• The KillerFrogs

State of college football (and TCU) summed up.

calisuperfrog

Full Member
Honest assessment. I can’t imagine that we can’t find a large donor class that the sum of its parts could compete with the Cody Campbell Texas Tech’s of the world. UT, etc will always be a challenge as marque schools of large states.
 

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
Look down the road at Baton Rouge. They ran off the amoral sociopath they had as Coach, paying him some $50 million to go away (Yeah, I know. Dueling lawsuits and other nonsense, which LSU will eventually lose. But it kicks the financial can down the road and will be some future AD's problem), and will now cough up some new Vast Sum to money-whip yet another amoral scumbag into their Head Coach position. On top of all that filthy lucre, they are paying players far and away more than TCU ever could.

We cannot do that. Period. Full stop.

The Old Ways are dead, with a stake through their heart. Moneyball is the New Way.
 
Last edited:

Mean Purple

Active Member
Honest assessment. I can’t imagine that we can’t find a large donor class that the sum of its parts could compete with the Cody Campbell Texas Tech’s of the world. UT, etc will always be a challenge as marque schools of large states.
We can. And it is slowly getting better. But if they don’t step up the game, could get left in the dust.
 

HornyWartyToad

Active Member
We can. And it is slowly getting better. But if they don’t step up the game, could get left in the dust.
Idk how you convince even one, much less a substantial group of investors to throw down huge sums on an ongoing basis when (unless major changes), the payback is going to be finishing at the bottom of the top half of a mediocre conference.
If Klieman is right, and no evidence to suggest he’s wrong, then spending middle of the pack money is going to generate mid-pack returns, and we’ll get to watch as we slip further down into irrelevance.
The future seems pretty grim, barring something really radical happening.
I watched the 2nd half entirely yesterday, only because of the rain delay- it was not a priority. And that’s the most CFB I’ve seen this year. Man, what a roller coaster we’ve been on these last 25 years.
 

Dogfrog

Active Member
Honest assessment. I can’t imagine that we can’t find a large donor class that the sum of its parts could compete with the Cody Campbell Texas Tech’s of the world. UT, etc will always be a challenge as marque schools of large states.

I don’t have Cody Campbell money. If I did, I would never consider spending it to hire 18 year old football players. I would consider funding scholarships for worthy students.
 

Big Frog II

Active Member
Next year are schools only allowed to use the money set aside from their TV revenue? Wasn't this the last year of the free for all anyone can buy a player?
 

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
Next year are schools only allowed to use the money set aside from their TV revenue? Wasn't this the last year of the free for all anyone can buy a player?
The Free For All is on, and will only get worse. Oh, sure, there's "rules" now for all this, but no one gave a ripe crap about the "rules" before, so I don't really understand why they would start now...
 

LVH

Active Member
Ive beaten the horse dead but it's why my interest in college sports is at an all time low. I watched ONE game this season.

College sports has turned into "My school's NIL mercenaries funded by my schools billionaire donors are better than your school's NIL mercanries funded by billionaire donors"

Its not fun anymore. What made the glory days of the Gary Patterson era fun was that the program was built and succeeded due to culture and hard work. It showed that you could out perform bigger schools with more recruiting pull via coaching, culture and grit.

Those days are over. You cant build programs with culture and discipline anymore because its all about playing the price is right while managing egos. Players just transfer when they get their feelings hurt. Its impossible to build a program like we built ours because good players who were underlooked out of high school and have a good year will be scooped up by the big schools.

Good for Texas Tech for the season they've had but it has to feel kind of hollow knowing that its mainly because they massively outspent every program in the conference outside of BYU. Im actually glad our alumni base doesn't have stupid donors willing to pay millions for football players.
 

Prince of Purpoole II

Reigning Smartarse

Look if Sonny Dykes had given this same statement there would be a line of at least a dozen posters here raking him over the coals, accusing him of making excuses, wishcasting billionaire TCU Cody Campbell clones out of thin air and calling for his head.

The fact is this assessment is reality
 
Last edited:

Wexahu

Full Member
Look if Sonny Dykes had given this same statement there would be a line of at least a dozen posters here raking by him over the coals, accusing him of making excuses, wishcasting billionaire TCU Cody Campbell clones out of thin air and calling for his head.

The fact is this assessment is reality
Was gonna say the same thing. If SD had said these exact words the pitchforks would be out.
 

Putt4Purple

Active Member
It’s pretty simple for me. I’m not a big donor. I don’t have deep pockets. Ive been a supporter as much I could be and I’m sure I am speaking for 80% on this board.I bought season tickets for 7 straight years. I ate some of those for different reasons. I will NOT sacrifice my personal financial well being to support a college sports program knowing there are millions flowing through peoples hands going out and I have no control over it. Hello government control. Maybe in this case there needs to be government oversight which I know will set off fireworks on this site and I am a political conservative! Go figure.
 
Last edited:
The Old Ways are dead, with a stake through their heart. Moneyball is the New Way.
In a way, GP had his own form of Moneyball. He filled his roster with "less valuable" recruits, but put them into positions where they could flourish.

But you're right...the next GP, or Whittingham, or Petersen will be the guy who figures out the calculus of roster management.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
In a way, GP had his own form of Moneyball. He filled his roster with "less valuable" recruits, but put them into positions where they could flourish.

But you're right...the next GP, or Whittingham, or Petersen will be the guy who figures out the calculus of roster management.
I don’t know how you have a good team and keep other teams from figuring out who your good players are, but unless you’re willing to pay up, that’s the only way to keep a really good together.

Zero chance those teams from the late ‘00’s stay together in this era without huge $ commitment. And if you have a huge $ commitment, roster management isn’t that complicated because if you lose a guy, you just go buy another.
 
I don’t know how you have a good team and keep other teams from figuring out who your good players are, but unless you’re willing to pay up, that’s the only way to keep a really good together.

Zero chance those teams from the late ‘00’s stay together in this era without huge $ commitment. And if you have a huge $ commitment, roster management isn’t that complicated because if you lose a guy, you just go buy another.
Uh...that was the reason for the sentence "the next GP, or Whittingham, or Petersen will be the guy who figures out the calculus of roster management."

Someone will figure out a way to do it better than the others. I have serious doubts it will be Dykes, though.
 
Top