Let's face it, we are never going to be able to compete at the dollar levels of most P6 schools unless Mr. Kurtz discovers a long-dormant love for college basketball...which isn't happening (but more on him later).
So, we have to do things a little differently...take advantage of what you DO have...and perhaps what others are not focused on. The Wisconsin story (the "transfer" player who had signed a 2 year contract) hit on the concept of multi year contracts which I had been thinking about for a while.
Our strength supposedly is in developing players...give us 4 year guys and we can compete. Great.
High school players have never been as undervalued as they are now. Beyond the top 25...maybe 50, there isn't much traction with them...and my guess is, beyond this level they are getting little to no NIL coming out of HS.
So, maybe we combine these two things - our ability (and want) to develop players over 4 years with the availability of HS talant, with the pending rule change allowing schools to pay players directly, into a strategy.
Think about roster building; every year target 4 or so HS players (obviously you pursue more than this to actually get 4, but bring in 4) at varying degrees of talent. Recruit in the 50 or 75 and up category...not the superstar level, but players of ability.
Create a salary structure dependent on the players ranking/ability; sign all players to 4 year contracts, with a salary that increases each year, and is fully guaranteed; if said player transfers at any point, they owe back all prior year salary. Again, you put this in the contract to avoid all doubt. And before the naysayers say they will never sign such a thing...hear me out.
Say at the low end you pay the player 25,000 as a freshman...50K So, 75K Jr and 100K Sr. that is a 4 year salary of 250K, for a player perhaps that was ranked 200 or higher in the HS class...guaranteed. He wasnt looking at anything close to that.
In fact, these are the kids that go to Monmouth/mid major hoping to make a name for themselves and maybe...just maybe after 2 or 3 years, they get someone to pay them. This option gives them a guarantee.
The scale of course goes up from there, with similar jumps each year, and for arguments sake, lets say tops out at 200K for a freshman...which would amount to 1.4 million guaranteed over 4 years. I would think a top 100 player would bite at that.
I have mapped it out, and at its maturity, this is a team salary of about 3 million. Which better be easily doable or what are we bothering to talk about. And frankly, with a budget that better be at 4 million or above, leaves room to bring in 1 high level transfer a year.
Of course if kids blow up say after their Soph year they can threaten to transfer...but remember he has to pay back years 1 and 2...so if he was the high end HS player that would be 500K to pay back; even if he's now being offered 1 million, that really is only 500K after the payback...which is only 100K greater than what I have us paying him in year 3...which makes for an easy renegotiation, and roster continuity.
There are risks to this...on both sides. You can be locked in to a player that simply doesn't pan out...and you have to pay him. But that is why you have to have some penalty in there for kids that transfer prematurely...my idea of "salary clawback" is just 1 way of having some disincentive to transfer. But if we are risking guaranteed salaries for 4 years, there has to be some risk on the other end.
Look, I know there are holes in this...after all this isn't my job...lol...but we have to have a plan, and we have to think differently if we are going to succeed.
Re: Mr. Kurtz, stop with the niceties and "oh Mr. Kurtz your alma mater really needs you" type of "reach out"; fish or cut bait. Use your resources in the sporting world to get some F1 contacts and use those to get to him. He is obviously a competitive person, so feed into that. Maybe set up an "IT Security" curriculum that you put his name on, have him help develop, whatever, feed his ego...and the pro quo for that quid is his maybe making a "matching grant" to the school of say $3 million a year, to be matched by the school for NIL purposes. I dont know if this would work, but the days of hoping and asking nicely have to stop...it's time to find out.
Apologize for the length...but after watching 3/4 of that debacle last night (I had to walk out about half way thru the second half that was abysmal) and after going to games for more than 40 years, the frustration level is at an all time high. Something has to be done.
So, we have to do things a little differently...take advantage of what you DO have...and perhaps what others are not focused on. The Wisconsin story (the "transfer" player who had signed a 2 year contract) hit on the concept of multi year contracts which I had been thinking about for a while.
Our strength supposedly is in developing players...give us 4 year guys and we can compete. Great.
High school players have never been as undervalued as they are now. Beyond the top 25...maybe 50, there isn't much traction with them...and my guess is, beyond this level they are getting little to no NIL coming out of HS.
So, maybe we combine these two things - our ability (and want) to develop players over 4 years with the availability of HS talant, with the pending rule change allowing schools to pay players directly, into a strategy.
Think about roster building; every year target 4 or so HS players (obviously you pursue more than this to actually get 4, but bring in 4) at varying degrees of talent. Recruit in the 50 or 75 and up category...not the superstar level, but players of ability.
Create a salary structure dependent on the players ranking/ability; sign all players to 4 year contracts, with a salary that increases each year, and is fully guaranteed; if said player transfers at any point, they owe back all prior year salary. Again, you put this in the contract to avoid all doubt. And before the naysayers say they will never sign such a thing...hear me out.
Say at the low end you pay the player 25,000 as a freshman...50K So, 75K Jr and 100K Sr. that is a 4 year salary of 250K, for a player perhaps that was ranked 200 or higher in the HS class...guaranteed. He wasnt looking at anything close to that.
In fact, these are the kids that go to Monmouth/mid major hoping to make a name for themselves and maybe...just maybe after 2 or 3 years, they get someone to pay them. This option gives them a guarantee.
The scale of course goes up from there, with similar jumps each year, and for arguments sake, lets say tops out at 200K for a freshman...which would amount to 1.4 million guaranteed over 4 years. I would think a top 100 player would bite at that.
I have mapped it out, and at its maturity, this is a team salary of about 3 million. Which better be easily doable or what are we bothering to talk about. And frankly, with a budget that better be at 4 million or above, leaves room to bring in 1 high level transfer a year.
Of course if kids blow up say after their Soph year they can threaten to transfer...but remember he has to pay back years 1 and 2...so if he was the high end HS player that would be 500K to pay back; even if he's now being offered 1 million, that really is only 500K after the payback...which is only 100K greater than what I have us paying him in year 3...which makes for an easy renegotiation, and roster continuity.
There are risks to this...on both sides. You can be locked in to a player that simply doesn't pan out...and you have to pay him. But that is why you have to have some penalty in there for kids that transfer prematurely...my idea of "salary clawback" is just 1 way of having some disincentive to transfer. But if we are risking guaranteed salaries for 4 years, there has to be some risk on the other end.
Look, I know there are holes in this...after all this isn't my job...lol...but we have to have a plan, and we have to think differently if we are going to succeed.
Re: Mr. Kurtz, stop with the niceties and "oh Mr. Kurtz your alma mater really needs you" type of "reach out"; fish or cut bait. Use your resources in the sporting world to get some F1 contacts and use those to get to him. He is obviously a competitive person, so feed into that. Maybe set up an "IT Security" curriculum that you put his name on, have him help develop, whatever, feed his ego...and the pro quo for that quid is his maybe making a "matching grant" to the school of say $3 million a year, to be matched by the school for NIL purposes. I dont know if this would work, but the days of hoping and asking nicely have to stop...it's time to find out.
Apologize for the length...but after watching 3/4 of that debacle last night (I had to walk out about half way thru the second half that was abysmal) and after going to games for more than 40 years, the frustration level is at an all time high. Something has to be done.
Last edited:
