This is a Multiple Year Rebuild

[rutgersal_rivals139582]

There’s not enough talent and there’s not enough money to turn things around in one year, unless our freshmen come in and set the world on fire which is unlikely, and we get impact transfers the level of Cam Spencer, which is also unlikely.

If it was so important for basketball to win, people should have given more to NIL, but since they didn’t, we play with the hand we’re dealt. The story of Rutgers Athletics. Meanwhile, UConn just landed one of the best guards in the portal, and will make a run for #1.

Pikiell turned things around once. He can do it again. We’re not firing a competent Coach with multiple years to go on his deal. He’s gradually fixing the lack of talent on the roster under adverse circumstances. (Ie not enough money). We are just going to have to be patient. This is a multiple year rebuild. The objective this year, is to simply build the foundation. Angelino Mark and Chris Nwuli are a start. There will be more to come.

 

[fluoxetine]

If we don’t have money for a winning roster this year, how will we have money to retain the players needed for a winning roster next year?

Without some restrictions on transferring, you basically need to rerecruit a new team every season. So if our budget truly won’t hack it we are just ****** until something changes or we get lucky.

 

[FinalFourOrBust_rivals142702]

There’s no such thing as multi year rebuilds anymore

 

[coldsprings_rivals]

All this talk about NIL money, and we ignore what is in RU's control.

It was not money that stopped Pikiell from running an offense this year.

It was not money that stopped Pikiell from demanding an all-out effort from players.

I don't remember who on this board wisely observed that watching March Madness was like watching a different sport than the RU games this year. He was not just talking about the talent gap.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

No such thing as a rebuild any more. The draft/auction will be next year again at this time. The only question is the amount of money we will have at the auction.

This is like building a sand castle at low tide.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

It was not money that stopped Pikiell from running an offense this year.

that is code for you are disappointed with results

Anyone who goes to games and watches the Rutgers bench, Williams and Harper, and players knows we run an offense.

 

[bac2therac]

There’s no such thing as multi year rebuilds anymore

This

Every year is its own rebuild

75% plus new rosters every season

Be better Al

 

[Mr_Twister]

Maybe NCAA limits teams to 2 incoming transfer portal athletes annually, rather than the current free-for-all revolving door rosters.

 

[RUich]

If you look at this as an investment, the fact that there was not enough financial interest last year, the results will decide if people change their minds and invest now. Next season looks like it will be even worse. So, even less money.
No rebuilds anymore as already stated. We will be looking up at the rest of the league.

 

[dconifer0]

There’s no such thing as multi year rebuilds anymore

Yeah, most teams have to rebuild every year now. There are teams out there at this moment with nothing but walk-ons on the roster. Teams that actually competed and won games in the season that hasn't even ended yet...

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

How about odd years (next year) we take $4,000,000 and put in cash (get interest of course) so in the even year we have $8,200,000 to spend.

Odd years we go 10-28
Even years we go 20-12

 

[dconifer0]

Maybe NCAA limits teams to 2 incoming transfer portal athletes annually, rather than the current free-for-all revolving door rosters.

But what would their motivation be for doing that? It's only us geezers who don't like the new landscape...

 

[Smols]

But what would their motivation be for doing that? It's only us geezers who don't like the new landscape...

I doubt anyone likes this except players and agents.

 

[dconifer0]

I doubt anyone likes this except players and agents.

I hope you're right, honestly. I really do.

Until about fifteen years ago I followed pro sports rabidly, but I completely lost interest and don't know jack anymore (although I'm loosely keeping track of the Capitals and Ovechkin, and will be attending a game in Washington next weekend just so I can hang with my lifelong friends, so ha ha, I'm a hypocrite). For me, it's not just talk when I say that my interest in college sports is waning, for most of the same reasons...

 

[Mr_Twister]

But what would their motivation be for doing that? It's only us geezers who don't like the new landscape...

There can be some middle ground to the current setup.

 

[Retired711]

There can be some middle ground to the current setup.

Here's the problem: every restriction on transferring can be challenged as a violation of the Federal antitrust laws and a defendant found liable is subject to paying treble damages. One of two things has to happen: Congress has to change the antitrust laws to allow at least some restrictions or the players have to be allowed to unionize so that they can negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the schools that contains restrictions. (Restrictions in collective bargaining agreements can't be challenged on antitrust grounds.)

The House v. NCAA settlement that is apparently about to happen helps a little; at least it imposes a salary cap so that the majors and mid-majors are all on the same level -- Michigan won't be able to outspend Rutgers. But the settlement does nothing to stop kids from transferring every year. And the settlement doesn't protect the schools from the possibility of an antitrust suit by the Federal government -- which can also result in treble damages. That's certainly not going to happen under the current Presidential administration, but it could happen under a future one. So the only solution is for Congress to step in or for the players to unionze.

 

[NickRU714]

I doubt anyone likes this except players and agents.

Michigan went from literally last place to the Sweet 16.

They probably like it.

 

[MadRU]

No such thing as a rebuild with the current atmosphere of college sports.

It is now a yearly load. If you have money you can load up with top talent, if not you load up with lower level talent and hope they can gel as a team to be decent.

 

[NickRU714]

How about odd years (next year) we take $4,000,000 and put in cash (get interest of course) so in the even year we have $8,200,000 to spend.

Odd years we go 10-28
Even years we go 20-12

This is a great idea.

What does "development program" mean? Don't expect to actually compete and win every year. We're going to stink most years.

Well do the same thing.
Only try and compete every 2 or 3 years by building up a budget.

But the coach only gets 1 shot at it.
If they blow their year that's likely all they get.
Which means it can't be a coach with a complicated system that takes years to learn.

 

[seansherm]

Al is right. RU doesn't have the funds to build an annual team, it's $ will need to be spent on retention and freshman. It will take awhile sadly.

 

[The RUT]

Well Al, he’s got 2 years.

There’s always been the offense stuff, rotations not being worked out for essentially the entire season, lack of inbounds plays, etc.

While I’m not a fan of all those things, they are what they are.

The #1 thing that I look at these days that makes me say “screw this program,” is the fact that he is 100% aware he needs a GM and we don’t have one for this offseason.

The GM role was discussed in the beginning of this year. He’s doing interviews saying “we know we need that and we know we’re behind there.”

And the offseason after the biggest disappointment of all time, and he won’t have a GM in place.

Inexcusable, he needs to start being proactive rather than reactive. Is he driving the ship, or is he just along for the ride?

 

[NickRU714]

Al is right. RU doesn't have the funds to build an annual team, it's $ will need to be spent on retention and freshman. It will take awhile sadly.

Where is the money for "retention" coming from?

If we don't have money to acquire talent, we won't have money to retain equivalent talent.

If Grant costs $2.5m next off season to "retain", is Rutgers going to be able to do that?

Retention cost increases as the player develops.

 

[bac2therac]

Al is right. RU doesn't have the funds to build an annual team, it's $ will need to be spent on retention and freshman. It will take awhile sadly.

there is no such thing as retention..thats a minority..even blue blood schools are not getting much retention..any player that has a pulse is going to look for the highest bag...that is all its about now....18-21 year old getting bags...not making the ncaa tourney or getting an education

 

[needmorecowbell]

Well Al, he’s got 2 years.

There’s always been the offense stuff, rotations not being worked out for essentially the entire season, lack of inbounds plays, etc.

While I’m not a fan of all those things, they are what they are.

The #1 thing that I look at these days that makes me say “screw this program,” is the fact that he is 100% aware he needs a GM and we don’t have one for this offseason.

The GM role was discussed in the beginning of this year. He’s doing interviews saying “we know we need that and we know we’re behind there.”

And the offseason after the biggest disappointment of all time, and he won’t have a GM in place.

Inexcusable, he needs to start being proactive rather than reactive. Is he driving the ship, or is he just along for the ride?

We don’t have a GM because the AD isn’t in place and the previous AD was not supporting NIL (what we need the GM for). It has nothing to do with Pike. Schiano doesn’t have a GM either. The university is sitting on their hands until the president and AD positions are filled. I don’t agree either but you can’t blame the coaches.

 

[CollegeSenior]

Maybe NCAA limits teams to 2 incoming transfer portal athletes annually, rather than the current free-for-all revolving door rosters.

Sounds good in principle but what would Indiana do to put a team on the court next year if such a rule was in place today?

 

[The RUT]

We don’t have a GM because the AD isn’t in place and the previous AD was not supporting NIL (what we need the GM for). It has nothing to do with Pike. Schiano doesn’t have a GM either. The university is sitting on their hands until the president and AD positions are filled. I don’t agree either but you can’t blame the coaches.

Schiano does essentially have a GM and he has people managing the NIL situation, it’s just not common knowledge.

Not having an AD is the biggest excuse out there. Be a man, take action. The University has always sat on its hands, we need coaches who refuse to sit on theirs.

We hired not 1, but 2 DC’s with no president or AD. It’s Pike’s program, he needs to get **** done.

 

[needmorecowbell]

Schiano does essentially have a GM and he has people managing the NIL situation, it’s just not common knowledge.

Not having an AD is the biggest excuse out there. Be a man, take action. The University has always sat on its hands, we need coaches who refuse to sit on theirs.

We hired not 1, but 2 DC’s with no president or AD. It’s Pike’s program, he needs to get **** done.

