Illinois Football Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#155      
It’s kind of funny how our football program would be so much better off right now in a pre-NIL era, whereas basketball seems uniquely primed for success under the current system.

It's just so different. There's 85!!! Scholarship athletes on a football team. Most of them should stick with where they are... but they always get antsy because they wanna play.
 
#156      

Mr. Tibbs

southeast DuPage
It's just so different. There's 85!!! Scholarship athletes on a football team. Most of them should stick with where they are... but they always get antsy because they wanna play.
I think a fairly large percentage of the transfers AFTER their year 2 are for money , more than simply playing time
 
#158      
I would say Illinois' football prospects were increasingly harmed by B1G realignment than NIL changes.
Yeah, I just meant strictly recruiting. And I also think the whole "There are so many more players on a football team!" argument only goes so far. It's not like there aren't over 3 times as many Illini fans at our football games than basketball games ... we do not have a smaller number of football fans than basketball fans. They are just less engaged due to a lack of history of winning. If we had the football history of success that we have in basketball (both historically and recently), we'd be as well positioned for football NIL as we are for basketball.

And that is the frustrating part ... we aren't Wake Forest or Washington State or whatever where there is a fundamental "ceiling" on the size of our fan base and donor support. Those types of schools have smaller enrollments and mostly alumni-only fan bases that are concentrated around their immediate locations. We are not Michigan or Alabama with bandwagon fans in every corner of the US, but we are surely somewhere in the middle with plenty of non-alumni fans drawn from all over a very high population state (source? I am one!!). It's a bit of a chicken-and-the-egg problem for galvanizing our potential donor base to pony up the NIL necessary to get top football talent, but man ... we need to put pretty much all of the DIA's efforts going forward to football NIL fundraising. Everything else that helps to secure our future as a desirable athletic program that is valuable to the Big Ten (or its successor or whatever) is downstream from that, IMO.
 
#161      
I actually think our NIL strategy is fine for where our program is. We seem to spend our NIL$ on player retention rather than player acquisition. You can still win (maybe not playoff worthy, but 7-8 games every year) finding 3 stars and coaching them up. Iowa, Wisconsin etc continually put these types of guys in the NFL. Of course you’re not going to have a 100% hit rate, but for those that do hit I think using NIL to keep those guys around is very smart. They already hace an incentive to stay so if we come close to matching their market value they should mostly stick around.

As crazy as NIL is for basketball, it seems like it’s even crazier for football. Blue chippers are easily getting 7 figures. We just don’t have the bankroll to overpay for studs and even if we did, that just seems like a super risky approach. If we get to the point where we are a consistent winner, player and NIL interest will rise. But it takes time.

That said…losing players like Tobe to the portal hurts and is alarming. Need guys to stick around to be a development program.
 
#162      

mhuml32

Cincinnati, OH
Pretty much, yes. Needs to be a focus. More important than facilities, etc.

The horse is already out of the barn. The athletic department spent generously on making facility upgrades when the narrative was your facilities made the difference. Now there are long-term capitol project payments needed as backfill to pay for those improvements through bonds and university payments, but the facilities are no longer the priority.
 
#163      
I actually think our NIL strategy is fine for where our program is. We seem to spend our NIL$ on player retention rather than player acquisition. You can still win (maybe not playoff worthy, but 7-8 games every year) finding 3 stars and coaching them up. Iowa, Wisconsin etc continually put these types of guys in the NFL. Of course you’re not going to have a 100% hit rate, but for those that do hit I think using NIL to keep those guys around is very smart. They already hace an incentive to stay so if we come close to matching their market value they should mostly stick around.

As crazy as NIL is for basketball, it seems like it’s even crazier for football. Blue chippers are easily getting 7 figures. We just don’t have the bankroll to overpay for studs and even if we did, that just seems like a super risky approach. If we get to the point where we are a consistent winner, player and NIL interest will rise. But it takes time.

