BleedGopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 64,517
- Reaction score
- 23,796
- Points
- 113
Per Morales:
It’s nearly impossible to have a conversation with a college football staffer without the escalating costs of talent acquisition coming up.
We’re less than two years removed from Ohio State athletic director Ross Bjork shocking us all — or most of us — when he revealed the Buckeyes spent $20 million on their football roster.
That was only the beginning.
“The new number in our sport right now is $40 million,” an SEC head coach told The Athletic recently. “That’s for the ’26 season. What’s it going to be for the ’27 season? I don’t know, I think if you’re at $40 million this year, I bet you’ll be at $45 million next year.”
“It’s getting up to $35 million-plus, if not $40 million-plus,” said a Big Ten personnel staffer.
A logical response might be: What do you mean by $40 million? I thought there was a revenue-share cap of $20.5 million for student-athletes across all sports?
Well, that rev-share cap was always more of a wholesome wish than an enforceable action.
Spending doesn’t guarantee your program will turn into a winner overnight, but it sure does help. Just look at Indiana and Texas Tech, which have invested at unprecedented levels and have won at … well, unprecedented levels.
Winning is expensive, but the alternative costs a lot more.
“Losing is the most expensive element of our sport,” a Pac-12 assistant coach said. “Winning is far less expensive than losing. Losing, there’s no return on investment. Winning is huge.”
Lose long enough and your fans become apathetic. Attendance sags, donors stop giving money, the environment gets toxic and recruiting becomes difficult. Florida State, which has sputtered under coach Mike Norvell the past two seasons, is dealing with this predicament.
“The more people see that’s the pathway to winning,” the Pac-12 assistant said, “it’s only going to become more intense.”
That’s not to mention that college football is resembling the NFL more and more each day — even though that’s a turnoff for some. In the NFL, players reset the market all the time.
Top transfer offensive tackles were receiving around $1.3 million, but when Colorado’s Jordan Seaton — a former five-star recruit — entered the transfer portal in January, he was expected to earn anywhere between $2 million and $3 million. Seaton landed at LSU, which was an aggressive spender this offseason.
“Our joking motto is ‘Double it,’” the Big Ten personnel staffer said. “Which is what we say every cycle. It’s like whatever you hear, double it. That’s just what it’s going to end up being for a lot of these kids. Whatever we end up paying for this type of kid, next cycle you’re going to have to double it. Trying to compare it to what it was even a year ago at this time is completely different.”
“The more information, the more the market will go up,” a Group of 6 general manager said. “We all think we’re better than what we are, so everybody will look at the market and say, ‘The best quarterback in college football made X amount of money. I’m better than that. I deserve more.’ Even if they aren’t better than that, if they believe that and put themselves out there in the open market, somebody is going to pay a hefty price for it.”
www.nytimes.com
Go Gophers!!
It’s nearly impossible to have a conversation with a college football staffer without the escalating costs of talent acquisition coming up.
We’re less than two years removed from Ohio State athletic director Ross Bjork shocking us all — or most of us — when he revealed the Buckeyes spent $20 million on their football roster.
That was only the beginning.
“The new number in our sport right now is $40 million,” an SEC head coach told The Athletic recently. “That’s for the ’26 season. What’s it going to be for the ’27 season? I don’t know, I think if you’re at $40 million this year, I bet you’ll be at $45 million next year.”
“It’s getting up to $35 million-plus, if not $40 million-plus,” said a Big Ten personnel staffer.
A logical response might be: What do you mean by $40 million? I thought there was a revenue-share cap of $20.5 million for student-athletes across all sports?
Well, that rev-share cap was always more of a wholesome wish than an enforceable action.
Spending doesn’t guarantee your program will turn into a winner overnight, but it sure does help. Just look at Indiana and Texas Tech, which have invested at unprecedented levels and have won at … well, unprecedented levels.
Winning is expensive, but the alternative costs a lot more.
“Losing is the most expensive element of our sport,” a Pac-12 assistant coach said. “Winning is far less expensive than losing. Losing, there’s no return on investment. Winning is huge.”
Lose long enough and your fans become apathetic. Attendance sags, donors stop giving money, the environment gets toxic and recruiting becomes difficult. Florida State, which has sputtered under coach Mike Norvell the past two seasons, is dealing with this predicament.
“The more people see that’s the pathway to winning,” the Pac-12 assistant said, “it’s only going to become more intense.”
That’s not to mention that college football is resembling the NFL more and more each day — even though that’s a turnoff for some. In the NFL, players reset the market all the time.
Top transfer offensive tackles were receiving around $1.3 million, but when Colorado’s Jordan Seaton — a former five-star recruit — entered the transfer portal in January, he was expected to earn anywhere between $2 million and $3 million. Seaton landed at LSU, which was an aggressive spender this offseason.
“Our joking motto is ‘Double it,’” the Big Ten personnel staffer said. “Which is what we say every cycle. It’s like whatever you hear, double it. That’s just what it’s going to end up being for a lot of these kids. Whatever we end up paying for this type of kid, next cycle you’re going to have to double it. Trying to compare it to what it was even a year ago at this time is completely different.”
“The more information, the more the market will go up,” a Group of 6 general manager said. “We all think we’re better than what we are, so everybody will look at the market and say, ‘The best quarterback in college football made X amount of money. I’m better than that. I deserve more.’ Even if they aren’t better than that, if they believe that and put themselves out there in the open market, somebody is going to pay a hefty price for it.”
Why the cost of college football roster building won’t slow down anytime soon
Winning is expensive, but the alternative costs more. “Losing is the most expensive element of our sport,” a Pac-12 assistant coach said.
www.nytimes.com
Go Gophers!!
