Started By
Message

re: Official Portal Thread

Posted on 2/1/24 at 6:47 am to
Posted by CrimsonBoz
Member since Sep 2014
16995 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 6:47 am to
I hate we didn’t get Muhammad but we have alot of 5 stars that could go there.
Posted by Sl0thstronautEsq
Antarctica
Member since Aug 2018
9265 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 8:45 am to
quote:

I hate we didn’t get Muhammad but we have a lot of 5 stars that could go there.


I think getting Tacario would make up for Muhammed, but even if we don't get him, as you said, plenty of talent on the roster, they're just lean on experience.
Posted by tide06
Member since Oct 2011
11178 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 9:38 am to
quote:

I think getting Tacario would make up for Muhammed, but even if we don't get him, as you said, plenty of talent on the roster, they're just lean on experience.

One of the 5* kids is gonna have to start, won’t be the first time and I don’t think we can hold on to many of them moving forward if they don’t start right away due to NIL anyway.
Posted by Remiden
Member since Jan 2018
1322 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 11:14 am to
I'm not sure having a transfer that is not familiar with the system or Bama is better than having a 5? that has been here a year.
This post was edited on 2/1/24 at 11:36 am
Posted by Sl0thstronautEsq
Antarctica
Member since Aug 2018
9265 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 11:20 am to
quote:

I'm not sure having a transfer that is not familiar with the system


Well it's a brand new system, so a guy that has been here a year will know as much as a transfer (unless the transfer is from Wash or South Alabama)
This post was edited on 2/1/24 at 11:21 am
Posted by Remiden
Member since Jan 2018
1322 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 11:35 am to
Yep, but he won't be new to Bama.
Posted by Evolved Simian
Bushwood Country Club
Member since Sep 2010
20497 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 3:16 pm to
quote:

I think getting Tacario would make up for Muhammed, but even if we don't get him, as you said, plenty of talent on the roster, they're just lean on experience.



I feel like people are sleeping on Domani Jackson.
Posted by Sl0thstronautEsq
Antarctica
Member since Aug 2018
9265 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 3:17 pm to
quote:

I feel like people are sleeping on Domani Jackson.


I think he can lock down one CB spot, I was thinking of Tacario for the other, assuming none of the guys currently on the roster are ready.
Posted by Alabama_Fan
The Road Less Traveled
Member since Sep 2020
13079 posts
Posted on 2/1/24 at 6:55 pm to
quote:

NEWS: Iowa is self-reporting a violation for impermissible contact with Alabama OT transfer Kadyn Proctor, @ScottDochterman reports.
Posted by antibarner
Member since Oct 2009
23711 posts
Posted on 2/2/24 at 12:42 am to
BS...Half the country reported them, including me. They should get hit hard for this.

If someone isn't made an example of, this will only get worse. It should cost them a scholarship.
This post was edited on 2/2/24 at 12:43 am
Posted by ETT2001
Member since Dec 2020
720 posts
Posted on 2/2/24 at 10:38 am to
Is Tacario that good? Not very highly rated out of HS and played at Arizona meh. Never seen or heard of him but do not follow Arizona or PAC football much.
This post was edited on 2/2/24 at 10:51 am
Posted by AbSnopes
Birmingham
Member since Dec 2020
921 posts
Posted on 2/2/24 at 10:50 am to
quote:

better than having a 5? that has been here a year.


But DeBoer hasn't brought anybody from his defensive staff in so far. His offense was great, but not his defense, so he may be looking at a 4-2-5 defense, but it will be run by different people. Also that base defense is not unique.
Posted by Sl0thstronautEsq
Antarctica
Member since Aug 2018
9265 posts
Posted on 2/2/24 at 11:03 am to
quote:

Is Tacario that good?


He was AP Second-Team All-Pac-12 and led the conference in PBU (with 13) as a Sophomore, plus he's got crazy size (he's either 6'3'' or 6'4'' depending on what site you check).

