Jump to content

Texas Recruiting Notes 2022 - Idiotic Slapfights Unrelated To 2022 Recruiting


Recommended Posts

Oregon went fucking 4-3 last year, are we the only school that doesn't negative recruit? Are recruits just trolling us, is the staff really that confident on kids or are the 9.95ers just full of shit. How can we "lead" for someone for so long and lose them at the last minute while someone we're supposedly out of we get? 

Edited by Michael Knight
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Michael Knight said:

Oregon went fucking 4-3 last year, are we the only school that doesn't negative recruit?

Cristobal's an OL specialist, they have a legitimately functional bag game, kickass facilities and what I'd imagine is an incredible NIL sell.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, texifornia said:

Cristobal's an OL specialist, they have a legitimately functional bag game, kickass facilities and what I'd imagine is an incredible NIL sell.

We have what's considered one of the best OL coaches in the nation and a better NIL sell. Does it just come down to our alumni not handing out bags of cash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Michael Knight said:

We have what's considered one of the best OL coaches in the nation and a better NIL sell. Does it just come down to our alumni not handing out bags of cash?

They have the perception that they've been more consistently successful over the decade. Even in this shit year, they still snuck into the Rose Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

favorable NIL venue is nice in Oregon I guess, but Lady Bird Lake sells itself...

1 minute ago, Michael Knight said:

We have what's considered one of the best OL coaches in the nation and a better NIL sell. Does it just come down to our alumni not handing out bags of cash?

Phil Knight and his brand (and his $40BB) apparently seem to have a decent NIL atmosphere to sell to recruits.

  • Fuck You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, Oregon's NIL sell doesn't really have to be Nike itself, which I think is illegal under the current rules. It's about Phil Knight. But do y'all really think Phil Knight doesn't have a shitload of other holdings he can use to "endorse" these kids?

Having the top legit business case for NIL is great, but having one super-booster who's willing to go way above fair market value is worth even more, at least for the 5 star targets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, texifornia said:

They have the perception that they've been more consistently successful over the decade. Even in this shit year, they still snuck into the Rose Bowl.

I don't understand when this shift that omg they haven't been successful recently so they will never be successful. Every fucking new coaching staff got to start over and say we are gonna win with this new group come join us.  I blame Lebron James and entitled generations

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tex-19 said:

To be clear, Oregon's NIL sell doesn't really have to be Nike itself, which I think is illegal under the current rules. It's about Phil Knight. But do y'all really think Phil Knight doesn't have a shitload of other holdings he can use to "endorse" these kids?

Having the top legit business case for NIL is great, but having one super-booster who's willing to go way above fair market value is worth even more, at least for the 5 star targets

No one knows anything so they are making promises they probably won't be able to keep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Michael Knight said:

I don't understand when this shift that omg they haven't been successful recently so they will never be successful. Every fucking new coaching staff got to start over and say we are gonna win with this new group come join us.  I blame Lebron James and entitled generations

What else are you supposed to go with besides past performance? And Sark's HC record isn't exactly shimmering. There's a huge element of "prove it" with him.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

To be clear, Oregon's NIL sell doesn't really have to be Nike itself, which I think is illegal under the current rules. It's about Phil Knight. But do y'all really think Phil Knight doesn't have a shitload of other holdings he can use to "endorse" these kids?

Having the top legit business case for NIL is great, but having one super-booster who's willing to go way above fair market value is worth even more, at least for the 5 star targets

Why would Nike endorsements be illegal under the current rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and you would know... how?

Just reading the tea leaves my man. Fanbase panicking is a no-brainer. If what is true about our staff telling recruits that we don’t have spots or are expecting others to commit and then them going elsewhere, that shows a level of being situational unaware which leads to panic in some form as plans fall apart. Just my opinion and could be wrong but honestly just tired of seeing the same bullshit happen repeatedly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it's blind optimism, but I have a hard time believing the staff told Sexton no spot (assuming that's true) and then misses on BOTH OTs they had taking those spots only like a week later.

IT also still the most confident source I've seen across all the schools. Not that I still really trust them much..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, longhornmatt said:

Agreed.  Nike execs using Nike money to get kids to attend Oregon without any real business purpose for Nike is illegal under actual laws and not just NCAA crap, too.  But Phil Knight has more than enough money and connections to do this on the side at the same level of a major corporation if he cares enough.

