Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="wfschrec, post: 5648114, member: 361"]
Actually higher retention favors the 65 model ... the simple math leads to also increasing the likelihood of retention due to more available funds per player.

$13 million split evenly (yes I know it doesn't have to be even and assuming the rev share is $13 million of the $20.5) across 105 players is $123,800 per player.  Across 65 players it becomes $200,000 and as you tier the payouts ..  (premium players get larger cuts i.e. QB gets a lot more than kicker) it decreases the burden on NIL and also means you have a better chance to pay for seasoned portal replacements.  In theory if you select 8 players (lets say special teams like kickers, punters, snappers, or just special teams designates like a LB for kickoff coverage) and pay them $100K a piece (which is rather healthy) you then have an extra $800K which now means you could designate that allotment to paying $1 million with rev share to a starting QB without even touching NIL.  If you are able to retain at a high clip you are removed from having to pull in gobs of NIL to go out and bring in a large class or a lot of new bodies from the portal.  With the way classes are now and if we go to 5 for 5 expect most players to be on campus 5 years anyway which means you may lose anywhere from what ... 13-20 bodies per season tops.  If you are a high retainer that is far less to replace on a rotational basis.

The coin flip analogy is fine if this is a heads or tails situation but whether or not a player succeeds isn't equivalent to a coin toss due to a litany of environmental factors.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?