Rich, getting richer

It’s Early Signing Day, so I’ll have a post up later to discuss the official members of Georgia’s class of 2020.

In the meantime, a reminder of how things are on the recruiting front these days:

Rivals.com has 33 players in the Class of 2020 rated as five-star recruits. A whopping 22 of them have either committed, or are predicted by Rivals experts, to sign with just five schools: Clemson (6)Georgia (6)LSU (4)Ohio State (3) and Alabama (3).

That’s five schools getting two-thirds of the very best recruits in America.

And to think some of you still believe that paying college athletes would be bad, because it would lead to the top talent being concentrated at the richest programs.

28 Comments

Filed under Recruiting

28 responses to “Rich, getting richer

  1. Derek

    If you have a problem, I’d say the best answer is to make it worse. Also, if you create incentives that are irrelevant to either academic or athletic achievement we can really make college football reach its intended potential.

    In fact, if this model continues, id like to see the transfer portal be a weekly free agency market. If a kid at one insignificant college is really doing well, why can’t alabama offer to sell his autographs for $x (x=whatever it takes) so that the kid can be on campus for the next game?

    After all, theres nothing stopping coaches from leaving in midseason and signing with another team. Call it the “petrino model.” Its freedom!!

    Man, what do you think osu would pay to have jamarr chase switch sides! The possibilities are endless!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Also, if you create incentives that are irrelevant to either academic or athletic achievement we can really make college football reach its intended potential.

      LMAO! What do you think the conferences have been doing for the last two decades?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Derek

        Like i said: See a fire, find a can of gas. Apply liberally.

        Like

        • Horse is already out of the barn. Paying players will have little effect on recruiting. (It’ll likely have a bigger effect on facilities spending.)

          If CFB is already burning, though, why are you still following the sport?

          Like

          • Derek

            I follow the georgia bulldogs.

            Like

            • A distinction without a difference

              Like

              • Derek

                The difference is that my attention to the georgia bulldogs football team is in no way an endorsement of how college football is run in general.

                I would like the team i follow to be part of something approaching respectability. I would go the opposite direction of the one you propose. I think that would be a good thing for all involved.

                Like

                • Paying players isn’t respectable?

                  The difference is that my attention to the georgia bulldogs football team is in no way an endorsement of how college football is run in general.

                  Cool. Then if UGA athletes get paid, you can still pay attention without endorsing it. Problem solved!

                  Liked by 1 person

                • 4th & Kirby

                  So go ahead and pay everyone according to their ability. No limitations whatsoever on NIL. But, in my opinion, remove all athletic scholarships and hold athletes to the same academic standard for entrance that all other students are held to.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Derek

                  Yes. Exactly.

                  Lets play with students.

                  I think we’ll still show up.

                  Like

                • CB

                  You definitely would since you’ve stated time and again that you support a DIII model. Did you get your Berry College season tickets yet?

                  Like

                • CB

                  Removing athletic scholarships is a total misnomer because you people don’t understand that any excess money from a current scholarship goes back in the player’s pocket. The issue is there is a cap on payment which is illegal. Only a communist would support our current system.

                  Like

                • Derek

                  You people?

                  Like

                • Derek

                  The current situation of recruiting/signing kids who:

                  Can’t be students and/or dont want to be isnt respectable.

                  Paying an incentive to be even less engaged doesn’t help.

                  Like

          • Tony Barnfart

            Can we at least get the bathrooms and DooDoo ice fixed before we route all the moneys to the slaves ?

            Liked by 2 people

          • Anonymous

            Horse is already out of the barn.

            The horse has been dead for so long that it has evaporated into the ether. You are simply beating the spot where local legend has it that a horse gave up the ghost.

            Like

    • DawgPhan

      But what would be the problem with students switching schools? What would be the downside to the student if he suddenly was able to access more of his value. If you are academically eligible I am not sure why we would want to arbitrarily restricted the movement of a particular type of person.

      Like

      • Texas Dawg

        If we are going to continue the illusion that they are student athletes rather than semi pro players, then there are a lot of problems. To maintain academic eligibility you actually have to be in classes. How do you reconcile a grade started at one institution transfer mid term and them finish at another institution that has totally different testing/grading criteria? You know all these football players at Auburn taking calculus would struggle when they transferred to North Avenue Trade School and tried to finish their calculus in a class full of NATS football players.

        Like

        • Tell me, is that a concern you have for students who aren’t college athletes, but get paid for something?

          Like

          • Texas Dawg

            Not sure where you are going with that question. I was talking about Derek’s weekly free agent market idea.

            “In fact, if this model continues, id like to see the transfer portal be a weekly free agency market. If a kid at one insignificant college is really doing well, why can’t alabama offer to sell his autographs for $x (x=whatever it takes) so that the kid can be on campus for the next game?”

            No student football or otherwise could just transfer mid term and pick up at a new school. Once enrollment for semester is closed, you can’t just drop in to a class and get credit. You have to wait for the new term to start. As for other students, we are not talking about them, we are discussing CFB players. Trying to compare regulations for them vs other students is like comparing apples to automobiles.

            Like

      • DawgPhan

        And the upside to student switching schools with less restrictions is that the sport is healthier. The quality of football improves.

        Like

    • CB

      And the mandatory CFB draft. Don’t forget about that draft lol. Why don’t you bring that up anymore? It’s such a genius talking point. It’d be shame to see it go by the wayside.

      The nonsense hypotheticals are endless with this guy. At least he’s consistent. The biggest liberal on this blog is pro socialism in college football.

      Like

  2. DawgPhan

    But what would happen when

    checks notes

    all the same schools get all the top talent. Wont someone please think of the children.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. WNCDawg

    Ehhhhhh 12 players from the state of Georgia in the top 100 and UGA has 2 signed. Seems Like it just means more other places.

    Like

  4. Looks like we need a bagman to stop Clemson from turning into Tennessee of the 90s.

    Like

  5. Clemson has been getting way too many of Georgia’s best.

    Like

  6. practicaldawg

    How much would Mullen have to pay a 5* to commit?

    Liked by 1 person