Illinois Football Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#228      
illiniwil
I guess i don't understand why the university of illinois can be "competitive" with NIL dollars.
even indiana did and they were a basketball school. Doesn't illinois have enough huge net
worth alumni to handle this? We should be in the top 10 in nil$ at least.
 
#230      
fuddrules
therealmiket86 said:
Those are all programs that will pay more than us. Nebraska offered Trae Taylor more than double what we did. Look at how much they paid Riaola to go there.
Click to expand...
Thanks and this is what gives "pause" on Lopati mania from some Illinois fans. It's justifiable.
 
#231      
phats22
therealmiket86 said:
Those are all programs that will pay more than us. Nebraska offered Trae Taylor more than double what we did. Look at how much they paid Riaola to go there.
Click to expand...
was this due to inability or lack of value proposition for us with Taylor? can we make a higher offer (ie, stay competitive with the market) for the right recruit
 
#232      
illiniwil
illiniwil said:
I guess i don't understand why the university of illinois can be "competitive" with NIL dollars.
even indiana did and they were a basketball school. Doesn't illinois have enough huge net
worth alumni to handle this? We should be in the top 10 in nil$ at least.
Click to expand...
anyone?
 
#236      
Mr. Tibbs
if you mean the stratospheric levels of high net worth, I remember Marc Andreessen not caring a great deal about football as an undergrad. I doubt that has changed much.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that bridge was burned 32 years ago

On December 21, 1994, a settlement was reached between the
University of Illinoisand Marc Andreessen's company (then-named Mosaic Communications Corp., later Netscape) regarding intellectual property rights to the Mosaic web browser. The settlement required Netscape to stop distributing the original software, pay a fee to the university, and ensured no further claims were made, costing Netscape nearly $3 million.
 
#237      
therealmiket86
phats22 said:
was this due to inability or lack of value proposition for us with Taylor? can we make a higher offer (ie, stay competitive with the market) for the right recruit
Click to expand...

Unless our budget increases a lot I don’t see us paying millions for a prep qb. Look at the deals underwood and Riaola got. It doesn’t sound like we will add a transfer like Houser next year so there should be money and playing time available.
 
#239      
ChiefGritty
therealmiket86 said:
He will get paid a ton and end up at a blue blood. We aren’t making competitive offers for a prospect like this.
Click to expand...
With a quarterback like Lopati there are a lot of considerations at play.

In theory for both college career NIL maximizing purposes as well as NFL prospects, he will be thinking about where he can start immediately, though there are also scheme considerations there too.

Though the other thing is, it would be easy to say Illinois can compile its biggest possible NIL bag and clear the decks so that Lopati walks in as a day 1 true freshman starter, and that being a better "deal" than perhaps a bit more money to sit and develop at Bama or wherever. But do WE want to do that? Is that money better allocated to more experienced QB's and/or other positions?

QB is really tricky in this new world. In the NFL it's conceptually simple, you find your great QB in the draft which locks them into a below-market salary, and then you can hang onto them (at much higher prices) for 15 years or whatever. You can't do either of those things in college.
 
Last edited:
#240      
therealmiket86
ChiefGritty said:
With a quarterback like Lopati there are a lot of considerations at play.

In theory for both college career NIL maximizing purposes as well as NFL prospects, he will be thinking about where he can start immediately, though there are also scheme considerations there too.

Though the other thing is, it would be easy to say Illinois can compile its biggest possible NIL bag and clear the decks so that Lopati walks in as a day 1 true freshman starter, and that being a better "deal" than perhaps a bit more money to sit and develop at Bama or wherever. But do WE want to do that? Is that money better allocated to more experienced QB's and/or other positions?

QB is really tricky in this new world. In the NFL it's conceptually simple, you find your great QB in the draft which locks them into a below-market salary, and then you can hang onto them (at much higher prices) for 15 years or whatever. You can't do either of those things in college.
Click to expand...

Obviously we can give him the 3 million we gave Houser. Investing big into a freshman qb is a big gamble.
 
