I wonder if they have any rules around walk-ons and NIL. If they didn't, schools could just load up on "walk-ons" every year.
13 scholarship players, 15 can dress for a game I believe, not sure there’s a limit on total number of players.
IU took that kid from Air Force as a walk on. He never played though, so not sure what the deal was there.
I would guess that the court ruling that started NIL applies equally to walk-ons. Generally speaking though, most of the money is going to go to the top players and most players not getting the big NIL bucks will want a scholarship.
I mean, in theory, any student can get an NIL deal.
So years ago they dropped the football schollie limit to 85 so that the powers at the time wouldn't take all the talent and let them ride pine for 4 years as opposed to going to another school where they'd play against them. Theoretically, that is all out the window. If the war chest is big enough, you could "buy" enough gray shirts (or the BB equivalent) to keep them off other potential other title contenders. The argument is "yeah, but the kids want to play" or "other schools would bid more" but it isn't out of the realm of possibility, especially if it's positional (shooting guard court generals). And I don't think the NCAA can say diddly about it.
We had 17 play against Samford including all 13 scholarship players (including barrett) and 4 walk-ons.
I could see someone “giving up” their scholly to allow the extra player. There is precedence for this. Someone like Waddell who is in-state and has maybe $20k worth of tuition and r/b and gets a favorable NIL deal to offset (pretty sure he already gets six figures).
If our 13th man is getting six figures, I don’t want to hear another word about Purdue’s NIL collective not being competitive. More realistically, there’s no way he’s getting close to six figures.
Thanks for posting.Good illustration of our scholly situation. We need either someone to transfer or one of the incoming recruits to go prep school. The challenge if it's the latter is it fills us for 2025-26 as well unless there are subsequent transfers. That's not ideal as we are in on some good recruiting targets in that class as well.
It’s competitive for the 6th-13th players. It’s not competitive when you are throwing millions at bringing guys in. I think it’s a good strategy to spread the wealth. Can you imagine the resentment some of these 3-4 year guys at schools feel when they are getting peanuts and their coach goes out and brings in someone to play over them that is marginally better, zero loyalty to the school, and perhaps isn’t putting in the effort and getting $1m? Creates a toxic locker room. I think that will be a major issue with IU.l, think of Trey Galloway. Seems like a team player but he’s human and will have emotions if he gets benched for a transfer.
Exactly. I think that’s why so many guys go to the portal (well at least one of the reasons).
I don’t know if Galloway will get more money somewhere else. Indiana has a war chest and while they are using it as a recruiting tool I suspect they also are using some for retention. They got Renau and Mgbako to come back which was not rumored presumably by giving them some more $. I don’t think Galloway will get more money somewhere just he will be hurt that after giving it his all someone else will take his minutes and wil be making more than him.
Very good points and totally agree. I think IU is overpaying Galloway, Leal, Cupps and even Mgbako—just not sold on him. Maybe it’s because i had higher expectations for a 5 star but just he underwhelmed all year. Kinda played better towards end but still lacked the explosiveness…anyways I’ll stop rambling.
Painter does a great job of growing his team. Also how many other teams are able to redshirt like him? We (Brownstown folks) already think Benter is redshirting because his Dad is coaching next year. Everyone thought he was quitting to watch Jack at Purdue
Ahhh that would make sense. And yeah it’s great and I hope it’s sustainable for Purdue but I’m getting nervous that eventually we will have to start going to the portal for 3+ guys each year like the other teams since like 3/4 of college bball goes to the portal the following year. A 4 year player or even a 3 year player at a P5 (6?) school seems like it will be very rare in the future. Hope I’m wrong…but seems like Purdue is going to have to play the portal game sooner rather than later.
Agree. We've dabbled in the portal, but there is going to come a day (season) where we need more than 1 guy to fill a need. That's why I've cautioned people from being too harsh on teams that are going into the portal bigger than we have so far. That's most likely going to be us also.
Good point. We have usually only taken 1 year portal kids with the exception being Evan Boudreaux. As much as single year mercenaries can provide positional stability, guys with multiple years can elevate missed recruiting targets.
It’s certainly possible, but the low number of transfers out has to be based on a reason. Players do not want to leave this program. Part of it, I believe, is that Purdue uses its NIL money to reward the guys in the program rather than by trying to make a splash in the portal. Part of it is who Painter recruits and the culture that results. Part of it is that Painter has built trust and that players want to play for him. I’m not saying that there won’t be a season ever when 4 or 5 guys transfer, but I expect it to be the exception and not the norm.
There are a lot of reasons a team may "need" to go into the portal for multiple guys.
UConn had 4 transfers in 2023 and 2 of them stayed this year (Newton and Diarra) and then only needed 1 guy this year via transfer portal (Spencer). Hurley is not a huge fan of the transfer portal but those guys were huge in their success the last two years. I think we will start to see painter use it for 1-2 guys…I’m not sure when but he will be forced to play.
So much to unpack here….
Link for?
Kudos to you for doing the "unpacking." Kids transfer for different reasons. I have no idea why anyone would already predict that 2-3 incoming kids will transfer, particularly from Purdue's program. We do it differently. We develop kids, and on top of that, choose kids BECAUSE they want to be developed. Would Painter love to get studs, like Kanon and Biggie? Yeah, of course. But he's developing a program by bringing guys in who want to develop in a team concept.
And Newman stayed 3 years after his redshirt year. He obviously wasn't overly upset by redshirting. So yeah, strange to include him in the discussion.
You clearly don’t understand the types of players painter recruits and his commitment to them. We will for sure have attrition but we have 12 scholarship players on our team and 10 of them played for us last year, 6 didn’t start and came back (Heide, Gillis, Morton, Furst, Berg, and Waddell) and only lost one in Newton. Three of those guys rode the bench in 2022 after having later roles in 2021 and still chose to come back for 2023.
He definitely did not say that everyone will stay no matter what. He said he doesn't understand why you are already predicting multiple incoming guys will leave before they even get here.
So you misquoted me first. I never said "nobody will leave..." What I said was "guys DON'T typically transfer from this program" (I copied and pasted it so you don't forget what I said).
