Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 hours ago, campcrunk said:

"Dillingham said he’s seen contracts that also permit schools to end or reduce a player’s salary over the course of the deal, something reported earlier this spring by Yahoo Sports via Illinois law professor Michael Leroy, who uncovered more than 90 different player contracts through open-records requests.

'These NIL contracts read like employee handbooks that reserve a right of employment at will for employers,” he said. “They don’t use ‘at will’ but the concept is, they can terminate the contract.'”

There's going to be a whole bunch of fuckery, some kids are going to get Jordan Addisoned, some schools are going to come off looking very bad, and some extremely expensive players are not going to contribute meaningfully - at least not initially - despite intense pressure to do so. It's going to be an interesting season

If Micah Hudson, out of HS, had signed a big third party NIL deal, and DeLoitte didn’t get around to reviewing it until November, say, and it got turned down- how do you think Tech responds? I bet they shrug and say, “Micah, we’ll resubmit, but the clearinghouse is telling us it needs to be low five figures, not high six figures”. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, statsman said:

If Micah Hudson, out of HS, had signed a big third party NIL deal, and DeLoitte didn’t get around to reviewing it until November, say, and it got turned down- how do you think Tech responds? I bet they shrug and say, “Micah, we’ll resubmit, but the clearinghouse is telling us it needs to be low five figures, not high six figures”. 

What happens is Cody Campbell/Matador club sue that arbitrary judgement was made to limit a players value.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
3 minutes ago, RockyMountainHighHorn said:

You want some posters to step away from the ledge? Is it wrong to hope some do the opposite? 

push GIF

  • Haha 6
Posted
3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

What happens is Cody Campbell/Matador club sue that arbitrary judgement was made to limit a players value.

I chose Micah Hudson for a reason- a high cost HS recruitment, who showed in his freshman year that he was not going to produce right out of the box. In my opinion, Tech doesn’t sue for the right to overpay. They decide, instead, to not throw good money after bad. 
 
The inevitable Clearinghouse lawsuit will be over a player the school wants to continue to pay. 

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, statsman said:

I chose Micah Hudson for a reason- a high cost HS recruitment, who showed in his freshman year that he was not going to produce right out of the box. In my opinion, Tech doesn’t sue for the right to overpay. They decide, instead, to not throw good money after bad. 
 
The inevitable Clearinghouse lawsuit will be over a player the school wants to continue to pay. 

But your example is a poor example especially in the sense you're trying to use it. You can't look at what he did after he enrolled because the deals are set for approval before they do anything with the current format. The schools/NIL collective will sue because it's limiting their talent acquisition out of HS. As we all know not every position is a position you can fill like WR in the portal. So HS talent acquisition at certain positions like QB, OL, DL, EDGE, CB are very very important. 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
11 hours ago, Not a Sock said:

This just reinforces my belief that this recruiting class is absolutely cooked. Because nothing gives me any indication that Texas was actually prepared for this. Maybe Texas is proven right down the road and this blows up in people’s face, that fallout will happen after this class in on campus.

I expect Texas to assess it resources, the field, the rules, and see if out Ground Rules and Assumptions still make sense. I expect Texas to adapt the strategy, making sure to not make any changes that will upset the current or future locker dynamic. I won’t be surprised if Texas gets more aggressive on third party NIL; I would be surprised if Texas starts dropping bags of cash, pays agents directly or starts paying HSers before they enroll. 
 
I expect that Texas will be very upfront about what a player should expect, and when, and who bears risk at different points. That will not appeal to a certain player (the kind letting their “uncle” handle everything) and will appeal to another type (getting good counsel). You miss out on some great ones that way, but that’s part of what makes a player a “Texas guy”, in my opinion. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Nuge said:

Name a school that wouldn't love to drop a dime on Texas if we were being shady and breaking rules.

I found an applicable map for who would turn them in in this situation

IMG_3947.thumb.jpeg.78613a881106fb47c118f2b53f7589be.jpeg

Edited by NoName
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted

Seems like we’ve been reading for a few years now that certain programs make promises they can’t keep, but is there any evidence that it actually matters? Mark Bowman’s family doesn’t seem overly concerned with what happened to Jordan Addison.

