whereiend

With no long term contracts, money that isn't on the field is a complete waste. And it's hard to get true freshman on the field.

How so? I think rules being enforced makes it even harder for them. They'd only have $15M or whatever total. How to keep everyone happy with that? Remember every team in P5 has rev share. The rule enforcement would just limit over the cap spending.

Yes I think so absolutely. That class will get looted hard every portal cycle.

Even though he isn't perfect I think it's great to have a guy with his experience in the system at C. Still need to find some better guards, though.

They make us look dumb for blowing so much NIL on players that did nothing this year

They are a bunch of 23 year olds from the portal. How many stars they had 5 years ago in HS means nothing. What they are is proof that attempting to develop young players is a fools errand in this era. Spend all of your money on experienced players in the portal. 4 and 5 star freshman are a liability more than a benefit..

I meant as far as the portal losses go, we are being particularly stingy with the rev share allotments, because we have limited ability to execute above the cap NIL deals the way other schools are. (See LSU's offer to Sorsby).

The NCAA made various rules that intend to limit the use of NIL as pay for play. NIL deals are supposed to go through a clearinghouse that confirms they are legit market rate deals and not just pay for play. It's very unlikely that these will ever be successfully enforced, but unfortunately it appears that UT has made it a priority to follow these dumb rules anyway while other schools are clearly not. Luckily we have enough legit corporate NIL to almost overcome this, but everything is 10x harder than it should be.

It's a shocking change from the rest of college football history but IMO 5 star recruiting classes are now a liability. Without long term contracts it simply doesn't pay to be in the game of player development. If we spend our money retaining these young players that have proven nothing we will lose to the Indiana and Tech's of the world that are stacking proven 23 year old players in the portal. I think the sweet spot is getting some of the 2nd and 3rd year players that are ready to contribute but have a little growth ahead of them as well. E.g. Mosley, Watson, etc. Then we have some continuity without blowing money bench riding 18 year olds.

From other sites, it seems to be implied that we are unable to win these portal battles because of the rev share limits. Other schools are simply ignoring the rules and spending whatever they want, which makes sense given that the rules are obviously completely unenforceable (and frankly ethically wrong. You are telling me all of the athletes at the school can only make $20M a year while Lane Kiffin can make $13M himself? just laughable) But for whatever reason the idiots in charge at UT are happy playing with one hand tied behind our back. If true it is an incredibly dumb move by CDC, Compliance, and Texas One. Just pay the damn players and let's see what the NCAA does about it.

I mean we aren't trotting Jackson Arnold out like they did

These rules have yet to be enforced. Tech is obviously blatantly disregarding them with a "why don't you sue us and we'll see how that goes" posturing. The NCAA can't win the most basic enforcement cases (e.g. eligibility) and you think this stuff will hold up? there is absolutely no way.

Really now? You can't tell the difference between a real #1 RB and a guy like Wisner that warrants 10-15 carries per game? Wisner wanted "one of the best RBs in college football" money when he is actually a below average SEC starter.

UT is making a smart choice here. Wisner lacks the talent to be a #1 RB in the SEC. Wisner IMO is making a bad choice. Should have come back as a #2 and spent the rest of his life as a UT legend like Rod B, Fozzy Whitaker, Whittington, Roschon, etc.

Wisner can be #1 somewhere, but will that somewhere pay more than Texas would pay for a #2? That seems doubtful to me.