The story is that A&M raised a slush fund of $30 million to spend on the 2022 recruiting class. The stories in this class are endless. Kids that had shown no interest in A&M, out of the blue went to A&M on an unofficial visit, and then committed to the aggies within days. There is a reason that many parents of aggie commits showed a sudden interest in crypto. I absolutely don't understand football recruiting rules. Or NIL, completely. Is the underground story that they broke the rules? If Texas A&M took advantage of NIL/loopholes in recruiting rules... I mean, power to them I guess. Also, I understand A&M's motivation, but to be frank, right now, they're already the #1 Texas football school... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2022 12:28:03 GMT -5
They can't be bought, by the athletic dept.
NIL and before that bagmen, were entirely outside the athletic dept.
So it's not a valid thing to say something like "Vandy's athletic dept doesn't spend enough on vball, so they can't compete for players with TA&M". The overall outcome might be the same, but it would have nothing to do with athletic dept spending.
Sure, I agree that the athletic department isn't spending money on this directly. But I don't think the players care who exactly is paying them. I'm sure they don't.
The discussion is on if Vandy will spend at a high level on volleyball. Regardless if you think they will or not and why, that discussion can't include the concept of players being bought, for the reasons above.
Now if you want to expand the discussion to ask questions like "will Vandy boosters be willing to 'put in the extra, that it takes to win'?" or "will Vandy's NIL collective be able to attract the services of top volleyball student-athletes?", be my guest!
|
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Apr 26, 2022 12:29:37 GMT -5
This is the common underground story. After Texas and OU joined the SEC, the A&M admin/alumni have become highly motivated to not be the #2 Texas school when Texas starts play in the SEC. The story is that A&M raised a slush fund of $30 million to spend on the 2022 recruiting class. The stories in this class are endless. Kids that had shown no interest in A&M, out of the blue went to A&M on an unofficial visit, and then committed to the aggies within days. There is a reason that many parents of aggie commits showed a sudden interest in crypto. I absolutely don't understand football recruiting rules. Or NIL, completely. Is the underground story that they broke the rules? If Texas A&M took advantage of NIL/loopholes in recruiting rules... I mean, power to them I guess. Also, I understand A&M's motivation, but to be frank, right now, they're already the #1 Texas football school... A&M is definitely better than Texas right now (I mean, Texas lost to Kansas), but that could change if Texas gets the right coach (I don't really think Sark is the guy, but I guess we'll see). Also, A&M and Texas haven't played each other since A&M left for the SEC. When Texas joins, I imagine that rivalry will be renewed, and it will probably be played every season. I think A&M wants to make sure that they win that game more often than not. But I also think A&M has bigger fish to fry than just Texas. They haven't won a title since 1939, but they have a national championship coach and great recruiting classes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2022 12:31:10 GMT -5
Texas A&M has had a top 5-6 recruiting class since Jimbo got there. NIL definitely had an impact on the #1 class, but I don't think it's accurate to say they got #1 solely because they "bought players..." This is the common underground story. After Texas and OU joined the SEC, the A&M admin/alumni have become highly motivated to not be the #2 Texas school when Texas starts play in the SEC. The story is that A&M raised a slush fund of $30 million to spend on the 2022 recruiting class. The stories in this class are endless. Kids that had shown no interest in A&M, out of the blue went to A&M on an unofficial visit, and then committed to the aggies within days. There is a reason that many parents of aggie commits showed a sudden interest in crypto. Coincidentally, Texas and Texas A&M I believe the two richest athletic depts in the nation, in terms of (legal) revenue generated -- though I believe that also includes donations.
All that money, and no legal mechanism to buy players. ........... *wink wink wink wink wink*
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2022 12:34:41 GMT -5
I absolutely don't understand football recruiting rules. Or NIL, completely. Is the underground story that they broke the rules? If Texas A&M took advantage of NIL/loopholes in recruiting rules... I mean, power to them I guess. Also, I understand A&M's motivation, but to be frank, right now, they're already the #1 Texas football school... A&M is definitely better than Texas right now (I mean, Texas lost to Kansas), but that could change if Texas gets the right coach (I don't really think Sark is the guy, but I guess we'll see). Also, A&M and Texas haven't played each other since A&M left for the SEC. When Texas joins, I imagine that rivalry will be renewed, and it will probably be played every season. I think A&M wants to make sure that they win that game more often than not. But I also think A&M has bigger fish to fry than just Texas. They haven't won a title since 1939, but they have a national championship coach and great recruiting classes.