Betting against the capacity for cognitive dissonance in human beings when it’s in their own self interest is a proven loser. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
12 hours ago, campcrunk said:

"Dillingham said he’s seen contracts that also permit schools to end or reduce a player’s salary over the course of the deal, something reported earlier this spring by Yahoo Sports via Illinois law professor Michael Leroy, who uncovered more than 90 different player contracts through open-records requests.

'These NIL contracts read like employee handbooks that reserve a right of employment at will for employers,” he said. “They don’t use ‘at will’ but the concept is, they can terminate the contract.'”

There's going to be a whole bunch of fuckery, some kids are going to get Jordan Addisoned, some schools are going to come off looking very bad, and some extremely expensive players are not going to contribute meaningfully - at least not initially - despite intense pressure to do so. It's going to be an interesting season

Nathan Kalman-Lamb: How oppressive Florida State revenue-sharing deals show continued exploitation of college football players

Quote

Revenue sharing is now a feature of college athletics. Thanks to the house settelement signed in May, schools are permitted to spend $20.5m annually across sports, including through expanded scholarships and direct payments (of which it appears football will generally receive approximately 75%). This would seem to mitigate the longstanding problem of exploitation in college football.

However, in a sport still defined by extreme injury, recently disclosed provisions in the new Florida State University (FSU) revenue-sharing contract show that schools appear to simply be finding new ways to extract value from players, as ever at startling personal cost. Per a CBS Sports report, the new FSU contract being distributed to football players reads, in part, “the following circumstances create a breach of contract by Student-Athlete: Student-Athlete experiences any illness or injury which is serious enough to affect the value of the rights granted to [school] under this Agreement.”

In other words: If a player gets injured, the school has leverage to cancel the deal.  Darren Heitner, adjunct law professor at the University of Florida and University of Miami, and an expert on college sports’ name, image and likeness (NIL) deals, was stunned by what he found upon reading the contracts. “I take no issue with the drafter of a contract creating a document that leans in favor of the drafting party. In fact, that’s expected,” he told us.

“However, there is a problem with a contract when it is so unfair, one-sided, and oppressive that it shocks the conscience. Reviewing the terms and considering that sometimes 17-year-olds with no legal counsel will be asked to sign on the dotted line, my takeaway is that this rises to the level of unconscionability unless thoroughly negotiated. I have reviewed dozens of revenue-sharing agreements and none compare.”

In a statement given to CBS Sports, FSU said in part that “Each individual situation will be unique and the hypotheticals are impossible to predict. However, we are committed to continuing to provide an elite experience for our student-athletes in all aspects of their collegiate career.”

Injury, of course, is an inherent feature of college football. In my recent book The End of College Football: On the Human Cost of an All-American Game we observe that every 2.6 years of participation in football doubles the chances of contracting the degenerative brain disorder chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) and that 91 percent of American college football players’ brains examined in a pivotal Boston University study displayed neuropathology consistent with CTE. Similarly, participation in football likely increases the chances of developing Parkinson’s disease by 61 percent compared to athletes in other organized sports (and that risk is 2.93 times greater at the college/pro level).

In the book, we interviewed twenty-five former big-time college football players about their experiences in the sport. Many of those players suffered extremely debilitating injuries that caused them to lose seasons or even end careers, including knee reconstructions, torn AC joints, neck surgeries, torn achilles tendons, and countless concussions.

One player told us, “Before I got to college, never had an injury. By the time I left college, I had a medical record book of over six hundred pages. From rehab notes, surgery notes, to MRIs. I had over twelve MRIs total, five knee surgeries. This was while I was playing. . . . Later I found out that I had four torn labrum. So I have a torn labrum on both shoulders, torn labrum on both hips.”

Thus, the question of players being relieved of their contractually agreed upon compensation as a consequence of injury is hardly academic. It will happen, and to many. “I think the recently revealed contract details from Florida State exemplifies the current attitude of university officials who have completely lost sight of their jobs as educators,” former UCLA and NFL player Chris Kluwe told us. “They view college athletes (and students) as slaves to be bought and sold and not human beings, which runs contrary to everything the education system should be.

“In a sport like football where athletes are predominately black and in a state like Florida where the current government seems intent on returning to the Antebellum Era, the fact school officials feel the need to include severe language curtailing players’ rights to the product of their labor is intensely concerning, and highlights the need for a college players union to protect athletes from would-be modern day plantation owners.”