Greg does not have a GM. Stop. You’re just looking for things to be upset about with Pike. If Greg had the green light, he would have hired a GM already.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

No such thing as multi year anything in hoops.

 

[Retired711]

Schools can pick how to allocate the money they pay players. U. Conn, which is much stronger in men's and women's basketball than in football, could decide to allocate a higher percentage to basketball than most other schools. Or Penn State, which is traditionally stronger in football than basketball, could decide to allocate more than most schools do to football. We may be heading for a world in which schools choose which sports to specialize in.

 

[Retired711]

No such thing as multi year anything in hoops.

True, Would a high school kid be willing to sign a multi-year contract and give up the right to transfer if things don't work out? I doubt it.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Football will always be a bit different because more guys get playing time, and more guys have potential to actually make an NFL roster. And there’s no true G league for development either so it still matters to pick the right program for your future.

 

[The RUT]

Greg does not have a GM. Stop. You’re just looking for things to be upset about with Pike. If Greg had the green light, he would have hired a GM already.

Lol you don't know what you're talking about, but that's fine.

Schiano has the entire NIL situation completely under control, and he's got it covered from the money coming in to the way that the money is getting managed and paid out. I'm not looking for anything to be upset about, it's directly in front of our faces.

Imagine announcing (while we had no AD) that R Hoops is going to add a GM. Then having the biggest disappointment of a season ever. Then NOT having a plan for the GM spot at seasons end. THEN getting interviewed and saying "I know we need a GM, and I know we're behind in that area, but we likely won't have one for this off-season."

And Schiano has tried to help Pike... dude is just a lost cause.

 

[rutgersal_rivals139582]

All this talk about NIL money, and we ignore what is in RU's control.

It was not money that stopped Pikiell from running an offense this year.

It was not money that stopped Pikiell from demanding an all-out effort from players.

I don't remember who on this board wisely observed that watching March Madness was like watching a different sport than the RU games this year. He was not just talking about the talent gap.

It was mostly the lack of talent that stopped Pikiell from running an effective offense last year. This year, we will be a high defensive effort team. But it’s only the start. We are building the foundation.

 

[rutgersal_rivals139582]

There’s no such thing as multi year rebuilds anymore

At Rutgers, we rebuild in multiple years because we heavily rely on freshman to develop. Teams can rebuild in single years because they have money. We don’t.

 

[rutgersal_rivals139582]

If we don’t have money for a winning roster this year, how will we have money to retain the players needed for a winning roster next year?

Without some restrictions on transferring, you basically need to rerecruit a new team every season. So if our budget truly won’t hack it we are just ****ed until something changes or we get lucky.

We have revenue share which should allow us to keep our players, unless someone really blows up.

 

[MadRU]

True, Would a high school kid be willing to sign a multi-year contract and give up the right to transfer if things don't work out? I doubt it.

Sign contracts with buyouts just like coaches do.

If you sign a two year contract and decide to leave after one year, either the school that signs you next or you pay the buyout to the school you are leaving.

Just like coaches leaving. This way the original school gets some kind of compensation for development etc.

 

[Retired711]

Sign contracts with buyouts just like coaches do.

If you sign a two year contract and decide to leave after one year, either the school that signs you next or you pay the buyout to the school you are leaving.

Just like coaches leaving. This way the original school gets some kind of compensation for development etc.

If you were a high school kid, would you sign such a contract? What would be the advantage to you? A coach at least knows he'll get to coach. A kid who becomes a benchwarmer would have no choice other than either not play or pay to get out of the contract.

 

[rutgersal_rivals139582]

Schools can pick how to allocate the money they pay players. U. Conn, which is much stronger in men's and women's basketball than in football, could decide to allocate a higher percentage to basketball than most other schools. Or Pen State, which is traditionally stronger in football than basketball, could decide to allocate more than most schools do to football. We may be heading for a world in which schools choose which sports to specialize in.

UConn has big NIL donors, which we don’t. Not a coincidence that the transfer guards final two schools were UConn and St John’s, both big $ NIL schools. Other schools like Rutgers can offer the prospect of revshare contingent on the settlement.

 

[MadRU]

If you were a high school kid, would you sign such a contract? What would be the advantage to you? A coach at least knows he'll get to coach. A kid who becomes a benchwarmer would have no choice other than either not play or pay to get out of the contract.

If it’s the rule, then they would have to. The way it is now is ridiculous.

People always used the argument that coaches can leave at any time, well they have contracts with buyouts and other stipulations, make it the same for professional college athletes.

 

[rutgersal_rivals139582]

No such thing as a rebuild any more. The draft/auction will be next year again at this time. The only question is the amount of money we will have at the auction.

This is like building a sand castle at low tide.

Rutgers is rebuilding and hopefully we can keep most of our guys next year.