Braelon Oliver (Sr LB) Into the Portal

Donate To GopherHole
Gophers_4life said:
OK, fair enough.

Latest game notes are still for the Wisc game, so don't show the Wisc starters, but still give a pretty good picture:

fmp5DoK.png



So I guess I can see that he must feel like he has been replaced by Lindenberg for the 2nd LB that's always on the field. Maybe that right there is the reason.


But with Dixon gone, who I think was considered a "starter" at the LB-esque Nickle/5th DB position in a 4-2-5 configuration ... who is the better LB that would have beat out Oliver next year for the 3rd LB in the 4-3 configuration??

I guess it will be Willis now, or a transfer. Unless there is a younger player that will step up.
Click to expand...
Sori-Marin is gone so that opens up 1 full column on that sheet. So I guess I don't see how thinking he had been beaten out by Lindenberg would be a factor at all since there is still a second spot.

Could mean he felt like he was going to lose playing time to Willis or some other LB on the roster, or the reason is totally unrelated to playing time (closer to home, NIL, something else).
 


MNVCGUY said:
Sori-Marin is gone so that opens up 1 full column on that sheet. So I guess I don't see how thinking he had been beaten out by Lindenberg would be a factor at all since there is still a second spot.

Could mean he felt like he was going to lose playing time to Willis or some other LB on the roster, or the reason is totally unrelated to playing time (closer to home, NIL, something else).
Click to expand...
Gophs didn't view him as a full time linebacker. He wants to play the whole game.
 

kg21 said:
It sure ain't about getting an education. So why not
Click to expand...
It's up to the players if they want to maximize the value of their educational opportunity. I'm sure many former CFB players regret not taking advantage of what they had, and on the other side, many lives have been improved based on the educational opportunities that their football talents provide.

That said, NIL is a separate topic. Plenty of guys making money off of NIL are also great students. Plenty I'm sure are not - same as it was before NIL existed.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Sori-Marin is gone so that opens up 1 full column on that sheet. So I guess I don't see how thinking he had been beaten out by Lindenberg would be a factor at all since there is still a second spot.

Could mean he felt like he was going to lose playing time to Willis or some other LB on the roster, or the reason is totally unrelated to playing time (closer to home, NIL, something else).
Click to expand...
I think the missing bit here is that MSM's spot is like a traditional "Mike" LB, a big, run-stopping middle backer, while the other spot is more of an "outside" LB that has to be able to cover TE/backs and such. Could be wrong though.

Lindenberg I think is kind of a freak athlete, and perhaps could play either, but obviously Oliver either knows or thinks he knows what's going to happen and is thus leaving.
 


Ogee Oglethorpe said:
Careful what you wish for. Isn't this what so many people were screaming for? You have to pay the players, you have to pay the players.... and here we are....
Click to expand...
I think a lot people were thinking "hey, here is an extra $2,500 a semester on top of your scholarship"; not "hey, 5* high school quarterback who has never played a down of college football, my name is Slick Booster and if you come to Helmet School U I'll give you $5,000,000."
 

forever a gopher said:
Is it bizarre that pro teams have more stability than NCAA football right now? Not just reacting to the Oliver news, just the insanity of the portal so far. Unless they change this, it will rip the sport apart and leave but a shell of itself behind.
Click to expand...
And that shell will be Alabama, Ohio St., Texas, George, Michigan, USC,...
 

Gopherchase said:
Shocked by this, but as one of 14s biggest fans going into ‘22 he didn’t play great this year a lot of missed tackles. We must have some ballers behind him and he was told his PT will be challenged next year for this to happen otherwise he maybe is just looking for a change.
Click to expand...
Agree. Besides being frequently nicked and banged up, his coverage at times was atrocious and he seemed to me to be out of position more than he probably should have been. On more than one occasion I was yelling for him to wrap up and make the tackle.
 

Gophers1992 said:
Are you against the free market?
Click to expand...
Almost everybody is against an unbridled, unregulated "free market." That is an exceptionally cruel system that eventually destroys all except a privileged few who gain enormous wealth AND a self-perpetuating advantage that freezes in place an economic aristocracy. Study up on game theory. The US "free market" is regulated for that very reason, and also to preserve some semblance of equity among citizens. The NFL, out of a desire for self-preservation--and to foster equity among members--is actually a highly-regulated "free market," both as to salary caps and free agency rules. The college scene at the moment could use some of the same socio-economic rationality. It would still be a free market, but one that operates more like the highly-evolved US economy and the NFL sub-economy. Something that actually makes sense for ALL the participants.
 