There’s probably an argument that NIL might not change the competitive landscape that much.  The group of people who want to pay their own money to college athletes to entice them to go to their favorite school hasn’t changed.  The ones who care enough to be big spenders probably were already doing it for the most part.  And that same group might just spend even more rather than a bunch of people who previously weren’t in the game deciding they want to help pay a 5 star recruit this year.

 

But the key is "without any real business purpose for Nike."  It would be easy to pay them to wear Nike outside of school and do online Ads or even local commercials.  I cannot imagine that anyone is going to investigate the "market rate" requirement for these things.  As long as they are doing something for Nike and not getting paid $1 million a year or something outrageous, my guess is it is just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, longhornmatt said:

Agreed.  Nike execs using Nike money to get kids to attend Oregon without any real business purpose for Nike is illegal under actual laws and not just NCAA crap, too.  But Phil Knight has more than enough money and connections to do this on the side at the same level of a major corporation if he cares enough.

There’s probably an argument that NIL might not change the competitive landscape that much.  The group of people who want to pay their own money to college athletes to entice them to go to their favorite school hasn’t changed.  The ones who care enough to be big spenders probably were already doing it for the most part.  And that same group might just spend even more rather than a bunch of people who previously weren’t in the game deciding they want to help pay a 5 star recruit this year.

 

I agree with this but where it changes things is around the boosters who have moral qualms with cheating. So where our boosters may have been too squeamish to offer bags, they may be totally fine paying that money through legit means of NIL.

As others have detailed, there is also significant legit business money to be made through NIL which should be a real factor. But a lot of that likely won't come until guys are Jrs/Srs and making a bigger name for themselves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, longhornmatt said:

It doesn’t really benefit Nike if a kid goes to Oregon instead of Texas or Ohio State or Duke or UNC or wherever.  That would just be Phil Knight wanting his school to get a recruit.  And Nike wouldn’t be able to hide their endorsement deals with these guys, which means somebody would see it and say, “WTF!”  Some guy who owns 2 shares and is a USC fan could blow that up.  I suppose they could do it under the table, but that’s not NIL - that’s back to shady street agent stuff.

There is no way a shareholder is going to get past the business judgement rule by claiming that Nike should be paying other schools' players instead of Oregon's players to advertise for them unless they are paying unseemly amounts of money to unknown players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

It doesn’t really benefit Nike if a kid goes to Oregon instead of Texas or Ohio State or Duke or UNC or wherever.  That would just be Phil Knight wanting his school to get a recruit.  And Nike wouldn’t be able to hide their endorsement deals with these guys, which means somebody would see it and say, “WTF!”  Some guy who owns 2 shares and is a USC fan could blow that up.  I suppose they could do it under the table, but that’s not NIL - that’s back to shady street agent stuff.

Nike just said they’re gonna pull in $50B next year. Public reporting requires accuracy within 5%. Operating expenses of $13B. That means $650M is still a rounding error. This man could buy every top 500 recruit and it wouldn’t impact a single shareholder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, longhornmatt said:

But isn’t the idea of paying guys unseemly amounts to go to Oregon the whole point of the hypothetical?  

My guess is no one is getting unseemly amounts right now.  Likely, they are being promised Nike money and endorsements if they come to Oregon and are successful.  If I had to guess, they're probably dangling the possibility of tens of thousands in Nike money for doing some ads - not millions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

It doesn’t really benefit Nike if a kid goes to Oregon instead of Texas or Ohio State or Duke or UNC or wherever.  That would just be Phil Knight wanting his school to get a recruit.  And Nike wouldn’t be able to hide their endorsement deals with these guys, which means somebody would see it and say, “WTF!”  Some guy who owns 2 shares and is a USC fan could blow that up.  I suppose they could do it under the table, but that’s not NIL - that’s back to shady street agent stuff.

This is not commentary on the rules as I have no idea if Nike can push deals to recruits, however....

Have you ever watched an Oregon game where they didn't talk about Nike, the facilities, the uniform combinations, and/or, Phil Knight? I haven't, and that's a shitload of free airtime. When they compete for a national championship, that geographically distributes all of the unsolicited advertisements. The actual value of that pub would be MILLIONS of dollars less than what they would be able to get away with paying for NIL deals. There's plenty of justification here for Nike to spend that money if they are able too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...