The situation is compounded by the fact that universities don’t provide long-term health insurance to the players, leaving them to bear all the associated costs of their physical hardship. One player we spoke to for the book actually told us that “Long term, just strictly financially … it will have [ended up], like I paid money to play college football.”

Until such time as there are genuine occupational health and safety protections befitting a profession with such profound inherent dangers, it’s clear that the sport is not actually entering a more humane era. The House Settlement has ushered in little more than a new modality for the same old exploitation and harm.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, satyanash said:

Nathan Kalman-Lamb: How oppressive Florida State revenue-sharing deals show continued exploitation of college football players

 

It's only oppressive if anyone signs with Florida State, and they won't. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
44 minutes ago, tokamak said:

Seems like we’ve been reading for a few years now that certain programs make promises they can’t keep, but is there any evidence that it actually matters? Mark Bowman’s family doesn’t seem overly concerned with what happened to Jordan Addison.

This is a really good point and ties into ideas better expressed in Daily Texan or CR, but I think culturally we’ve turned away from punishing people or institutions that make exaggerated promises (or lies), and this is a problem most deeply felt by the younger generations raised in a social media environment in which there is zero accountability for fabrication (in fact, the algorithms encourage it). 
 

It’s a nihilism that leads someone like a Bowman or a Lott to perhaps think “all of the schools are bullshitting me, but I’m going to take a chance on the one with the highest $&$ promised.”  

Posted

It’s been a rough summer so far, and normally I’d be pretty bummed about their recruiting results so far, but for some strange reason I just feel like it will work out being a really good class once we see the finish and the results on the field. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Roughly 30% of the prior NIL deals would have passed the new Deloitte process. 
 

I think Texas will or the TexasOne Fund will need to get someone who knows how to make their clearing % higher and/or craft these third party deals to ensure the most competitive bids possible via new clearinghouse  

I think it’s just getting engine retuned and Texas will be highly competitive in this new process. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, satyanash said:

Nathan Kalman-Lamb: How oppressive Florida State revenue-sharing deals show continued exploitation of college football players

 

I personally am shocked...shocked I tell you that a guy who is law professor at UF and Miami has an issue with FSUs NIL contracts.....I'll bet he's never asked to examine UF or Miamis....

 

shocked philip j fry GIF

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)

Is there any public knowledge of how Deloitte will define market values?  
 

I guess a second question is will they be sharing their valuations with teams and athletes, to shape future contracts?  Would let the athletes know if they are being offered under value. Are undervalued contracts (if there are any) also rejected as not aligned with the market?

Edited by Pato del Muerto
Posted
22 hours ago, Hookem2147 said:

Gerry has mentioned it a few times, but it sounds like a family member (I’m assuming the dad) favors Tennessee but Rouse himself may favor Texas.

My guess would be that the Rouse camp saying Texas may even be leading is just negotiation to see if Tenn will up their offer.  no downside to this at all for them(or any recruit).  It is Negotiating 101.   

as an aside, I wonder where this goes in the future.  could a kid potentially wait too long and then an offer goes away, team fills the spot with another player at better "market value", do you have time limits on offers?

It will be interesting to see how long players hold out before accepting an offer.  do you want to accept it before the season starts?  say Texas needs an Edge but a Sophomore shows out during the season, does Texas then decide another position is worth more that recruiting year.

It really is crazy with the portal and unlimited free agency.

Posted
2 hours ago, statsman said:

I expect Texas to assess it resources, the field, the rules, and see if out Ground Rules and Assumptions still make sense. I expect Texas to adapt the strategy, making sure to not make any changes that will upset the current or future locker dynamic. I won’t be surprised if Texas gets more aggressive on third party NIL; I would be surprised if Texas starts dropping bags of cash, pays agents directly or starts paying HSers before they enroll. 
 
I expect that Texas will be very upfront about what a player should expect, and when, and who bears risk at different points. That will not appeal to a certain player (the kind letting their “uncle” handle everything) and will appeal to another type (getting good counsel). You miss out on some great ones that way, but that’s part of what makes a player a “Texas guy”, in my opinion. 

By the time that appears to happen this class will be gone which is what I was try convey. 
 

2 hours ago, Nuge said:

Name a school that wouldn't love to drop a dime on Texas if we were being shady and breaking rules.

The NCAA was doing a stellar job of enforcement. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Is there any public knowledge of how Deloitte will define market values?  

Quote

Third parties interested in pursuing NIL deals with student-athletes must understand and adhere to university, state, and NCAA laws and regulations. The House settlement stipulates that entities such as booster collectives, referred to as “Associated Entities or Individuals” in the settlement, are permitted to pay student-athletes for the use of their NIL, provided all payments are for a valid business purpose. A valid business purpose must be “related to the promotion or endorsement of goods or services provided to the general public for profit, with compensation at rates and terms commensurate with compensation paid to similarly situated individuals with comparable NIL value who are not current or prospective student-athletes at the Member Institution.” In other words, the deals with booster collectives and other “Associated Entities and Individuals” must be entered into for the actual purpose of promoting a brand or business at market rates, rather than an athletic services deal, which can be at a higher value than what is considered fair market.

All NIL transactions with a total value of $600 or more must be reported by student-athletes and member institutions to the Commission. Reporting will be done via an online platform called NIL Go, which will be overseen by LBi Software and Deloitte. The Commission will be responsible for determining whether reported NIL payments from Associated Entities and Individuals are at fair market value. Thus, Associated Entities and Individuals must attempt to determine valuation based on other deals entered into by similarly skilled and similarly famous athletes. Deloitte will use data from past college and professional endorsement deals, along with other relevant data to pinpoint whether each deal exceeds an athlete’s fair market value.

https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/06/house-v-ncaa-settlement-approved-era-of-direct-payments-to-college-athletes-begins

 

It's obviously going to be determined on a case-by-case basis, but the basic question is whether the value is comparable to the NIL value of someone that is not a current or prospective student athlete at the university.

Posted
1 minute ago, Texas Wahoo said:

https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/06/house-v-ncaa-settlement-approved-era-of-direct-payments-to-college-athletes-begins

 

It's obviously going to be determined on a case-by-case basis, but the basic question is whether the value is comparable to the NIL value of someone that is not a current or prospective student athlete at the university.

and here is where the fuckery starts.  I think this time we will be ready to play the game and tell the NCAA to fuck off.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

It's obviously going to be determined on a case-by-case basis, but the basic question is whether the value is comparable to the NIL value of someone that is not a current or prospective student athlete at the university.


I have a feeling William and Mary will be screwed.

  • Haha 2
Posted
17 minutes ago, TexasRenegade said:

I personally am shocked...shocked I tell you that a guy who is law professor at UF and Miami has an issue with FSUs NIL contracts.....I'll bet he's never asked to examine UF or Miamis....

 

shocked philip j fry GIF

Who are you referencing that is a law professor at UF and Miami?

Posted

Besides NIL offer increases, here is my view on how and where Texas might win "hang around the rim recruitments" in 2025:

  • Sell doubt on the football program trajectory / development / head coach stability. These are programs that have coaches who aren't on the hot seat right now, but a rocky 2025 can cause a recruit to question the stability of the program:
    • A&M: Roseborough, Edwards, Krempin
    • Michigan: Malakai Lee
    • Alabama: Ezavier Crowell, Sam Utu, Xavier Griffin
  • Head coach gets fired. These are programs that seem most likely to fire their head coach this year if things don't go well:
    • USC: Mark Bowman, Luke Wafle, Jaimeon Winfield
    • LSU: Jabari Mack, Trenton Henderson
    • Florida: Kendall Guervil
  • Head coach leaves for a new job. Dan Lanning and Ryan Day have had NFL rumors the past few years:
    • Oregon: Jalen Lott
    • Ohio State: Damari Simeon
  • Head coach is a buffoon (Brian Kelly)
    • LSU: Jabari Mack, Trenton Henderson

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
29 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

and here is where the fuckery starts.  I think this time we will be ready to play the game and tell the NCAA to fuck off.

