Coaching Carousel (Football)

#76      
And it isn't even THAT big in the modern scheme of things, reportedly $18M for him, $28M for his whole staff.

But then you add the commitments needed to attract anyone appealing to a dead-end job to the escalating ante to even put a P4 worthy roster on the field and it's beyond what any booster community there can swallow.

Don't think for a second we're in a stable equilibrium. The existing financial structure of this sport cannot sustain itself for very long.
I don't know how long it will go but the cracks will appear at the margins at some point. There might be a plentiful supply of boosters willing to write 6 and 7 figure checks at Ohio State, Alabama, Georgia and Oregon to name a few. But maybe not at Rutgers, Boston College or Syracuse. Or Illinois and Iowa. Big donations come with big and frequently outsized expectations. The day will come that some folks writing a $1m check will think that money would be better spent on charter schools/scholarships/medical research or ahem, political donations than helping a couple of 19 yr olds buy an Escalade so your team can go 8-4 instead of 5-7. But what do I know. I know I likely won't be around when the last of the implosions occur.
 
#77      
With 138 division I FBS teams, I would venture to say maybe 25-30 can actually play ball at this level. I was trying to find the number of profitable teams and keep finding that most are not. A 2022 review found that only 18 programs generated more money then they spent - and this was well before NIL.

I live near the University of Northern Iowa (a former FCS powerhouse) and where Illinois analyst Mark Farely comes from. The program here is in debt and pulling money from the general fund. Even they have NIL at a much lower rate. Programs like UNI, Illinois State, etc. cannot remain in the current arms race. My guess where we are going:

- FCS will go to the division II model of scholarships, no NIL
- Group of 6 will be the new FCS
- Power 4 will be reduced to about 32-40 teams and will be big $$$

The trade-up factor will be reduced. You watch other games because the affect they may have on your team. Once your team is irrelevant, you stop watching those other games, drying up TV revenue.
 
#78      
I don't know how long it will go but the cracks will appear at the margins at some point. There might be a plentiful supply of boosters willing to write 6 and 7 figure checks at Ohio State, Alabama, Georgia and Oregon to name a few. But maybe not at Rutgers, Boston College or Syracuse. Or Illinois and Iowa. Big donations come with big and frequently outsized expectations. The day will come that some folks writing a $1m check will think that money would be better spent on charter schools/scholarships/medical research or ahem, political donations than helping a couple of 19 yr olds buy an Escalade so your team can go 8-4 instead of 5-7. But what do I know. I know I likely won't be around when the last of the implosions occur.

Certainly money is important but Illinois and even more Iowa (and others) are having success not being near the top of the dollar food chain. Ohio State is finding out it takes more than money.

Before NIL, the 80's belonged to the Illini. The 90's and later certainly did not. There's always been ebbs and flows and ups and downs with successful athletic programs and/or teams.

Illinois has never won a basketball or football title in my lifetime. They very well may never do it, but I'm still here. Still a fan.

I don't fully understand when so many use the word sustainable or implosion. There's not a program in my lifetime that has sustained something like top "10" status of a team. Ohio State, Georgia, Alabama, Michigan have all had their downfalls. Nothing has ever been sustainable by that measure. It won't be in the future either. They all screw up at one point or another.

I'm glad JW and the coaches he has hired have the mindset of, within the rules, regardless of what they are, we're smart enough to figure out a way to have success.
 
#79      
no one ever thought Northwestern or Indiana or Illinois could be winners .
To the point I made elsewhere about us getting out of our own way, Illinois doesn't belong in that conversation and never did.

We're not Ohio State, but there ultimately have never been any real headwinds for this program that weren't strictly of our own making.
 
#80      
To the point I made elsewhere about us getting out of our own way, Illinois doesn't belong in that conversation and never did.

We're not Ohio State, but there ultimately have never been any real headwinds for this program that weren't strictly of our own making.
point remains that 99% of cfb fandom considered us perennial losers , for whatever reasons
 
#81      
point remains that 99% of cfb fandom considered us perennial losers , for whatever reasons
Who can blame them, many of our own fans felt the same way.

But to the point of Rutgers situation, there is still slack and inefficiency and the fog of change in the system. But there's less every year, and it takes money to seize the opportunity.

If Rutgers had the money to seize the opportunity, the first thing they would do is buy out Greg Schiano's contract, a recruiter/tyrant/cult of personality type who completely belongs to a bygone era of the sport in just the way Dabo or Fitzee do.
 
#82      
point remains that 99% of cfb fandom considered us perennial losers , for whatever reasons

I think for something to stick, it has to span more than a decade and have consistent results from multiple coaches:

Upstarts with Potential (Illinois is in this group):
- Minnesota
- Michigan State
- Nebraska
- Northwestern

Consistent 2nd Tier B10:
- Iowa
- Wisconsin
- Oregon

Historical Powers (decades of success and National Championships)
- Ohio State
- USC
- Penn State
- Michigan
 
#87      
I do not think he will be the HC there in 2030. Fanbases always get infatuated by the idea of bringing back "one of their own" - ours included, but this seems like a real stretch.🤷‍♂️
Like bring back Holacek? Yes. I think experience matters. Bret was a great college coach at Wisconsin. I think his time under Belichek made him even better. Rivers lacks this and it will be very difficult for him to do better than Doeren.
 
#88      
Like bring back Holacek? Yes. I think experience matters. Bret was a great college coach at Wisconsin. I think his time under Belichek made him even better. Rivers lacks this and it will be very difficult for him to do better than Doeren.
So we’re not bringing John back?
 
#89      
Like bring back Holacek? Yes. I think experience matters. Bret was a great college coach at Wisconsin. I think his time under Belichek made him even better. Rivers lacks this and it will be very difficult for him to do better than Doeren.
The situation has an odor of somebody's got somebody convinced that Rivers is going to open somebody's wallet and change the ceiling there in a way that wasn't going to happen with Doeren.

Whether that's actually going to happen we shall see. Happened with Rick Pitino and St. Johns! Happened with Joey McGuire and Texas Tech!

Knowing a thing or two about Doeren and the NC State fanbase, I will hazard a prediction that he was more realistic about the situation than they were.
 
#91      
The situation has an odor of somebody's got somebody convinced that Rivers is going to open somebody's wallet and change the ceiling there in a way that wasn't going to happen with Doeren.

Whether that's actually going to happen we shall see. Happened with Rick Pitino and St. Johns! Happened with Joey McGuire and Texas Tech!

Knowing a thing or two about Doeren and the NC State fanbase, I will hazard a prediction that he was more realistic about the situation than they were.
national college sports radio sees this as a NC State play for NIL money . perhaps a group of monied boosters promised $$$ if Rivers was signed as HC. I don’t believe anyone thinks he can run the office on day 1 as he should be able to
 
Back