So I think if he continues to develop, he could be really, really good.
Posted by Diego Ricardo
Alabama
Member since Dec 2020
5913 posts
Posted on 2/2/24 at 3:51 pm to
For a defense that seems to like playing some quarters and cover 3, I think size at corner is useful.
Posted by mrbroker
Sylacauga Alabama
Member since Jul 2011
16524 posts
Posted on 2/4/24 at 9:31 am to
The portal and NIL will chase many coaches ages 55 and up to leave for the NFL. Unless Sankey and the big 10 guy get something done soon
Posted by TideWarrior
Asheville/Chapel Hill NC
Member since Sep 2009
11834 posts
Posted on 2/4/24 at 9:47 am to
quote:

Unless Sankey and the big 10 guy get something done soon


Nothing they can do now. The Alston case only ruled that the NCAA does not have the authority to prevent NIL. But the judges made it clear they would prevent basically anyone who attempts to hinder a player in regard to NIL. Basically, they are waiting on the NCAA, state, or college from trying. The left door open or set a trap basically.

Another court in December basically did the same thing in regard to the transfer portal using the same premise. The only thing here is move the transfer window to a time that easier for all to manage like maybe late spring and they may no longer have that opportunity. But limiting the number of times a player can transfer, sitting out a year, and needing a reason to transfer is no longer an option.

Multimillion dollar coaching salaries and multibillion dollar TV deals created this.

The only out now is contracts(employees) and without union representation that will not happen. Once that does CFB will be completely done as well as other sports.

To many people have gotten rich off these players. Now the Sherman Act is being applied to them and not a thing any conference or those in charge will change that. The players have the full backing of the law/courts.


Posted by Diego Ricardo
Alabama
Member since Dec 2020
5913 posts
Posted on 2/4/24 at 9:52 am to
I don't think unionization and contracted employment will end college football to be quite honest. In fact, it is practically the only way to vaguely return to pre-Alston ruling norms in college football.

Want to limit player free agency? Give them some collective bargaining power with one hand and contracts that limit their free agency with the other.

The young men are getting to have their cake and eat it too right now. It is better to let them unionize if it means you can lock in your roster management through contract law.

The complication colleges are working through right now is getting some sort of Title IX exceptions for college football (and maybe men's basketball too) OR contriving some shell game to avoid it being applicable altogether.
This post was edited on 2/4/24 at 9:54 am
Posted by TideWarrior
Asheville/Chapel Hill NC
Member since Sep 2009
11834 posts
Posted on 2/4/24 at 12:36 pm to
That is one problem they are going to have to deal with Title IX. The left politically is pushing for athletes to be employees. The Dept of Labor is beating the drum for it and using CA as a spring board. They want all athletes no matter the sport to be classified as employees. They are not to allow it be sport specific and they can not legally.

Every major institution that receives federal money has to apply certain rules across the board. Which is basically every DI program. Employees at these said institutions also fall under Title IX. Once these athletes becomes employees even as a contract employee Title IX will govern how they get paid.

Unionization and contracts will not remove Title IX from the equation. Yes it may help roster management for football and even basketball to some extent but it will have to apply to every sport including financial distributions.



I agree there is some benefits via contracts but what coach
Posted by Diego Ricardo
Alabama
Member since Dec 2020
5913 posts
Posted on 2/4/24 at 12:46 pm to
I imagine you can have all athletes be employees but the contract’s compensation package is essentially the same deal as now for non-revenue athletes. People are being dense if they think this ends with women’s soccer players getting the same deal as a football athlete. That is simply not in line with the realities of what is driving the revenue explosion in college athletics.
Posted by TideWarrior
Asheville/Chapel Hill NC
Member since Sep 2009
11834 posts
Posted on 2/4/24 at 1:04 pm to
Right now the Dept of Labor along with union support is trying to classify every athlete, revenue or non revenue, as employees. Once they all become employees for the university they will still fall under Title IX governance

What that means is they may not get the same deal but what will happen no matter whether the athlete is from a non revenue sport or has no NIL value they will all still have to get paid by the university. Under Title IX the university will not be able to discriminate meaning it does not take into consideration the athlete's value. Just like right now it does not take into consideration that football needs more allotted scholarships due to roster requirements, especially safety. Hence why many colleges do not have certain men's olympic or other non revenue sports.

The structure may be different to some extent but right now no university is paying athletes outside of their scholarship and many universities will struggle to pay all their athletes including those from non revenue sports to not violate Title IX.

It is not being dense to understand the reason the NCAA is helpless right now is because of the Sherman Act the same issue will hinder universities under Title IX.
This post was edited on 2/4/24 at 1:08 pm
first pageprev pagePage 36 of 38Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter