Retaining Players in the Portal Era

[Randy Carson]

In order to retain our top players, we need to provide them what they want. So what is that?

Here are a few things that come to mind (listed alphabetically):

Education | Degree.
NIL Payment.
Personal Development | Coaching.
Playing time.
Positive Culture.
Winning Games.

Why would a kid move from Georgia Tech to Alabama or UGA? How can we minimize those transfers?

Conversely, why would a kid transfer from UGA to Tech? What can we do to make that happen more often?

I think the motivations for each of those two scenarios are mutually exclusive, so if we can focus on providing what college players want, we can make the transfer portal a one-way street - at least for the players we want to keep.

 

[Root4GT]

In order to retain our top players, we need to provide them what they want. So what is that?

Here are a few things that come to mind (listed alphabetically):

Education | Degree.
NIL Payment.
Personal Development | Coaching.
Playing time.
Positive Culture.
Winning Games.

Why would a kid move from Georgia Tech to Alabama or UGA? How can we minimize those transfers?

Conversely, why would a kid transfer from UGA to Tech? What can we do to make that happen more often?

I think the motivations for each of those two scenarios are mutually exclusive, so if we can focus on providing what college players want, we can make the transfer portal a one-way street - at least for the players we want to keep.

Good summary. It will always be a two way street. 85 scholarship players around half get most of the playing time! There will be roster churn

 

[MacDaddy2]

You assume that most 4 and 5 star players give a darn about an Education/Degree. They do not.

 

[forensicbuzz]

You assume that most 4 and 5 star players give a darn about an Education/Degree. They do not.

You assume that they don't, but they do.

You're not more right than I am. You have no more idea than I do. Don't write checks you can't cash.

 

[takethepoints]

You assume that they don't, but they do.

Yes, and I think the assumption leaves out one of, if not the, most important factors in both recruiting and retention: the player's families.

I think - and I admit I do not know - that many player's families are well aware of the chances that their sons will actually play in the NFL or star if they do are extremely, like Georgia Lottery, low. The new NIL regimen has made an instant payout more feasible, but even a low 7 figure amount is no more than temporary. What matters is the player's income over time and what that will mean for his parents and his future family.

Some families will advise their sons to take the payout and there are good arguments for that. Oth, there are better arguments for getting the education that will allow the player's to make what they can out of the nest egg they have gotten from college football. And, of course, this is the major argument that Tech makes to the young men who come to school there. Admittedly, if the young man is not capable of showing talent in the classroom, then taking the payout from the field - if it is available - makes more sense. But a Tech degree means something and most families and most players realize this. You can only play the boy's game so long and afterwards your education will be what feeds and satisfies you.

 

[bke1984]

I think they care more about the degrees than they get credit for. About 50% of 4* rated players make the nfl. And the average nfl career is 3.3 years. Even if you’re very good there is such a slim chance that you have a lucrative career playing football. That’s actually why this NIL money is so attractive. Hell, take a couple million to play football and then go back and get your degree after. You’re better off that way than by getting the free education. This is why it’s ruining the sport. The free agency part plays right into the fears and concerns about the longevity of the athletes. Normalize it with multi-year contracts, caps, buyouts, etc. It’s where all pro sports landed over many years and it’s where this will ultimately land as well. Then it’s just another pro sports, unfortunately.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

I try to be careful not to put my view of the world on these guys.

I obviously think education is very important and never had the chance to make millions playing any game. If I had though, I'd definitely consider playing a game where I could only do it when I was young, get the money and then go to college. You can go to college at any age.

That's [probably what I'd recommend to my son. The best of all worlds is go to a place like GT, then if you make it big go to the NFL. Then come back and get the degree and move on with a different phase of your like. The Calvin Johnson model.

 

[Randy Carson]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Assuming the NIL money is about even, a high 3- / low 4-star would rather play at Tech than be a practice dummy at UGA.

INTRODUCTION

Next time you watch a college basketball game, take a look at the players sitting on the far end of the bench who never even take off their warm-ups. Most of those kids at Duke or UConn would start at other programs. Got that image in mind?

I'm trying to figure out how to maximize Tech's success in the portal era while competing with big schools.

Our inherent advantages are:

• the education/degree and
• the City of Atlanta (for the kids who like that vibe).

Things we can control to varying degrees are:

• coaching/development,
• positive team culture,
• playing time (which has to be earned) and
• winning games/championships.

Our built-in disadvantage is NIL money due to the size of our alumni base (though we can minimize the gap to some extent).

CONCLUSION

Assuming that we have hired good coaches who develop their players, maintain a positive team culture, and win consistently, the only real hurdle seems to be NIL $$$.

I believe a four-star athlete who was BMOC at his high school in south Georgia is going to be unhappy sitting on the bench because Big State U has two five-stars making more money ahead of him on the depth chart. If my premise is correct, then we ought to be able to convince that kid that playing is better than going through two-a-day practices but never getting into a game - REGARDLESS OF THE MONEY. (As long as the difference is not too large.)

Thoughts?

 

[4shotB]

I think the myth of playing time has proven to be outdated. Players have shown a surprisingly long term outlook to their potential careers. Bama, OSU, etc. have shown that kids value development in their field over playing time. The have fallen into the myth that the coaching at these places is the single factor getting players into the league so they don’t mind waiting in line for their turn. Also these types of players go to these schools with the mindset that are better than the guys there.

Don’t know how things are going to change going forward. Maybe if we pay something close to factory money we can convince the guy sitting on the bench at Bama that he is better off starting at tech things will change.

One critical factor 2 - 4 years in this new world is how many of our kids are getting drafted. We need to make a stronger case that we are a destination for the ultimate player development. Kids (right or wrong) place a high value on this metric.

