Has the team gotten worse? Of course not. Has college football gotten worse as a whole? Absolutely.
It's hard to be a fan of a sport with such a Wild West situation in terms of personnel.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
2024 Transfer Portal News - Please Respect My Decision
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
Has the team gotten worse? Of course not. Has college football gotten worse as a whole? Absolutely.
It's hard to be a fan of a sport with such a Wild West situation in terms of personnel.
Interesting post. I'm assuming it's tongue in cheek. My revision is:
"Coaches just need to make everyone believe they will be a starter and that 40% of them have a shot at the NFL. Problem created and amplified."
My interest in college basketball, and especially women's basketball, is increasing exponentially while my interest in college football is diving even though the new changes apply to both sports.
NIL isn't the biggest problem. If anyone really wants to fix this stuff there's one small change that will do it, and that's to reinstate the rule that transfers have to sit out for a year. But I think that most Allbuffers would resist this as the status quo appears to benefit programs that are perceived to be improving.
I fully support the one time transfer rule
Yes, that works too. College football doesn't continue to thrive if fan interest goes sideways and I think that it's not just Buff fans that are getting disillusioned.
My, this is serious.
Worse in what way as a fan with a good portal era coach? I totally see the headache from an administrative and coaching perspective with the constantly revolving door. But the only way I can see this as being "worse" as a fan with an elite recruiter coach is that we can't get as familiar/attached with the players on the team because there's a decent chance they will be gone. But otherwise, parity will spread throughout CFB.
Now without Prime, I could see a bunch of people becoming apathetic towards the teams that are getting raided each year.
The problem with the current system is that literally all the power lies with the players and they can do as they please with no repercussions or consequences. The liability pretty much solely lies with the teams and there is no upside for them in actually developing players as good work doesn't get rewarded. If the player underperforms after he receives his bag, well, tough ****, a scholly is a scholly and your money is gone, if you hit on a diamond in the rough and [insert perceived big team here] has a need at his position and offers him a bag bigger than you can offer, thanks for the opportunity but tough **** you're left without the player and have **** all in hand for the work you did with him over the years.
It's basically a free-for-all offseason after offseason and the only chance a smaller team has to compete is if literally all the stars align and you hit on a bunch of transfers AND the players you already have all make the step in their development at the same time. And if that happens your coach gets poached in the offseason. All that would be less of a problem if there was some sort of compensation system.
It's basically a free-for-all offseason after offseason and the only chance a smaller team has to compete is if literally all the stars align and you hit on a bunch of transfers AND the players you already have all make the step in their development at the same time. And if that happens your coach gets poached in the offseason. All that would be less of a problem if there was some sort of compensation system.
I’m seeing a neurologist for it…..
Fogo
Well-Known Member
I have zero insight into NIL contracts but I wonder if some are structured based on performance and longevity. Or are they "here's your bag, have a great day" deals?
What Jens said. The idea that CU or any other school invests so much into a kid only for that kid to bolt the minute the coach tells him he has to go to class doesn't sit right with me.
A big part of the college experience for so many players used to involve having to grow up. You would hear stories all the time about highly recruited kids who would want to quit when they were buried in the depth chart, but they would stick it out and because they had no choice. In retrospect, they would usually cite those experiences as being foundational to who they were as grown ass men. I used to love reading about that ****.
That is just another thing that is seemingly in the past now.
We've got a bunch of 18-21 year olds saying they're making "business decisions" when most of them have never had a job or a budget to manage. And there are almost no regulations around it or structure for them. No one should be surprised that we're seeing a lot of half baked decisions.
Ideally, also including some academic requirements. Agree with your high-level proposal though.
I don't think the growing number of freshmen enrolling early is helping either.
Costa Rica Buff
Well-Known Member
not
performance based NIL is not allowed
So he portaled without a landing spot, I know they think it drives up the price, but the fit and the plan are backwards.
Is PORTALED a word?
Adjective. portaled (not comparable) Furnished with a portal. a portaled entranceway.
Bajoran Wormhole to Lincoln
So going back to restricting athletes (a majority of whom are not white) on where they can go to be happy?
Then we're back to granting one-off waivers based on someone's subjectivity. It would be back to the old way and that wasn't fair to the athlete. As a whole I think the market will actually do a good job of correcting this over time. As individuals and businesses see how easily someone can leave, they will structure deals to pay out the bulk after they have remained at the school for X amount of time. No performance based incentives, just requiring someone to be there to earn their pay.
Birch1
Well-Known Member
And then another university will just give them money up front and they'll sign away from you.
Maybe. But I truly think once more situations like Kadyn Proctor or incoming freshman that transfer before ever playing a down for a university, donors won't want to get burned again. Rich stay rich because the majority learn from mistakes that cost them money.
Some schools can absorb 8-figure mistakes and move on without a hitch. That's the difference. They can bet and lose bigger without it hurting their position. It's good to be the guy at the hold em table with the largest stack.
The schools absolutely can because it's not their money that they are throwing around. But will the individuals supplying the funds continue betting if they keep getting burnt?
Depends. For the schools that already had a robust shadow booster organization, "NIL" just stands for "Now It's Legal" and their collective donors are people who have been making these types of bets with the ups & downs of it for years (if not for generations). For a school like CU which dismantled what it had around 2004, it's more challenging for donors to accept how often their money is wasted for no return.
I agree with everything you are saying, but now the two biggest differences are that you can transfer whenever. NLI's are no longer actually binding, and someone who has transferred before is just as much a flight risk. These two things, in my opinion, might at least make someone pause. I could be dead wrong. But inefficient markets typically correct themselves and right now this is an extremely inefficient market.
Sounds like it was his planned usage he wasn’t good with, IMO. He wants to be used as a true APB and as others have mentioned, sounds like they wanted to kind of use him as a gadget player/mostly slot receiver. (Have to click into the tweet to read the rest of the post)
LOL - do you honestly believe there is any regulation on this bull**** right now?
I have no doubt your comment is correct in how the "rules" are written, but it is the wild wild west out there with teams not giving the committed money, players transferring after getting money. It's insanity.
Well, that rules out Nebraska
Solid QB play is a huge “if”
Go from best QB in CFB to a freshman that might **** himself