#242      
ChiefGritty
therealmiket86 said:
Obviously we can give him the 3 million we gave Houser. Investing big into a freshman qb is a big gamble.
Click to expand...
Right, it feels like the first question we need to ask is are we absolutely committed to him being the undisputed uncontested Week 1 starter as a true freshman.

There's no shame if that answer is "no". Perhaps the answer *should* be "no".

Having said that, as we learned this year, the single most valuable thing you can have in college football is an excellent long-term starter at QB, and there is no other path to getting that than taking the risk on a young, new starter at QB. And it is a risk. Where would we be if Hudson Card had said yes?
 
Last edited:
#243      
therealmiket86
ChiefGritty said:
Right, it feels like the first question we need to ask is are we absolutely committed to him being the undisputed uncontested Week 1 starter as a true freshman.

There's no shame if that answer is "no". Perhaps the answer *should* be "no".

Having said that, as we learned this year, the single most valuable thing you can have in college football is an excellent long-term starter at QB, and there is no other path to getting that than taking the risk on a young, new starter at QB. And it is a risk. Where would we be if Hudson Card had said yes?
Click to expand...

Imagine if we had Bryce Underwood the last 2 years and not Luke. Underwood has a better pedigree and will be a stud. But right now Luke is the better player and was huge for us last year. It’s obviously a gamble for the coaching staff if we go into next year with Boyd, Clayton or Lopoti as QB1
 
#244      
blackdog
therealmiket86 said:
Imagine if we had Bryce Underwood the last 2 years and not Luke. Underwood has a better pedigree and will be a stud. But right now Luke is the better player and was huge for us last year. It’s obviously a gamble for the coaching staff if we go into next year with Boyd, Clayton or Lopoti as QB1
Click to expand...

The Luke of year 1 was nowhere close to the Luke of year 2 and 3 though so we already took that gamble on playing a young unproven guy with multiple years to develop. It was rough the first year but look how it paid off the next two.
 
#245      
TheDrinkinLincoln
blackdog said:
The Luke of year 1 was nowhere close to the Luke of year 2 and 3 though so we already took that gamble on playing a young unproven guy with multiple years to develop. It was rough the first year but look how it paid off the next two.
Click to expand...
Hoping Hauck and the defense can bail out a young in experienced QB
 
#246      
mhuml32
therealmiket86 said:
Unless our budget increases a lot I don’t see us paying millions for a prep qb. Look at the deals underwood and Riaola got. It doesn’t sound like we will add a transfer like Houser next year so there should be money and playing time available.
Click to expand...


Are we talking millions as in plural? I'm guessing Lopati is going to cross the seven-figure mark to sign him.
 
#249      
therealmiket86
blackdog said:
The Luke of year 1 was nowhere close to the Luke of year 2 and 3 though so we already took that gamble on playing a young unproven guy with multiple years to develop. It was rough the first year but look how it paid off the next two.
Click to expand...

For sure. people also don’t get how much money Luke turned down to stay here. Getting him to play for 1 million was a huge discount. Now we will pay more than that to get Lopati
 
#250      
mhuml32
I know this discussion started around a specific recruit, but zooming out: deciding where to overspend your NIL budget is unavoidable if you want a long-term roster strategy.

“Never overspend, always find value” sounds great, but when better-resourced programs are strategically overspending, true “value” often disappears. Like it or not, recruit pedigree still matters. You can choose to spend above your peers at QB, OL, DL, WR, etc., but that requires two things: (1) those priority investments have to hit, because they’ll take up a disproportionate share of your cap, and (2) your scouting and development have to outperform in the spots where you’re spending less.

The risk/reward is even higher at QB, OL, and DL given their portal value. You can pay up for a Cameron Wagner-type prospect or spend less on a Soren Fifer-type*. Historically, the higher-rated tier produces better results over volume — but they cost more NIL and may sit for a year or more.

*Just an example, I am not privy to what their NIL asks look like
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back