That said…losing players like Tobe to the portal hurts and is alarming. Need guys to stick around to be a development program.
buuuutttt... we'd like to recruit 4 and 5 star guys out of HS. to do that, they have
to get paid and they have to see the field. that is the problem. save the $ for retention
and you'll never get those kids. basketball can pay 6 kids and be really good. its hard
to stretch NIL $ over 30-40 kids without kids and families feeling short changed..
 
#164      
I actually think our NIL strategy is fine for where our program is. We seem to spend our NIL$ on player retention rather than player acquisition. You can still win (maybe not playoff worthy, but 7-8 games every year) finding 3 stars and coaching them up. Iowa, Wisconsin etc continually put these types of guys in the NFL. Of course you’re not going to have a 100% hit rate, but for those that do hit I think using NIL to keep those guys around is very smart. They already hace an incentive to stay so if we come close to matching their market value they should mostly stick around.

As crazy as NIL is for basketball, it seems like it’s even crazier for football. Blue chippers are easily getting 7 figures. We just don’t have the bankroll to overpay for studs and even if we did, that just seems like a super risky approach. If we get to the point where we are a consistent winner, player and NIL interest will rise. But it takes time.

That said…losing players like Tobe to the portal hurts and is alarming. Need guys to stick around to be a development program.
Is it naïve to hope that Tobe might be back?
 
#165      
The horse is already out of the barn. The athletic department spent generously on making facility upgrades when the narrative was your facilities made the difference. Now there are long-term capitol project payments needed as backfill to pay for those improvements through bonds and university payments, but the facilities are no longer the priority.
There was a lot of money taken out in bonds during COVID right? Which if interest rates were low, was absolutely the right move. I remember seeing Illinois had a high debt around this time.
 
#166      
The harsh truth is Illini Football has been very bad for a long time. We are to the point where we consider mediocre a success. And I'm included in that. Bret's been an obvious step up. Good luck though trying to galvanize a fanbase for $ for 6 wins when the basketball team is going to the Elite Eight. That's just ugly ROI.
 
#169      
I actually think our NIL strategy is fine for where our program is. We seem to spend our NIL$ on player retention rather than player acquisition. You can still win (maybe not playoff worthy, but 7-8 games every year) finding 3 stars and coaching them up. Iowa, Wisconsin etc continually put these types of guys in the NFL. Of course you’re not going to have a 100% hit rate, but for those that do hit I think using NIL to keep those guys around is very smart. They already hace an incentive to stay so if we come close to matching their market value they should mostly stick around.

As crazy as NIL is for basketball, it seems like it’s even crazier for football. Blue chippers are easily getting 7 figures. We just don’t have the bankroll to overpay for studs and even if we did, that just seems like a super risky approach. If we get to the point where we are a consistent winner, player and NIL interest will rise. But it takes time.

That said…losing players like Tobe to the portal hurts and is alarming. Need guys to stick around to be a development program.
Malachi Nelson got $750,000 from USC without taking a snap, then transferring. Not endorsements.

It’s very crazy. I knew 7 figures was happening for top guys but always thought that the high #s we’re hearing about were a combination of $ direct from program somehow and things like public appearances, jersey sales, sponsorships, etc…
 
#172      
University Of Texas Hookem Horns GIF by Texas Longhorns
We’re looking south for help
 
#174      

TentakilRex

Land O Insects between Quincy-Macomb-Jacksonville
(Pure pipe dream idea, don't take seriously unless....)

While we are on Texas-ex's, let's poach Baylor for an ex-Texas coach who was a DB coach to be our temporary DB coach (he might better known for something else)

 
#175      

Illini92and96

Austin, TX
Malachi Nelson got $750,000 from USC without taking a snap, then transferring. Not endorsements.

It’s very crazy. I knew 7 figures was happening for top guys but always thought that the high #s we’re hearing about were a combination of $ direct from program somehow and things like public appearances, jersey sales, sponsorships, etc…
Seems like this has to change in the TBD iteration of NIL. That's just throwing money down the drain. If it were $75k that might be one thing, but $750k???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.