Illinois Football Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#52      
John Wooden says "hello!"

i.e. same as it ever was. the name of the game is plausible deniability
1767636271860.png
 
#57      
I know it’s still early, but how is everyone feeling about the portal so far?

I’m not going to lie, a small part of me was disappointed when I saw that we got Houser, but after some consideration, I feel like he could be a good bridge guy for us. Like some others, I got sucked into the splashier names like Minchey and Kienholz, but if we really think that Boyd or Lopati are going to be our guy for the future, I guess we don’t need someone with more than a year of eligibility.

But, if we were looking for someone with a few years of eligibility, do you guys think we could have landed one of those two, going up against the likes of Louisville and Nebraska? Are we considered contenders with those types of schools, given the modern landscape of college football? I guess I just don’t really know where we stand nationally when it comes to to NIL and what resources are made available to our football program.
I think Bret wanted a one year guy & Leavitt and Hoover were just going to be too expensive . Sometimes the best signing (or trade in basebal) are the ones you DONT do
 
#62      
Will Ferrell Chill GIF


It's difficult to see all of the players leaving without the subsequent replacements, but it's going to be okay. A couple of these losses hurt, but good players will also flow in. It's likely going to be a net-neutral or slight positive once everything shakes out.
 
#63      
This is getting pretty bad… you can’t convince me that returning basically no players on the defense is a good thing. No matter how bad the defense was last season.
Will Ferrell Chill GIF


It's difficult to see all of the players leaving without the subsequent replacements, but it's going to be okay. A couple of these losses hurt, but good players will also flow in. It's likely going to be a net-neutral or slight positive once everything shakes out.
We go through this every spring with basketball. Do people not yet understand how this all works?
 
#65      
We go through this every spring with basketball. Do people not yet understand how this all works?
Dude I’ve followed this (transfer recruiting) more closely than anyone. Check out my charts on previous pages. Deflections at this level is not the normal here. Are you claiming it is?

Well land players I’m sure. Replacing an entire defense in the portal tho… that’s difficult.
 
#66      
Good for the players. Coaches and their agents have been able to find more lucrative landing spots while still coaching at School A forever. Yes, most of their contracts have buyout clauses now, but those also are usually paid by the new landing spot.
Why should a player have to gamble by going into the portal without a landing spot? The toothpaste has been out of the tube for a while now.
I am all for players having one "free" transfer. After that they should sit out one year like the old time, unless the head coach that they committed to leaves the program. i think this could he stop having free agency every year of 3000 people in the portal.

I bet I get killed for this take.
 
#67      
Will Ferrell Chill GIF


It's difficult to see all of the players leaving without the subsequent replacements, but it's going to be okay. A couple of these losses hurt, but good players will also flow in. It's likely going to be a net-neutral or slight positive once everything shakes out.
I agree with all of what you said except net neutral or slight positive. It needs to be a large net positive. We had a bad defense last year. We need to identify much better talent. (And I think we will)
 
#69      
Will Ferrell Chill GIF


It's difficult to see all of the players leaving without the subsequent replacements, but it's going to be okay. A couple of these losses hurt, but good players will also flow in. It's likely going to be a net-neutral or slight positive once everything shakes out.
Net neutral would be disappointing, unless we're totally changing the defense and everyone has to re-learn things. That said, I think we're going to see a net positive, and many of these things have been known or planned.

Bret's been open about the resources being much better this year, so I believe this is a major overhaul to get us closer to a playoff-level team.
 
#71      
I am all for players having one "free" transfer. After that they should sit out one year like the old time, unless the head coach that they committed to leaves the program. i think this could he stop having free agency every year of 3000 people in the portal.

I bet I get killed for this take.

You shouldn't get killed, and I get the sentiment! The problem is the court system asks, "if this is such a good idea, why are other university students allowed to transfer as many times as they want without restrictions? or why are university employees allowed to change their employers as often as they like?"

Universities are never going to restrict other non-athlete students in this way or force all of their employees sign non-competes (which would create many other lawsuits), so here we are.
 
#72      
I am all for players having one "free" transfer. After that they should sit out one year like the old time, unless the head coach that they committed to leaves the program. i think this could he stop having free agency every year of 3000 people in the portal.

I bet I get killed for this take.
I'm right with you.
The way it is right now is not sustainable.
 
#74      
I agree with all of what you said except net neutral or slight positive. It needs to be a large net positive. We had a bad defense last year. We need to identify much better talent. (And I think we will)
agree

a net neutral is a big disappointment
 
#75      
You shouldn't get killed, and I get the sentiment! The problem is the court system asks, "if this is such a good idea, why are other university students allowed to transfer as many times as they want without restrictions? or why are university employees allowed to change their employers as often as they like?"

Universities are never going to restrict other non-athlete students in this way or force all of their employees sign non-competes (which would create many other lawsuits), so here we are.
Very good answer. In short, per the Supreme Court of the United States of America, it is very illegal to restrict student athletes from transferring.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back