The last 12 seasons ..... just seems like a very protracted period of utter mediocrity. There would seemingly be no possible reason for Texas to be anything other than an Alabama or Ohio State, in football.
But it's just ... worlds apart, during that period.
|
|
|
|
Post by nellynel on Apr 26, 2022 12:34:53 GMT -5
This is the common underground story. After Texas and OU joined the SEC, the A&M admin/alumni have become highly motivated to not be the #2 Texas school when Texas starts play in the SEC. The story is that A&M raised a slush fund of $30 million to spend on the 2022 recruiting class. The stories in this class are endless. Kids that had shown no interest in A&M, out of the blue went to A&M on an unofficial visit, and then committed to the aggies within days. There is a reason that many parents of aggie commits showed a sudden interest in crypto. I absolutely don't understand football recruiting rules. Or NIL, completely. Is the underground story that they broke the rules? If Texas A&M took advantage of NIL/loopholes in recruiting rules... I mean, power to them I guess. Also, I understand A&M's motivation, but to be frank, right now, they're already the #1 Texas football school... Hold up on dat car wash gentleman. Texas has been down with bad coaching hires but A&M left the B12 because they were tired of being the #2 team in Texas. A&M did not want to see Texas in the SEC. And even in the SEC under their magical Manzel year they finished what 4th in the SEC west? |
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 26, 2022 12:36:39 GMT -5
1) Florida and Kentucky are known. Sure, fine. I would think TA&M has fantastic potential to keep great in-state talent home, and plenty of money to spend. Other than that ... what other SEC schools seem to have turned a corner or consistently have converted either potential and/or big spending into significant, national success in vball? There could easily be some programs that can reasonably be argued to have done that, I don't know. Asking the question. (I'm talking the current SEC schools, not Texas and OU) 2) I understand the point about a school having a great football team generating more revenue that can then be spent on other sports. Fair point. But my response is this: when the SEC updates/renegotiates/signs a new TV contract with Texas/OU in the fold, Vanderbilt athletic dept will be receiving a check from the conference for something like $70M per year (maybe more?), for nothing other than being a member of the conference. That's it. They could place last in every sport. They still get the check. 3) (to n00b's post above) .... how much money can you possibly spend on the sport of college volleyball, before the spending saturates, in terms of success? You can't just buy wins. You can't buy players, in college. Maybe NIL will become more and more of a significant factor, but that is completely independent of the school's athletic dept spending. I would suspect that it only takes maybe $2-3M per year (??) before you've reached that saturation point. That's really not that much, relative to SEC overall budgets. But you CAN buy coaches. And that is one of the fastest paths to success. If Vandy offers Dan Fisher $1.5 mil/year, I have to think he'd gladly move to Nashville. And be competing for national titles within a decade. Now, I'm not sure I trust SEC administrators to be savvy enough to know who the right targets are. But they could go get coaches if they wanted to. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2022 12:38:31 GMT -5
1) Florida and Kentucky are known. Sure, fine. I would think TA&M has fantastic potential to keep great in-state talent home, and plenty of money to spend. Other than that ... what other SEC schools seem to have turned a corner or consistently have converted either potential and/or big spending into significant, national success in vball? There could easily be some programs that can reasonably be argued to have done that, I don't know. Asking the question. (I'm talking the current SEC schools, not Texas and OU) 2) I understand the point about a school having a great football team generating more revenue that can then be spent on other sports. Fair point. But my response is this: when the SEC updates/renegotiates/signs a new TV contract with Texas/OU in the fold, Vanderbilt athletic dept will be receiving a check from the conference for something like $70M per year (maybe more?), for nothing other than being a member of the conference. That's it. They could place last in every sport. They still get the check. 3) (to n00b's post above) .... how much money can you possibly spend on the sport of college volleyball, before the spending saturates, in terms of success? You can't just buy wins. You can't buy players, in college. Maybe NIL will become more and more of a significant factor, but that is completely independent of the school's athletic dept spending. I would suspect that it only takes maybe $2-3M per year (??) before you've reached that saturation point. That's really not that much, relative to SEC overall budgets. But you CAN buy coaches. And that is one of the fastest paths to success. If Vandy offers Dan Fisher $1.5 mil/year, I have to think he'd gladly move to Nashville. And be competing for national titles within a decade. Now, I'm not sure I trust SEC administrators to be savvy enough to know who the right targets are. But they could go get coaches if they wanted to. $1.5M ?! Wow, wouldn't that be like 3x what the top paid coach makes?