LOL, Texas would never. We bend the kneed to that stupid fucking organization and all their rules that we adhere to the letter of. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

Won’t Deloitte get the shit sued out of them the first time they reject a deal? Isn’t that a giant flashing red sign that says “ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES”?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Danimal said:

Head coach gets fired. These are programs that seem most likely to fire their head coach this year if things don't go well:

  • USC:

 

There's no way. The buyout will be $75M+. Could still put them in buckets 1 and 4, though.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, tokamak said:

Won’t Deloitte get the shit sued out of them the first time they reject a deal? Isn’t that a giant flashing red sign that says “ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES”?

This is all going to be very interesting for sure.  That said, apologies, for starting this on the recruiting thread.  maybe we should have an "NIL/University Direct Payments and Clearinghouse questions" thread so general discussion doesn't muck up recruiting threads?

Posted
10 minutes ago, tokamak said:

Won’t Deloitte get the shit sued out of them the first time they reject a deal? Isn’t that a giant flashing red sign that says “ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES”?

They will.  Deloitte has swindled the NCAA which appears to be run by dumbfucks.

Posted
3 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Bobby Burton

 

In what has become a theme in this recruiting class, Texas finished second on two very talented players yesterday. Close but no cigar.

Sure, it’s disappointing. Any recruiting loss is. But some folks need to take a deep breath and step away from the ledge.

After all, Texas already has 17 commitments, is ranked in a higher spot currently to where it was at this time last year, and there is the fact that Steve Sarkisian and his staff have proven themselves capable time and again of bringing in elite prospects before the final recruiting curtain closes.

All any recruiting loss really does at this time of year is up the stakes for Texas on the remaining prospects and/or on the prospects Texas will continue to recruit despite a public commitment elsewhere. Texas, and Sark in particular, has seen this play before and risen to the occasion.

So that’s where we are now. The stakes just got higher.

Texas is at 17 commitments. The Longhorns ultimately want to land anywhere between 25-27 scholarships come signing day.

Remember, it’s who you add in recruiting, not who you lose.

They need an RB, another OL, a TE, a couple of DLs, an LB or two and a top-tier CB.

Piece by piece, I have confidence Sark will get the Texas recruiting class there. Yes, even amidst all the changes in NIL and recruiting that I am well aware of.

Overall, I’m not sure I can adequately put into words just how strongly I believe and have faith in the paragraph above. I think Texas will finish recruiting with an elite class.

Anyone who leaves the theater now is overreacting and they’re doing so before the close of the first act and well before the second act even begins.

Bobby telling people to step off of the ledge implies he’s heard some good news imo.
 

4 hours ago, Hookem2147 said:

Chad Simmons (On3 National guy) on Samari Matthews 

4-star CB Samari Matthews 

South Carolina was long considered the team to beat for Samari Matthews, and the Gamecocks are in the final two, but we like where Texas sits with a decision date of July 11 approaching. Mark Orphey has led the charge for the Longhorns. Matthews may be a little closer with the staff overall in Columbia, but his connection with Orphey may be his strongest. This is an SEC battle, but Texas remains in the pole position with a decision nearing.

It’s probably this, Hayes posted about a commit to us the other day, people at ON3 know. We’ll see if we can actually make it to the finish line this time.

Posted
4 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

This is all going to be very interesting for sure.  That said, apologies, for starting this on the recruiting thread.  maybe we should have an "NIL/University Direct Payments and Clearinghouse questions" thread so general discussion doesn't muck up recruiting threads?

 

Posted

hi I've been away for a few days and i heard that i was supposed to be in here panicking

Fire Explosion GIF

 

 

 

 

ok, I panicked, the voracious demon spirit of BO&W should be appeased now

Posted
56 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Who are you referencing that is a law professor at UF and Miami?

"Darren Heitner, adjunct law professor at the University of Florida and University of Miami, and an expert on college sports’ name, image and likeness (NIL) deals, was stunned by what he found upon reading the contracts."

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
27 minutes ago, Lonestar88 said:

Bobby telling people to step off of the ledge implies he’s heard some good news imo.
 

Or he doesn’t want to lose his subscriber base that is close to jumping.

Posted

Some good news:

As schools adapt to the new era in college sports in the aftermath of the House settlement, the USC Trojans have reportedly made significant cuts to their athletic department.

The House v. NCAA ruling allows schools to allocate up to $20.5 million to student athletes this year with that figure increasing incrementally over the next 10 years.

The revenue share model is the first of its kind in college athletics, and adjustments were bound to be made across the country as schools search for additional revenue streams.

According to Ryan Kartje of the Los Angeles Times, USC has eliminated 12 jobs within its athletic department in order to cut costs after the House settlement took effect on July 1.

https://www.si.com/college/nil/nil-news/big-ten-athletic-department-eliminates-multiple-positions-house-settlement

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, TexasRenegade said:

"Darren Heitner, adjunct law professor at the University of Florida and University of Miami, and an expert on college sports’ name, image and likeness (NIL) deals, was stunned by what he found upon reading the contracts."

Heitner is a great source. There's a bunch linked in the NIL thread. 

Just a reminder that Deloitte is only reviewing NIL deals coming from payor's associated with the University (donated >50k, employ trustee, coach or collective officer). If that cannot be established, the process stops right there. 

Texas will continue to find and solicit the corporate money and be entirely above board in doing so. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

I was thinking that thread would be more for people wanting news on NIL with specific recruits and didn't want to create general discussion about the entities involved and how they work.

Posted

We just need to have all HS students who intend to participate in Intercollegiate Sports take an AAT - Athletic Aptitude Test.

Besides collecting physical and mental test results, AAT would also assign minimum and maximum dollar value to each student-athlete, and schools would not be allowed to pay more than maximum nor less than minimum. Test scores and valuations would be publicly available.

To maintain scholastic standards, schools would be required to deduct all of its normal student tuition and all other fees from the amounts paid to each student-athlete. No more "scholarships" for athletes, just real educational benefits like every other student. This might affect expensive schools negatively, but that only serves to level the playing fields.

Straight NIL would probably belong to the employer, the school, but not necessarily exclusively - actual name/image/likeness payments could be split between school and athlete, and non-NIL employment (ditch-digging, vinyl siding sales, etc) would be none of the school's business other than any restrictions on all students in general.

And, best of all, Deloitte could be entrusted with the AAT.

 

 

Posted
3 hours ago, closetojumping said:

There is nothing wrong with the ledge. 

Not absolutely true. Numerous factors, including ledge width and declination, surface friction, wind-speed and direction, personal balance issues, and vertical distance from (and material of) ground level - all of these and many more - contribute to "wrongness" of ledge interactions.

  • Haha 1
Posted
5 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Bobby Burton

 

In what has become a theme in this recruiting class, Texas finished second on two very talented players yesterday. Close but no cigar.

Sure, it’s disappointing. Any recruiting loss is. But some folks need to take a deep breath and step away from the ledge.

After all, Texas already has 17 commitments, is ranked in a higher spot currently to where it was at this time last year, and there is the fact that Steve Sarkisian and his staff have proven themselves capable time and again of bringing in elite prospects before the final recruiting curtain closes.

All any recruiting loss really does at this time of year is up the stakes for Texas on the remaining prospects and/or on the prospects Texas will continue to recruit despite a public commitment elsewhere. Texas, and Sark in particular, has seen this play before and risen to the occasion.

So that’s where we are now. The stakes just got higher.

Texas is at 17 commitments. The Longhorns ultimately want to land anywhere between 25-27 scholarships come signing day.

Remember, it’s who you add in recruiting, not who you lose.

They need an RB, another OL, a TE, a couple of DLs, an LB or two and a top-tier CB.

Piece by piece, I have confidence Sark will get the Texas recruiting class there. Yes, even amidst all the changes in NIL and recruiting that I am well aware of.

Overall, I’m not sure I can adequately put into words just how strongly I believe and have faith in the paragraph above. I think Texas will finish recruiting with an elite class.

Anyone who leaves the theater now is overreacting and they’re doing so before the close of the first act and well before the second act even begins.

Haha these recruiting analysts literally take their readers by the hand build up a recruit walk them to the ledge and when it don’t go the right way have the nerve to say some need to step back from the ledge.  I find this amusing since they are the ones that build up all the hope of a player committing.  
 

Personally I am not at all concerned about recruiting with the transfer portal. 
 

Just remember some of you need to step back from the ledge lol 

Posted
1 hour ago, Fondren & Main said:

They will.  Deloitte has swindled the NCAA which appears to be run by dumbfucks.

The ncaa isn't running this clusterfuck.  Although the ncaa was always just the conferences anyway.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...