As I sit in dismay staring at the wrapped Eva Hudson NIL jerseys I bought to give my family for Christmas I can't help but wonder how long until men's basketball gets poached. There is a reason we are seeing so many high level teams with so many 4th and 5th year players. My nightmare is that some big dollar program decides they are just a point guard away from the Natty and decide to throw a Brink's truck of cash at Smith. Does he take a couple Mil for one year and a chance for a real run at another FF or does he hang around and hope DJ heals and a bunch of sophomores start playing like seniors? It would be hard to fault him either way. He probably will make more in NIL than ever will as a pro. It is one thing for a Haarms, Newman or Isaiah Thompson to move down to get PT but in the NIL world our all-conference or even an all-american could get bought by big money from a top ten team. The unlimited transfer and unrestricted NIL have destroyed the NCAA. God bless Painter if he sticks around and is able to navigate this nonsense.
How long can Boiler Basketball avoid being portaled?
- Thread starter Boiler8285
- Start date
Yeah saw the VB news earlier today.
Closer to just getting off the train rather than buckling up for for these NIL and portal ventures.
Closer to just getting off the train rather than buckling up for for these NIL and portal ventures.
Last edited:
At minimum I’ll end up cutting my DISH sports package and all these streaming subscriptions, if it starts happening in hoops too.
Buy tickets every now and then on StubHub if I get an itch to see a game.
Gonzaga came after Braden after his fresh year. He could be tempted after this year.
Because we are filled with old school folks who just want to complain about how much better it was in the old days instead of getting with the new way and embracing it.
It's not like we don't have plenty of money both from alumni and being in the Big 10.
Pretty obvious answer. You spend money to recruit talent and retain talent.
Or you don't spend it on recruitment and end up with talent that maybe you are paying them well but they can get the same money and compete at a higher level somewhere else. Or you don't spend on retention but do spend on talent and then you have to hope each mishmash works out each season.
We spend on retention but the moment a few players don't pan out, that's going to get stressed.
Seems to me the ideal is a hybrid model where you pay for one or two top players every 1-2 seasons (while still looking for fit and culture) and you pay to retain your top 5-6 players. Thus, setting up a team with 6-8 talented and experienced players you can mix in with recruits.