Last edited:



#2Gopher said:
I'm getting a little discouraged with NCCA football as a whole.
Click to expand...
Correct.
Which is why I though last year was the big year. The way things are heading I’m not going to be following the sport except for betting. Not point following recruiting like we used to.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
Almost everybody is against an unbridled, unregulated "free market." That is an exceptionally cruel system that eventually destroys all except a privileged few who gain enormous wealth AND a self-perpetuating advantage that freezes in place an economic aristocracy. Study up on game theory. The US "free market" is regulated for that very reason, and also to preserve some semblance of equity among citizens. The NFL, out of a desire self-preservation--and to foster equity among members--is actually a highly-regulated "free market," both as to salary caps and free agency rules. The college scene at the moment could use some of the same socio-economic rationality. It would still be a free market, but one that operates more like the highly-evolved US economy and the NFL sub-economy. Something that actually makes sense for ALL the participants.
Click to expand...
Post of the Day!
 

MNVCGUY said:
Sori-Marin is gone so that opens up 1 full column on that sheet. So I guess I don't see how thinking he had been beaten out by Lindenberg would be a factor at all since there is still a second spot.

Could mean he felt like he was going to lose playing time to Willis or some other LB on the roster, or the reason is totally unrelated to playing time (closer to home, NIL, something else).
Click to expand...
It could certainly be things completely unrelated to football (homesick, GF, doesn't like coach, etc.).

However, if I'm thinking about it logically in terms of just football, I would think it's the lack of a guarantee of playing time. I'm sure PJ has been really honest with him that we are actively looking to add LBers in the portal. If Oliver slides or POTENTIALLY SLIDES from #2 to #3, that doesn't leave a ton of PT for a 5th year senior and that's assuming he doesn't get passed by any of the younger guys.

I just think with us going into the portal for LB, his PT was on shaky ground. He certainly could have won the job and played a ton but maybe he didn't want to risk it year 5.
 




First, i don't think losing Oliver is a huge issue. It's not great. It's depth, but he's average, at best.

As for the portal, if a head coach can walk out the door any time he wants for more money and greener pastures, why shouldn't players be allowed that same freedom? I don't love the portal or all of the player movement, but it's not the end of the world. Every year, 10 kids are going to jump into the portal, but we're going to bring in about 30/35 new players who WANT to be here.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
Almost everybody is against an unbridled, unregulated "free market." That is an exceptionally cruel system that eventually destroys all except a privileged few who gain enormous wealth AND a self-perpetuating advantage that freezes in place an economic aristocracy. Study up on game theory. The US "free market" is regulated for that very reason, and also to preserve some semblance of equity among citizens. The NFL, out of a desire self-preservation--and to foster equity among members--is actually a highly-regulated "free market," both as to salary caps and free agency rules. The college scene at the moment could use some of the same socio-economic rationality. It would still be a free market, but one that operates more like the highly-evolved US economy and the NFL sub-economy. Something that actually makes sense for ALL the participants.
Click to expand...
The US's free market is exceptionally cruel BECAUSE of those regulations. It creates quasi-capitalism where you can buy off politicians to distort the market into your favor. You find me an industry that is heavily regulated that isn't greasy and maybe i'll disagree.

Similarly, there is nothing "free market" about the NIL system. It is simply a heavily regulated industry where people need to be paid through back channels. It favors the people willing to bend the rules. I'm not saying I'm for it, but if it was more like professional sports (closer to a free market) it would be significantly less corrupt and greasy than this quasi-capitalistic system.
 

tpbeight said:
First, i don't think losing Oliver is a huge issue. It's not great. It's depth, but he's average, at best.

As for the portal, if a head coach can walk out the door any time he wants for more money and greener pastures, why shouldn't players be allowed that same freedom? I don't love the portal or all of the player movement, but it's not the end of the world. Every year, 10 kids are going to jump into the portal, but we're going to bring in about 30/35 new players who WANT to be here.
Click to expand...
At least for a year or so. . .


But I agree with your post but I also think it's really bad for college football. I don't have an answer for even how I would fix it because the entire system was built on a broken idea.
 

I’m with everyone else who thinks this transfer craziness is bad for CFB. Especially combined with NIL stuff, crazy coaching salaries, bowl opt-outs, and the erosion of geographic/cultural identities that come with conference realignment.

