My concern: how much improvement can we expect from the transfer portal? Our incoming transfers last year were meh (except Madsen and to some extent, Anthony).
Smith got a late start because of the delay in hiring, but BYU’s transfers last year were meh. Most transfers appear to be meh (except Plummer, Allen and Larsson, but that is another story).
I hope Stephanovic doesnt decide to stay in Europe.
Texas just lost to TCU. That kind of makes me happy.
Which was always that much harder to take knowing that we had a good shot at Altman (however much his demands were unreasonable) prior to him going to Oregon, and us hiring Coach K… Que Sera, Sera
Let’s all remember that some/many/most of the stars from last year would likely have transferred had Coach K remained, and we might have been marginally better, but probably not enough. I personally would have given him another year, but understood fully when the AD did not do so.
Smith’s hire was not exactly what I was hoping for, but it is what it is.
The bottom line is that based upon Smith’s relative success at his previous positions, and his ability to get something out of essentially nothing (particularly in the form of player buy-in, defense, and effort) he may still turn out to be the right hire, and only the benefit of a few years of patience is going to tell.
(Oh, and, regardless of what @operaman86 says, I’d argue that the MWC and the top of the WAC were as competitive many years in the Majerus years as the PAC12 is currently. Which, added to the lack of any sense of Utah as a basketball power in the minds of kids who were born after the Majerus era, will create recruiting challenges until both the perception of Utah, and the league change.)
I understand what operaman is saying, but maybe he came across a little too strongly. Honestly I feel his concerns because I share many of them.
I’m not going to get into all the issues I have with Smith other than what I’ve seen on the recruiting front. He missed badly on the Farmington kid, who was “Utah’s to lose” up until we lost him…to a greased pole named Pope. All his other HS targets haven’t been anywhere near PAC level talent, from what I understand (which I admit isn’t much). Smith seems to be aiming at a low bar then missing badly. I think this off season will be a ‘make it or break it’ for Smith. If he doesn’t bring in a high level HS recruit and one or two high level transfers then what we saw this year is what we’ll get every year.
I’m hoping for the best, I’m hoping for some marquee players coming to Utah, I’ve got my fingers crossed buy I’m not holding my breath.
I heard Riley and Chris Grant discuss Colin Chandler last week. They said he was coming to Utah until the Y came forward with an NIL deal somewhere between $100K and $1 mil (courtesy of Ryan Smith). Said or implied that the U was caught flatfooted and hadn’t geared up for NIL deals yet. FWIW
This is probably a big a reason as any as to why we are failing on recruits.
That said (and this will piss off any lurking zoobs), I can’t understand the mentality of this. I was never a prospect, but I’ve met kids who said they would walk on to Utah before they would accept a scholy from byu-provo. I guess money talks louder than I suspected.
That is interesting. Thanks for sharing. If that’s the case then Harlan needs to get his ■■■■ together ASAP.
And, Ryan Smith is scum.
Boycott the Jazz!
A milly is a milly.
This is why I secretly cheer for the Jazz to lose each game, and I live in Utah.
Notes from the underground.
Yeah well the thing is, that’s arguably not NIL… it’s pay-for-play, and the kind of scheme the NCAA is now investigating. Sure it was the NCAA’s own fault for not setting clear rules upfront, but it feels like something’s gonna give.
Seems painfully obvious that there ought to be an ironclad rule against any NIL contact with recruits prior to signing. But how to enforce that? It’s hard to see how this is not going to get uglier and uglier.
I agree totally with this. I certainly want anybody with talent to take advantage of their NIL to profit from their talent as the market may allow. But, I am also a believer in regulation that makes sense so that the market works as it should.
To that point, this article. Five-star recruit in Class of 2023 signs agreement with collective that could pay him more than $8 million – The Athletic
On Friday, a five-star recruit in the Class of 2023 signed an agreement with a school’s NIL collective that could pay him more than $8 million by the end of his junior year of college, The Athletic has learned. He’ll be paid $350,000 almost immediately, followed by monthly payouts escalating to more than $2 million per year once he begins his college career, in exchange for making public appearances and taking part in social media promotions and other NIL activities “on behalf of (the collective) or a third party.”
While there’s no centralized database to reference other contracts, two NIL experts believe it’s the largest individual NIL deal signed by a non-professional athlete.
Blake Lawrence, the founder of the NIL marketing platform Opendorse, said a deal that high seems like an outlier but added, “Whatever casual sports fans or coaches think student-athletes are earning from collectives, they’re (undershooting) by 10X. While $2 million (a year) is wild, $200,000 isn’t, but most people are thinking they’re getting $20,000.”
Lawyer Mike Caspino, who drafted the contract, allowed The Athletic to review and verify the contract in exchange for keeping the player and collectives’ identities anonymous. It provides a window into how donor-driven third parties tied to specific schools operate.
As per NCAA rules, the contract explicitly states, “nothing in this Agreement constitutes any form of inducement for (the athlete) to enroll at any school and/or join any athletic team.” There is no mention of any specific university, only that he be “enrolled at an NCAA member institution and a member of the football team at such institution,” ostensibly to avoid violating the NCAA’s pay-for-play rule. The only specific circumstances by which the collective could terminate the contract early is if the player violates a confidentiality clause or a clause about conducting himself with “the utmost character and integrity.”
“There’s an element of trust there,” Caspino said in regards to a collective offering that much money with no written assurance the athlete will sign with the donors’ school come December.
But in exchange for receiving his lucrative advances, the player hands over to the collective exclusive rights to use of his NIL, which would then negotiate outside opportunities on his behalf. In theory, that could dissuade him from entering the transfer portal, as he would not be able to make paid appearances promoting his next school.
Caspino, who says he has worked on deals like this with about 30 high school players, said the original terms were far more one-sided toward the collective. He decried some of the tactics those groups and NIL agents are using to maintain control over the athlete.
In one draft version of another deal The Athletic reviewed, the collective agreed to pay an athlete $1.5 million across two years but could “from time to time” ask for repayment of that money, plus a 10 percent commission and expenses — even if the agreement were to be terminated.
“Man, that is terrifying, quite frankly,” said Malik S. Jackson, a Florida-based attorney who works in the NIL space. “That was a terrible provision, and if that’s put in, that’s a sign the collective is not athlete-centric. It can’t be.”
Jackson compared it to one-sided contracts in the music industry commonly referred to as “360 deals,” where record companies claim a share of an artist’s future earnings.
Caspino, however, was able to negotiate that language out of his client’s particular contract. It’s unclear if it has been included in others. Jackson said he hasn’t seen language like that in any contracts he has dealt with on behalf of companies but has not dealt with collectives often.
Caspino said he has also seen language in which the collective retains a player’s exclusive NIL rights for the duration of the contract even if it’s terminated early.
“There’s always some hook in there, that if they’re paying money, somehow, someway, that kid is going to have a deep financial inducement to stay at that university,” he said. “I’ll never have one of my clients sign that.”
His concern is that most high school players are signing deals like these without running them by an attorney first.
“The word ‘exclusive’ is the most expensive word for any athlete in any marketing agreement,” Lawrence said. “Student-athletes should own and maintain their NIL rights.”
But for some athletes and families, it may be too tempting to sign what’s offered, no matter the terms.
The fact that a high school junior has been promised more than $8 million to entice him toward a specific school — even if not put in writing — no doubt will horrify college administrators, many of them already frustrated by the NCAA’s inability to police NIL.
Last month, the NCAA Board of Directors asked the Division I Council to prepare a report by April assessing the impact NIL is having in recruiting, among other issues.
“We are concerned that some activity in the name, image and likeness space may not only be violating NCAA recruiting rules, particularly those prohibiting booster involvement, but also may be impacting the student-athlete experience negatively in some ways,” said board chair Jere Morehead, the president at the University of Georgia.
But many in the profession believe the NCAA wants no part in trying to enact restrictions on athletes’ NIL compensation due to last summer’s Supreme Court decision in the Alston antitrust case. As long as all parties are smart enough to not put anything recruiting-related in writing and the athlete can prove he or she is providing legitimate NIL services, there may be no limit to the rapidly soaring dollar figures permeating recruiting.
“Nobody knows what these kids are actually worth because there’s not enough data,” Lawrence said. “Imagine you’re selling your home, Zillow never existed and someone comes up and says they’ll give you $50,000 for your house. You have no idea whether that’s good or bad, but it sounds like a lot, so you take it. But then you go and search Zillow and find out it was actually worth $500,000.”
The top high school prospects are quickly learning they’re worth far more than that.
Hell, maybe kids will stay in school longer since they can make more playing college ball than pro (TIC)
With this kind of money being thrown around, they should start considering making athletic scholarships need-based. In my mind, someone making well into the 6 figures annually due to their association with a college athletic program, should be able to handle the cost of their education.
So, in the end, what’s worse… The bagmen who funnel funds to players under the table, (see Zion Williamson named in new book on college basketball FBI scandal - Sports Illustrated) or, these new collectives, who essentially are bagmen with some legal basis behind them?
I am not sure which is worse, but it sure makes me feel more dirty about being interested in college athletics. Not that I would ever give it up, just feel a bit more dirty.
Interesting article. I notice they mentioned how the Williamson’s lived in a nice place in Durham, but then never mentioned Coach K.
Yeah, its funny how coaches like Miller, Self, and Krizolonski never get punished in that way (though Arizona did finally get rid of Miller, but only once he stopped winning big). College basketball, in that way, works a lot like the mob, gotta keep the godfather insulated from the deeds of the street bosses.
Wasn’t it once discussed here that Coach Larry wouldn’t stoop to the tactics and thereby lost recruiting ground?
Very possibly. I was more concerned with Larry keeping the recruits that he did land.