 

[RamblinRed]

I think they care more about the degrees than they get credit for. About 50% of 4* rated players make the nfl. And the average nfl career is 3.3 years. Even if you’re very good there is such a slim chance that you have a lucrative career playing football. That’s actually why this NIL money is so attractive. Hell, take a couple million to play football and then go back and get your degree after. You’re better off that way than by getting the free education. This is why it’s ruining the sport. The free agency part plays right into the fears and concerns about the longevity of the athletes. Normalize it with multi-year contracts, caps, buyouts, etc. It’s where all pro sports landed over many years and it’s where this will ultimately land as well. Then it’s just another pro sports, unfortunately.

This is not quite correct.
Just under 50% of players drafted are 4* players.
The percentage of 4 star players that play in the NFL hovers around 25-30%.
Sort of 2 different metrics.

 

[bke1984]

This is not quite correct.
Just under 50% of players drafted are 4* players.
The percentage of 4 star players that play in the NFL hovers around 25-30%.
Sort of 2 different metrics.

I was looking at stats that said otherwise and was honestly surprised it was 50%...so if it's lower it further supports the argument I'm making. The data is not readily available and is likely skewed to what the writers want it to say...

 

[leatherneckjacket]

I am sure there are a lot of players who are more focused on their immediate wants and needs than on the long term. It is likely that they fail to understand the impact of these short term decisions to maximize their revenue at the cost of their education and long term financial security. Perhaps, they believe they need to capitalize on the current system to get as much money as possible now and worry about the future later. The best we can do is educate them and their families that this should be a 40 year decision and not a one year one.

While there are some players who are focused on their education, I imagine those are very few and probably not the ones who are going to move a program significantly in a meaningful way. Even then, you still have align on their education wants and balance that with their professional goals. Since we are an engineering school, we are not going to get interest from a majority of the academically inclined players unless they want to study engineering or business.

I think the best way to retain the players you have as well as draw players from other programs is to create a culture of winning on the field and in life. Helping the players balance and maximize their short/long term finances in a way that few other schools can do.

 

[slugboy]

This is not quite correct.
Just under 50% of players drafted are 4* players.
The percentage of 4 star players that play in the NFL hovers around 25-30%.
Sort of 2 different metrics.

How many 3* and 5*?

 

[stinger78]

How many 3* and 5*?

Has to be more 3* since there are so many more of them.

32 teams x 7 drafts slots = 224 players drafted. If just under half of those are 4* players (say 100), and only the top 50 are 5* (IIRC), so maybe 40 or so of them (which is probably high), of the 85 or so left, maybe 60-70 would be 3* college recruits.

 

[MACHETE]

All these kids have agents now and the agent only cares about the cut of the $$$ he is getting so let's get real here.

 

[takethepoints]

This thread has suddenly and gratifyingly become a very nuanced and well argued set of positions. Fun and informative to read for all newcomers.

 

[Tommy_Taylor_1972]

This thread has suddenly and gratifyingly become a very nuanced and well argued set of positions. Fun and informative to read for all newcomers.

I am uneducated on how, in reality, the NIL system works for an individual player. Is it paid in a lump sum like a signing bonus or over time like a salary? Are income taxes and other deductions paid on $NIL and what share goes to the agent? Are there fringe benefits like the coaches get as employees, like sports tickets, cars, etc? Are there work conditions for the athlete, or is this a no-work contract? What happens when a player transfers and the contract conditions are not met?

Has anyone on the forum had any real life feedback on an athlete actually receiving NIL income. We would hear more about the previous under-the table money than we hear about NIL, and we would see new houses and cars for the parents and know why. Seems a lots of secrecy regarding NIL at public institutions. We know what a faculty member or coach makes, why not a player?

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Most care about NIL payments - that is it. Yes, they want to be prepared for the NFL, but they know only a small % of them will ever get to the NFL.

So, basically, if you want to keep players that others covet? You pay them big bucks. Bottom line.

 

[LongforDodd]

.

 

[slugboy]

I am uneducated on how, in reality, the NIL system works for an individual player. Is it paid in a lump sum like a signing bonus or over time like a salary? Are income taxes and other deductions paid on $NIL and what share goes to the agent? Are there fringe benefits like the coaches get as employees, like sports tickets, cars, etc? Are there work conditions for the athlete, or is this a no-work contract? What happens when a player transfers and the contract conditions are not met?

Has anyone on the forum had any real life feedback on an athlete actually receiving NIL income. We would hear more about the previous under-the table money than we hear about NIL, and we would see new houses and cars for the parents and know why. Seems a lots of secrecy regarding NIL at public institutions. We know what a faculty member or coach makes, why not a player?

NIL is taxable. Athletes may have to do estimated withholding. It's kind of like having your own business.

NIL contracts have conditions, like appearances and other "work". If you don't fulfill your side, they don't have to pay.

NIL agents charge 15-25% for their services. I don't know if that includes accounting fees, but the athletes should have an accountant. I wouldn't rely on the tax prep guy in the strip mall.

If an athlete gets use of an apartment or a car or other assets, that's taxable too.

Key is a state employee of a certain income, so the budget for his role is semi-public. NIL deals are private. If Key had an endorsement contact with Kia, we wouldn't have that financial info unless someone shared it. Same for the athletes.

Athletes probably want as much cash up front as possible; their sponsors will want to delay the payments as much as possible; how it works out is all in the contract.

NIL Deals and Tax Implications: A Guide for College Athletes

NIL deals allow college athletes to monetize their name, image, and likeness, but there are tax implications that students should be aware of.

www.investopedia.com