I definitely think players should be able to cash in (beyond scholarships) on the NCAA racket. But there has to be a better way to do this. I feel like this is all a path for the rich to get richer even more easily than they did before.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
Almost everybody is against an unbridled, unregulated "free market." That is an exceptionally cruel system that eventually destroys all except a privileged few who gain enormous wealth AND a self-perpetuating advantage that freezes in place an economic aristocracy. Study up on game theory. The US "free market" is regulated for that very reason, and also to preserve some semblance of equity among citizens. The NFL, out of a desire self-preservation--and to foster equity among members--is actually a highly-regulated "free market," both as to salary caps and free agency rules. The college scene at the moment could use some of the same socio-economic rationality. It would still be a free market, but one that operates more like the highly-evolved US economy and the NFL sub-economy. Something that actually makes sense for ALL the participants.
Click to expand...

The problem with college football (athletics) is that it's very hard to regulate. Too many schools with an ineffective regulating body. Plus, even when infractions are caught, the blue bloods get their hands slapped while others get the death penalty. College athletics are the wild wild west.

But yes, attempts to improve competitiveness among members is an essential for a viable sport.
 

FredCoxRocks said:
And that shell will be Alabama, Ohio St., Texas, George, Michigan, USC,...
Click to expand...

Just watched an ESPN documentary on recruiting. These same teams dominated the 1960s-70s because there was usually only two or three televised games per week, and one of these teams were always on the schedule. It was a self serving sport for the blue bloods. This NIL thing could go either way. It's the combination of NIL and easy transfer portal that could be a toxic mix.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
The US's free market is exceptionally cruel BECAUSE of those regulations. It creates quasi-capitalism where you can buy off politicians to distort the market into your favor. You find me an industry that is heavily regulated that isn't greasy and maybe i'll disagree.

Similarly, there is nothing "free market" about the NIL system. It is simply a heavily regulated industry where people need to be paid through back channels. It favors the people willing to bend the rules. I'm not saying I'm for it, but if it was more like professional sports (closer to a free market) it would be significantly less corrupt and greasy than this quasi-capitalistic system.
Click to expand...
You seem to be a fan of the oil and commodities markets in, say, the Russian Federation. Or the oil industry market in the Arab peninsula. They are largely unregulated and have spawned enormous oligopolistic wealth based on economic corruption (including kickbacks of billions to government officials) and the violent deaths of those who get out of line. But at least in those two economic systems ordinary citizens enjoy freedom of expression and movement. No oppression there.

Every large economic system that permits income and wealth distinctions is unavoidably cruel to some degree. The US economy is cruel to an extent; but it isn't exceptionally cruel. Not even close. People vote with their feet. Very few lower-income people choose to flee the US in search of less economic cruelty in other nations. But millions and millions of lower-income people have for decades been beating down the doors of the US to embrace our system and to escape the actual "exceptional" economic cruelty they experience in their home nations.
 
Last edited:

Bob_Loblaw said:
The US's free market is exceptionally cruel BECAUSE of those regulations. It creates quasi-capitalism where you can buy off politicians to distort the market into your favor. You find me an industry that is heavily regulated that isn't greasy and maybe i'll disagree.

Similarly, there is nothing "free market" about the NIL system. It is simply a heavily regulated industry where people need to be paid through back channels. It favors the people willing to bend the rules. I'm not saying I'm for it, but if it was more like professional sports (closer to a free market) it would be significantly less corrupt and greasy than this quasi-capitalistic system.
Click to expand...
Utilities I would say don’t seem to be corrupt, but maybe I’m missing something!
 

Gophergrandpa said:
Almost everybody is against an unbridled, unregulated "free market." That is an exceptionally cruel system that eventually destroys all except a privileged few who gain enormous wealth AND a self-perpetuating advantage that freezes in place an economic aristocracy. Study up on game theory. The US "free market" is regulated for that very reason, and also to preserve some semblance of equity among citizens. The NFL, out of a desire for self-preservation--and to foster equity among members--is actually a highly-regulated "free market," both as to salary caps and free agency rules. The college scene at the moment could use some of the same socio-economic rationality. It would still be a free market, but one that operates more like the highly-evolved US economy and the NFL sub-economy. Something that actually makes sense for ALL the participants.
Click to expand...
Ok, those are fair points, but what's your solution to the current NIL system?
 