But yes, you can buy coaches. You can spend on facilities. You can spend on budgets for recruiting. You can spend on budgets for travel.
But at the end of the day ... you can only spend so much before it stops having any effect at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by donut on Apr 26, 2022 12:44:42 GMT -5
I absolutely don't understand football recruiting rules. Or NIL, completely. Is the underground story that they broke the rules? If Texas A&M took advantage of NIL/loopholes in recruiting rules... I mean, power to them I guess. Also, I understand A&M's motivation, but to be frank, right now, they're already the #1 Texas football school... Hold up on dat car wash gentleman. Texas has been down with bad coaching hires but A&M left the B12 because they were tired of being the #2 team in Texas. A&M did not want to see Texas in the SEC. And even in the SEC under their magical Manzel year they finished what 4th in the SEC west? Ok? None of this really refutes my last sentence. I'm not arguing that Texas A&M doesn't have a "little brother, something to prove" mentality with Texas. Or that they left the SEC to get out of UT's spotlight. Honestly, I don't even particularly like either school that much. But if you think Texas's football program is better than A&M's right now, you're just biased. "Bad coaching hires" (Mack Brown's declining years, Strong, Herman, likely Sark...) is just another way of saying that they haven't really been nationally relevant since like 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 26, 2022 12:45:12 GMT -5
But you CAN buy coaches. And that is one of the fastest paths to success. If Vandy offers Dan Fisher $1.5 mil/year, I have to think he'd gladly move to Nashville. And be competing for national titles within a decade. Now, I'm not sure I trust SEC administrators to be savvy enough to know who the right targets are. But they could go get coaches if they wanted to. $1.5M ?! Wow, wouldn't that be like 3x what the top paid coach makes?
But yes, you can buy coaches. You can spend on facilities. You can spend on budgets for recruiting. You can spend on budgets for travel. But at the end of the day ... you can only spend so much before it stops having any effect at all.
Correct. But that limit hasn't been approached. That limit is whatever it would take to get Hambly, Sheffield, Cook or Kiraly as your coach. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Apr 26, 2022 12:45:15 GMT -5
1) Florida and Kentucky are known. Sure, fine. I would think TA&M has fantastic potential to keep great in-state talent home, and plenty of money to spend. Other than that ... what other SEC schools seem to have turned a corner or consistently have converted either potential and/or big spending into significant, national success in vball? There could easily be some programs that can reasonably be argued to have done that, I don't know. Asking the question. (I'm talking the current SEC schools, not Texas and OU) 2) I understand the point about a school having a great football team generating more revenue that can then be spent on other sports. Fair point. But my response is this: when the SEC updates/renegotiates/signs a new TV contract with Texas/OU in the fold, Vanderbilt athletic dept will be receiving a check from the conference for something like $70M per year (maybe more?), for nothing other than being a member of the conference. That's it. They could place last in every sport. They still get the check. 3) (to n00b's post above) .... how much money can you possibly spend on the sport of college volleyball, before the spending saturates, in terms of success? You can't just buy wins. You can't buy players, in college. Maybe NIL will become more and more of a significant factor, but that is completely independent of the school's athletic dept spending. I would suspect that it only takes maybe $2-3M per year (??) before you've reached that saturation point. That's really not that much, relative to SEC overall budgets. But you CAN buy coaches. And that is one of the fastest paths to success. If Vandy offers Dan Fisher $1.5 mil/year, I have to think he'd gladly move to Nashville. And be competing for national titles within a decade. Now, I'm not sure I trust SEC administrators to be savvy enough to know who the right targets are. But they could go get coaches if they wanted to. This is exactly right. I'd say having the right coach is the No. 1 factor for success in every college sport. |
|
%20ii%201967-2011-Seal.jpg)