Possible Portal Point Guards | Page 54 | Syracusefan.com

Possible Portal Point Guards

im sure you’re job is very special and you’re a great judge of talent. Considering you hired a guy for 100k more though, talent level was a guess at best. You do you though, I’m not arguing the guy isn’t worth it I’m arguing you’ll lose workers over this because of your lack of understanding how hierarchy works.
You’re way, way out of your element here.
 
Pretty sure the AD has fundraisers at his disposal and was doing just fine with the Lally facility before JB came to this position. Are we building a new building for MBB? To my understanding, there are not as many very large needs from a basketball facility perspective. The biggest need is NIL. Period. And if the AD isn’t focused on this area then I question their vision to the future.
I wouldn't question JW. He's crushing it. Women lax basketball, men's lax. First 20 win season in bball, Fran Brown, New Dome, New Athletic complex. Dont question JW.
Maybe JB is putting as much effort into fund raising as he did recruiting.
JW isn't the problem.
 
I wouldn't question JW. He's crushing it. Women lax basketball, men's lax. First 20 win season in bball, Fran Brown, New Dome, New Athletic complex. Dont question JW.
Maybe JB is putting as much effort into fund raising as he did recruiting.
JW isn't the problem.
You forgot the soccer national championship.

JW is immune to criticism just for his Fran Brown hire, but he's done so much right other than that.
 
I wouldn't question JW. He's crushing it. Women lax basketball, men's lax. First 20 win season in bball, Fran Brown, New Dome, New Athletic complex. Dont question JW.
Maybe JB is putting as much effort into fund raising as he did recruiting.
JW isn't the problem.

Where do some of you get the idea that JB is all of a sudden responsible for NIL?
 
I wonder why JB isn’t helping to lead the charge for basketball NIL fundraising. He knows everyone and has lots of pull .
Do you know for a fact that he isn't?

Because that is what your question implies.
 
I have been told multiple times by people on this forum that our NIL situation is "fine".

Judging from the latest transactions and proceedings, I am calling BS.

See, I don't think you are focused on the right aspect of this.

It isn't the money. Its the approach with how to spend the money.

Right now, our program takes the approach of making one fair, firm offer. No idea how they derive "market value" for determining the amount. They present the package to the kid / his handlers, and represent all of the other positive benefits of coming to SU.

Of the kid gets a higher offer, they reinforce that it isn't just about the monetary value, and that SU is a better choice. But if said kid wants to chase higher $$$, then they don't up the ante.

That's the strategy that I refer to above. Here's your fixed price, we aren't going to change or push our chips in or get caught in a bidding war.

And it's frustrating, because in this case, Leffew likes us the most, and maybe all it would take is an extra 100K or 2 to put SU over the top, but we don't play the game that way. Because where does it stop?

In some ways, its admirable. Instead of getting whipped up in the fever of "winning" and paying extra when you're so close to the finish line, we have a plan and are fiscally responsible.

On the other hand, this is a brand new era of recruiting, and I have no idea whether this strategy will prove to be effective, in an era where everyone is getting paid and the decision criteria for many [most?] quality transfers seems to have fundamentally changed.
 
Seems like the Hofstra kid is still on the table. Whatever happened to the PG who was originally from Syracuse that we were possibly linked to?
 
See, I don't think you are focused on the right aspect of this.

It isn't the money. Its the approach with how to spend the money.

Right now, our program takes the approach of making one fair, firm offer. No idea how they derive "market value" for determining the amount. They present the package to the kid / his handlers, and represent all of the other positive benefits of coming to SU.

Of the kid gets a higher offer, they reinforce that it isn't just about the monetary value, and that SU is a better choice. But if said kid wants to chase higher $$$, then they don't up the ante.

That's the strategy that I refer to above. Here's your fixed price, we aren't going to change or push our chips in or get caught in a bidding war.

And it's frustrating, because in this case, Leffew likes us the most, and maybe all it would take is an extra 100K or 2 to put SU over the top, but we don't play the game that way. Because where does it stop?

In some ways, its admirable. Instead of getting whipped up in the fever of "winning" and paying extra when you're so close to the finish line, we have a plan and are fiscally responsible.

On the other hand, this is a brand new era of recruiting, and I have no idea whether this strategy will prove to be effective, in an era where everyone is getting paid and the decision criteria for many [most?] quality transfers seems to have fundamentally changed.

Tack onto this- there is no cap other than what is set by the program based on available money.. with available being kind of ambiguous given the sources can vary. While say at the pro level you have negotiation- it’s still more structured vs this open ended market. So you only know what you think you know when it comes to how you allocate your funds and whether you should break your budget or not.
 
See, I don't think you are focused on the right aspect of this.

It isn't the money. Its the approach with how to spend the money.

Right now, our program takes the approach of making one fair, firm offer. No idea how they derive "market value" for determining the amount. They present the package to the kid / his handlers, and represent all of the other positive benefits of coming to SU.

Of the kid gets a higher offer, they reinforce that it isn't just about the monetary value, and that SU is a better choice. But if said kid wants to chase higher $$$, then they don't up the ante.

That's the strategy that I refer to above. Here's your fixed price, we aren't going to change or push our chips in or get caught in a bidding war.

And it's frustrating, because in this case, Leffew likes us the most, and maybe all it would take is an extra 100K or 2 to put SU over the top, but we don't play the game that way. Because where does it stop?

In some ways, its admirable. Instead of getting whipped up in the fever of "winning" and paying extra when you're so close to the finish line, we have a plan and are fiscally responsible.

On the other hand, this is a brand new era of recruiting, and I have no idea whether this strategy will prove to be effective, in an era where everyone is getting paid and the decision criteria for many [most?] quality transfers seems to have fundamentally changed.
Risky approach. It's a frustrating feeling to try to negotiate with someone who won't make one single move. And there's people in these kids' camps who want to prove they can negotiate upwards. The only reason I would take the firm offer approach is to build a reputation of doing that in the industry, but not sure how well that will serve them in the college sports NIL landscape.
 
Tack onto this- there is no cap other than what is set by the program based on available money.. with available being kind of ambiguous given the sources can vary. While say at the pro level you have negotiation- it’s still more structured vs this open ended market. So you only know what you think you know when it comes to how you allocate your funds and whether you should break your budget or not.

Right. I mean, because at the end of the day -- you're worth what someone is willing to pay you. So, if we think [I'm just making these numbers up for illustrative purposes] that Leffew is worth 250K, but another school is willing to pay 350K to induce him to play there instead of SU, then sticking to our hard line doesn't alter that his market value has shifted upwards.

We might have been initially right, but not anymore, so it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And again, I commend them not just getting swept up in the thrill of the chase, and deciding -- what the heck, let's make it 400K so we get our guy. Nah.

Seems like this strategy will only work if we can quickly land guys, or identify guys who are quality but under the radar, before other schools get involved. That seems dangerous to me.
 
Where do some of you get the idea that JB is all of a sudden responsible for NIL?
Of course, he isn't responsible for NIL. Nor are many others employed by Syracuse but of all the employees I would bet that if Jim made a push, he might be able to influence a greater commitment to NIL by some of our ex-players and alums. Not saying he isn't but if he really got behind it, he could make a difference.
 
I’m thinking we may get Jaquan Carlos this week. No inside info, but just a feeling I have, especially if Leffew drags his feet.
Think he'd come here as the backup pg to Leffew?
 
Right. I mean, because at the end of the day -- you're worth what someone is willing to pay you. So, if we think [I'm just making these numbers up for illustrative purposes] that Leffew is worth 250K, but another school is willing to pay 350K to induce him to play there instead of SU, then sticking to our hard line doesn't alter that his market value has shifted upwards.

We might have been initially right, but not anymore, so it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And again, I commend them not just getting swept up in the thrill of the chase, and deciding -- what the heck, let's make it 400K so we get our guy. Nah.

Seems like this strategy will only work if we can quickly land guys, or identify guys who are quality but under the radar, before other schools get involved. That seems dangerous to me.
I think what it signals is we'll use our NIL funds to primarily entice high school talent.
 

Similar threads

Forum statistics

Threads
167,709
Messages
4,721,873
Members
5,917
Latest member
FbBarbie

Online statistics

Members online
286
Guests online
2,078
Total visitors
2,364


Top Bottom