At what point as a Head Coach do you stop recruiting high school players?

[Mr_Twister]

Some reports speculate Nick Saban retired due to the changing NIL landscape, and he has seven national titles. 🙁

It’s one of the factors. There are many reasons he retired. The fact that he is fabulously wealthy and in reasonably good health might have something to do with it. The guy hit the college football coaching lottery.

 

[BillyC80]

Again, the contract would be tied to a particular school. There’s nothing to stop a player from leaving before the player cashes out on the bulk of the contract. It could be a major disincentive.

So if the players fair market value is 500 K a year, you offer them a two year deal for 1 million, and 900k of it is only payable after the completion of year two.

At the end of year one the player could jump. But to make the money equal, some other school would have to offer them essentially a one year deal for 900k. And the original school would’ve gotten that player for one year for 100k.

Sure, anything is possible when it comes to contracts, but I don’t see the incentive for a player to agree to such a huge disparity in pay between year one and year two. Also, I wonder if the courts would allow mandatory multi-year contracts for players.

If I were a player I’d only agree to a one-year deal at a high rate of pay, if the other option was a balloon payment in the second year. I could always make more money somewhere else in the second year.

Also, when I say “trades” I’m not suggesting they will happen without the players’ consent.

Imagine two teams, one with two outstanding centers and one with two outstanding point guards, and all 4 players are on multi-year contracts.

What’s to stop the two teams from working out a swap, where one player on each team has the second year of his contract “bought out” by the other team, so that both teams are made better and everyone wins, including the NIL donors who just want to see their team succeed?

 

[Eagleton96]

Sure, anything is possible when it comes to contracts, but I don’t see the incentive for a player to agree to such a huge disparity in pay between year one and year two. Also, I wonder if the courts would allow mandatory multi-year contracts for players.

If I were a player I’d only agree to a one-year deal at a high rate of pay, if the other option was a balloon payment in the second year. I could always make more money somewhere else in the second year.

Also, when I say “trades” I’m not suggesting they will happen without the players’ consent.

Imagine two teams, one with two outstanding centers and one with two outstanding point guards, and all 4 players are on multi-year contracts.

What’s to stop the two teams from working out a swap, where one player on each team has the second year of his contract “bought out” by the other team, so that both teams are made better and everyone wins, including the NIL donors who just want to see their team succeed?

Like with any contract, you expect a total dollar figure that would be lower the more the money is guaranteed. And higher the more it has conditions. So it would be a point of negotiation. Examples:

So a B1G starter level junior transfer with 2 years of eligibility might command $500k a year. A 2 year deal might be for 1 mil. But the player could break it. So the contract would have a balloon payment and 90% gets paid out after year 2. The player doesn't like that. So the team offers a 1.3 mill contract to compensate.

So, someone like GG comes in and RU is negotiating with them. If GG turned out to be a 4 year starter, and all B1G player, then his market value would be around 500k a year. But coming in nobody knows that for sure yet: he's skinny, no D, etc. So for year 1 his market value as a player on a 1 year contract is only 200k as a promising but unproven commodity. RU might offer him a 3 year deal worth 1 mil with a balloon after year 3. More than GG would get if he underperforms, and less than if he overperforms.

 

[BillyC80]

Like with any contract, you expect a total dollar figure that would be lower the more the money is guaranteed. And higher the more it has conditions. So it would be a point of negotiation. Examples:

So a B1G starter level junior transfer with 2 years of eligibility might command $500k a year. A 2 year deal might be for 1 mil. But the player could break it. So the contract would have a balloon payment and 90% gets paid out after year 2. The player doesn't like that. So the team offers a 1.3 mill contract to compensate.

So, someone like GG comes in and RU is negotiating with them. If GG turned out to be a 4 year starter, and all B1G player, then his market value would be around 500k a year. But coming in nobody knows that for sure yet: he's skinny, no D, etc. So for year 1 his market value as a player on a 1 year contract is only 200k as a promising but unproven commodity. RU might offer him a 3 year deal worth 1 mil with a balloon after year 3. More than GG would get if he underperforms, and less than if he overperforms.

I get it, I’m just saying most players would still opt for one year at a time, assuming that remains an option (which I can’t imagine it wouldn’t be).

 

[AdventureHasAName]

If you were to make list of circumstances that would most deter RU from being successful in competing in the world of 'big time' college sports, almost all of the events of the last couple years would be first and foremost on said list. I actually started to think with the return of Schiano and hiring of Coach Pike, program builders, we were going to have a chance to 'belong'. Now, once again, I am not so sure. When guys like Saban and Wright say goodbye, from programs with storied histories and significant war chests, I am very pessimistic that RU can ever be successful. I'll never desert the Knights but...go RU!

Bingo. If the Rutgers 1000 was writing a gameplan to get Rutgers Athletics to crumble, this is the roadmap they'd be drafting (you know, if they were more than three people and actually understood the business of sports).

 

[Eagleton96]

I get it, I’m just saying most players would still opt for one year at a time, assuming that remains an option (which I can’t imagine it wouldn’t be).

It's going to be a market. A lot of teams will want the multi year deals. A lot of the players will want 1 year deals. So if the player can get a better deal, get their 1 year deal at top dollar, great. But if a school doesn't want to pay it, they have to find someone else that will.

Eventually it should be regular enough that everyone knows off of the top of their head what the premium is on a contract for a 2 year deal with a balloon payment vs no balloon.

 

[Plum Street]

I think you offer multi year NIL deals to hs kids you really want. Kind of lock them in so they can’t leave.

 

[Pdabs]

How's that working for Deion ?

3 game improvement over last years coach. If Rutgers got 3 extra wins, we might be looking at the NIT. So I’d say not bad.

 

[BillyC80]

It's going to be a market. A lot of teams will want the multi year deals. A lot of the players will want 1 year deals. So if the player can get a better deal, get their 1 year deal at top dollar, great. But if a school doesn't want to pay it, they have to find someone else that will.

Eventually it should be regular enough that everyone knows off of the top of their head what the premium is on a contract for a 2 year deal with a balloon payment vs no balloon.

I’m thinking there may have to be a legal remedy. If all the NIL collectives start offering only multi-year deals, it may be considered collusion.

Also, if the players hold all the cards, one year deals will be the norm, imo.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

We have 1 guy left in the program that Pike has recruited. At what point do you acknowledge the landscape that we are in and assume every year you start from scratch?

Imagine being a coach in a non Power conference...it is much worse.

As a fan it is tough to get excited about anyone incoming freshman other than the 2 that are obviously ready to compete right now.

I think if we made the tournament this year or last year and ended on a good note this point would have more legs. Let’s see what happens with next years’ recruits if the season is a success before declaring this.

 

[Eagleton96]

I’m thinking there may have to be a legal remedy. If all the NIL collectives start offering only multi-year deals, it may be considered collusion.

Also, if the players hold all the cards, one year deals will be the norm, imo.

I think there is a good chance the market will work. If the players want one year deals the schools will offer 25% bigger paydays for 2 year contracts or something.