Gophergrandpa said:
You seem to be a fan of the oil and commodities markets in, say, the Russian Federation. Or the oil industry market in the Arab peninsula. They are largely unregulated and have spawned enormous oligopolistic wealth based on economic corruption (including kickbacks of billions to government officials) and the violent deaths of those who get out of line. But at least in those two economic systems ordinary citizens enjoy freedom of expression and movement. No oppression there.

Every large economic system that permits income and wealth distinctions is unavoidably cruel to some degree. The US economy is cruel to an extent; but it isn't exceptionally cruel. Not even close. People vote with their feet. Very few people lower-income people choose to flee the US in search of less economic cruelty in other nations. But millions and millions of lower-income people have for decades been beating down the doors of the US to embrace our system and to escape the actual "exceptional" economic cruelty they experience in their home nations.
Click to expand...
I am replying to your mailbox. Trying not to subvert this thread.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
The US's free market is exceptionally cruel BECAUSE of those regulations. It creates quasi-capitalism where you can buy off politicians to distort the market into your favor. You find me an industry that is heavily regulated that isn't greasy and maybe i'll disagree.

Similarly, there is nothing "free market" about the NIL system. It is simply a heavily regulated industry where people need to be paid through back channels. It favors the people willing to bend the rules. I'm not saying I'm for it, but if it was more like professional sports (closer to a free market) it would be significantly less corrupt and greasy than this quasi-capitalistic system.
Click to expand...
This may be an unpopular take, but I think they need to stop trying to distinguish between NIL, pay for play, and whatever else you want to call if, and just let it play out. If some wacko billionaire wants to pay an 18 year old to play for their favorite school, so be it. I don't think someone's earning potential should be restricted simply in the name of fairness for CFB (which has never existed anyway).

If players want to collectively bargain and agree to some sort of cap system, I suppose that's fine, but I can't imagine a scenario where that is realistic.
 


Bob_Loblaw said:
The US's free market is exceptionally cruel BECAUSE of those regulations. It creates quasi-capitalism where you can buy off politicians to distort the market into your favor. You find me an industry that is heavily regulated that isn't greasy and maybe i'll disagree.

Similarly, there is nothing "free market" about the NIL system. It is simply a heavily regulated industry where people need to be paid through back channels. It favors the people willing to bend the rules. I'm not saying I'm for it, but if it was more like professional sports (closer to a free market) it would be significantly less corrupt and greasy than this quasi-capitalistic system.
Click to expand...
See the other SEC.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
The US's free market is exceptionally cruel BECAUSE of those regulations. It creates quasi-capitalism where you can buy off politicians to distort the market into your favor. You find me an industry that is heavily regulated that isn't greasy and maybe i'll disagree.

Similarly, there is nothing "free market" about the NIL system. It is simply a heavily regulated industry where people need to be paid through back channels. It favors the people willing to bend the rules. I'm not saying I'm for it, but if it was more like professional sports (closer to a free market) it would be significantly less corrupt and greasy than this quasi-capitalistic system.
Click to expand...

Pretty much nailed it here.
 

Currently, and for the most part, players can transfer one time and have immediate eligibility. If the player wants to transfer an additional time, they will have to sit out a year.

The exceptions that gain an additional transfer:
1. Transfers during the Covid years were allowed without having to sit a year.
2. If a coach is fired, players have 30 days to transfer and retain eligibility.

Now this may change in the future because last summer the rules committee was debating to remove the one-year sit penalty for all transfers. Maybe they will consider again next year.

I’m okay with immediate eligibility for the first transfer, but not more than that. I think once the Covid players are done with their extra year, the transfer numbers will go down by at least 20%.
 

tpbeight said:
First, i don't think losing Oliver is a huge issue. It's not great. It's depth, but he's average, at best.

As for the portal, if a head coach can walk out the door any time he wants for more money and greener pastures, why shouldn't players be allowed that same freedom? I don't love the portal or all of the player movement, but it's not the end of the world. Every year, 10 kids are going to jump into the portal, but we're going to bring in about 30/35 new players who WANT to be here.
Click to expand...

Even coaches have buyouts and other contract clauses that make a change more difficult than just walking out the door. There needs to be some sort of skin in the game for players jumping ship too. Fans (paying customers) expect at least some semblance of team loyalty or they won't be fans anymore.

If I'm understanding the news correctly, transfers will get more difficult next year. That might be one reason there's a rush to the exits for many players right now.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom