Sabans recruiting pitch is everything you thought it would be

[QuadF]

Here is a quick thought over my morning coffee. He mentions 64 players in the "league". Every year he has around 100 players on on scholarship/PWO. In the last 4 years that is 400 young men that soon will need to find their way in the world. 64 out of 400 means 16% have a job and good income with which to plan a future ( career outside football, family, etc.). I never hear him mention a college education or degree for the other 84% or their prospects after Alabama. What about them? Is he too busy doing AFLAC commercials to care? These are critical recruiting points to use with 95% of the rest of the HS student-athletes out there that have a lot of talent and potential regardless of star rating. Just sayin'.

He isn't turning over 100 players per year. Probably closer to 35.

 

[rghoae]

Nothing untrue in there. What Saban doesn't say, and the recruit is too young to realize, is that pitch is the reason Saban makes millions every year. He got whipped in the NFL when he had to excel as a coach. In the college game where he needs only excel as a recruiter, he has the ability to pile up those gaudy statistics. And because he piled them up as a grabber of talent instead of developer of talent, the statistics lose their meaing.

Alabama under Saban doesn't "send people" to the NFL as much as it's really good at directing traffic through Alabama to the NFL that would've gotten drafted from wherever.

Even if this is entirely true (and it most certainly isn't..Saban was a bad NFL coach but NFL coaching is not about developing players as much as developing a cohesive team and system and adapting rapidly on a week to week basis with new schemes and strategies) it's still a really good reason for a player who has NFL prospects (which is almost certain if Alabama offered you) to go play for Saban. It's a huge advantage to be part of the college -> NFL pipeline that Saban has established.

 

[Tampa Jacket]

Alabama is “college” football only by name. They need to break off and go to form their own league with other schools who exist only to play football.

 

[andrew]

Alabama is “college” football only by name. They need to break off and go to form their own league with other schools who exist only to play football.

That would be most P5 schools. It's just that most of them don't do it as well as Bama.

 

[Tampa Jacket]

Where did Forest Gump go to college?

 

[andrew]

 

[wesleyd21]

Follow the money. Facilities and what schools are willing to shell out (paying players) to get top-shelf talent.

If you think USCw’s demise has nothing to do with getting busted (for paying Reggie Bush and his mom) then you’re a dumbass.

Hope the same happens to Bama and Uga simultaneously.

 

[Flywheel]

Follow the money. Facilities and what schools are willing to shell out (paying players) to get top-shelf talent.

If you think USCw’s demise has nothing to do with getting busted (for paying Reggie Bush and his mom) then you’re a dumbass.

Hope the same happens to Bama and Uga simultaneously.

Keep hoping. I would be shocked if there is not a powerpoint presentation out there showing how much revenue was lost for the NCAA because USCw got caught.

 

[FatJacket]

Nothing untrue in there. What Saban doesn't say, and the recruit is too young to realize, is that pitch is the reason Saban makes millions every year. He got whipped in the NFL when he had to excel as a coach. In the college game where he needs only excel as a recruiter, he has the ability to pile up those gaudy statistics. And because he piled them up as a grabber of talent instead of developer of talent, the statistics lose their meaing.

Alabama under Saban doesn't "send people" to the NFL as much as it's really good at directing traffic through Alabama to the NFL that would've gotten drafted from wherever.

Wow! What a jackass, ignorant. waste of 30 seconds. Gawd man, you don’t know anything.

 

[ncjacket]

Keep hoping. I would be shocked if there is not a powerpoint presentation out there showing how much revenue was lost for the NCAA because USCw got caught.

People always say this but why would the NCAA lose money if they got caught?

 

[LaFlavor]

People always say this but why would the NCAA lose money if they got caught?

The University of Spoiled Children has a huge fan base and is based in the LA TV market. When they're not good, that fan base and the LA market don't watch the games on TV, buy apparel, or (to a lesser extent) buy tickets to games. E$PN sees lower profits, officially licensed apparel profits go down, and ticket money goes down, which means that the NCAA sees less money.

The same can be said for teams like Texas, Bama, U(sic)GA, an Ohio State, and Clemmons.

 

[ncjacket]

The University of Spoiled Children has a huge fan base and is based in the LA TV market. When they're not good, that fan base and the LA market don't watch the games on TV, buy apparel, or (to a lesser extent) buy tickets to games. E$PN sees lower profits, officially licensed apparel profits go down, and ticket money goes down, which means that the NCAA sees less money.

The same can be said for teams like Texas, Bama, U(sic)GA, an Ohio State, and Clemmons.

I don’t know man. TV contracts are already in place and ESPN sells adds nationally. If a certain market drops for a year or two, and I doubt it really would, I don’t think it would have a material effect. Ticket sales and apparel maybe but unless it was the death penalty do you honestly think ugag fans are not going to a game or not but another hat or shirt? I just think it’s an overblown theory.

 

[LaFlavor]

I don’t know man. TV contracts are already in place and ESPN sells adds nationally. If a certain market drops for a year or two, and I doubt it really would, I don’t think it would have a material effect. Ticket sales and apparel maybe but unless it was the death penalty do you honestly think ugag fans are not going to a game or not but another hat or shirt? I just think it’s an overblown theory.

I agree that one of those teams being down for a year or two wouldn't really affect anything. I actually think the NCAA prefers that they have ups and downs to an extent. But, when was the last time USCw was really relevant on the national stage? They won the Rose Bowl at the end of the 2016 season, and were in the top 5, but they were never really in the discussion for a natty and they've been pretty Calvin Johnsonesque for the rest of the past decade. Prolonged down periods like that are going to start to affect TV ratings for a team like USC.

But, you raise another good point. It's a zero-sum game, so with USCw down, it opens things up for other teams to succeed. However, few other schools are going to have the built in financial advantage (for the NCAA) that USC is going to bring with the LA market, and certainly none on the west coast. Oregon and ASU have pretty big fan bases, but even Phoenix has nowhere near the TV market of LA. So they would rather have USC be really good 3 or 4 years out of five, with one of the other schools knocking them off the top spot every so often in the PAC 12.

Obviously the NCAA doesn't get to just dictate who is good and bad every year, and there are other factors at play that would explain why Bama gets such a light touch without a major city like LA or even Atlanta. The NCAA does have significant influence, though. That's why kids at Alabama and Georgie can drive around in BMWs, while we get hammered if one of our athletes gets a t-shirt.

 

[andrew]

I don’t know man. TV contracts are already in place and ESPN sells adds nationally. If a certain market drops for a year or two, and I doubt it really would, I don’t think it would have a material effect. Ticket sales and apparel maybe but unless it was the death penalty do you honestly think ugag fans are not going to a game or not but another hat or shirt? I just think it’s an overblown theory.

While I am sure that the NCAA would absolutely prefer more eyeballs on games than fewer, I agree the year-to-year connection between NCAA revenues and what teams succeed are tenuous.

However, the people in the NCAA don't exist and work in isolation. No doubt they have personal relationships with many people associated with NCAA schools, and are inevitably influenced by those relationships. *Those* people are definitely affected, either monetarily or emotionally, by the success of individual teams on a year-to-year basis. And richer schools with bigger fanbases are going to have more connections and be able to exert more influence than smaller schools.