Started By
Message
Article says Bama doesnt have NIL to compete?
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:42 pm
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:42 pm
Is this true? Makes sense they dropped hard last year and there had to be a reason Saban was getting out. Did they lose their competitive advantage when buying players became legal?
LINK
LINK
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:53 pm to swinetime
Yes, yes, everything you said is correct. We are broke and beat down. Sad, really.
Thanks for your concern.
Thanks for your concern.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:56 pm to swinetime
quote:
Did they lose their competitive advantage when buying players became legal?
100% they did.
Now… they aren’t broke and will come up with funds to compete like every other SEC school does. But… the serious advantage they enjoyed since 1960 isn’t there anymore.
This post was edited on 4/3/25 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:56 pm to swinetime
quote:
Did they lose their competitive advantage when buying players became legal?
Of course. It's the reason Saban retired, he knew the jig was up.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:59 pm to Tammany Tom
quote:
quote:
Did they lose their competitive advantage when buying players became legal?
100% they did.
Now… they aren’t broke and will come up with funds to compete like every other SEC school does. But… the serious advantage they enjoyed since 1960 isn’t there anymore.

Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:15 pm to swinetime
quote:
Did they lose their competitive advantage when buying players became legal?


Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:29 pm to swinetime
Bama made a gigantic mistake about 20 years ago when they decided to focus more on out-of-state kids vs in-state. They went from being 70% in-state to just 34% in-state by 2018. They are trying to correct things now but it’s hard to reverse course quickly.
Now that they are 20 years into their experiment, they’ve discovered that most kids from Illinois and New Jersey who come to school there have a great 4 years and then move right back to where they came from, and very few donate back to the school… both for academics or athletics.
In the OTM areas of Birmingham (upscale suburbs), the kids are choosing Auburn at about a 2:1 ratio and Bama is realizing now that they are losing out on the better in-state kids who come from money and are more likely to settle in-state with high-paying careers.
Now that they are 20 years into their experiment, they’ve discovered that most kids from Illinois and New Jersey who come to school there have a great 4 years and then move right back to where they came from, and very few donate back to the school… both for academics or athletics.
In the OTM areas of Birmingham (upscale suburbs), the kids are choosing Auburn at about a 2:1 ratio and Bama is realizing now that they are losing out on the better in-state kids who come from money and are more likely to settle in-state with high-paying careers.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:29 pm to SummerOfGeorge
The rankings here are a false flag. Bama still very attractive to high schoolers. However, where the damage is done is maintaining the roster and depth pieces in all positions. That's where they're getting hurt compared to their run from 2015-2020. They still recruit well and compete, but they're not going to build the super teams of 10 years ago.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:33 pm to SummerOfGeorge
How many times in Saban's last 10 years did Alabama finish third or lower in the conference in the recruiting rankings?
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:38 pm to AUTiger789
quote:I mean, they won 6 national championships using that strategy. Hard to say that was a mistake
Bama made a gigantic mistake about 20 years ago when they decided to focus more on out-of-state kids vs in-state.

Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:40 pm to SEC Doctor
quote:
The rankings here are a false flag. Bama still very attractive to high schoolers. However, where the damage is done is maintaining the roster and depth pieces in all positions. That's where they're getting hurt compared to their run from 2015-2020. They still recruit well and compete, but they're not going to build the super teams of 10 years ago.
That isn't Bama-centric, that's all of college football. Georgia has the exact same issues and Kirby discusses it regularly. Nobody is going to do that anymore. Those days are over in football.
quote:
How many times in Saban's last 10 years did Alabama finish third or lower in the conference in the recruiting rankings?
Well considering one of those is Texas, if you apply Texas to the league previously
2018 - #7 overall (#3) (UGA #1, Texas #3)
They finished #2 and barely ahead of #3 plenty of times the last 5 years.
2020 - #2 overall (#2) (UGA #1) (LSU #4)
2022 - #2 overall (#2) (Texas A&M #1) (UGA #3)
2024 - #2 overall (#2) (UGA #1)
Considering the guy they hired was expected to be a terrible recruiter by most I'd say a Top 3 finish (and #2 finish in avg recruit with a small class) and off to what appears to be just as good if not better a start in 2026 is doing just fine in the recruiting arena.
This post was edited on 4/3/25 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:42 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
I mean, they won 6 national championships using that strategy. Hard to say that was a mistake
I’m talking about university enrollment, not where football players come from.
Kids don’t start giving back to the school immediately upon graduation… most begin doing that in their late ‘30s and early ‘40s. Those instate kids that Bama neglected are all about 25-45 now and they are just recently noticing they don’t have as big of a doner pool as they thought they would after rapid enrollment increases.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:45 pm to SummerOfGeorge
So Saban never finished lower than second in the conference in the recruiting rankings in his past 10 years. He had an overwhelming talent advantage over his competitors when comparing recruiting rankings over any 3-4 year period.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:46 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
That isn't Bama-centric, that's all of college football. Georgia has the exact same issues and Kirby discusses it regularly.
You're right, which reinforces the point that it is going to be harder for Bama to build up teams like they used to.
Because on top of not being quite as good, the other teams are going to be a little bit better, at least those who have taken advantage of the new system to elevate their program, which will make it harder for any to shoot the moon in a given year.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:47 pm to SEC Doctor
quote:
So Saban never finished lower than second in the conference in the recruiting rankings in his past 10 years. He had an overwhelming talent advantage over his competitors when comparing recruiting rankings over any 3-4 year period.
Pretty big gulf between "greatest recruiter and coach of all time" and "can't compete anymore".
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:48 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
I’m talking about university enrollment, not where football players come from. Kids don’t start giving back to the school immediately upon graduation… most begin doing that in their late ‘30s and early ‘40s. Those instate kids that Bama neglected are all about 25-45 now and they are just recently noticing they don’t have as big of a doner pool as they thought they would after rapid enrollment increases.
Probably has more to do with inflation and people not willing to spend money on paying 18-20 year old kids that may leave in a year than it being “they’re not from the state of Alabama! So they don’t give back!”
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:48 pm to ukraine_rebel
quote:
You're right, which reinforces the point that it is going to be harder for Bama to build up teams like they used to.
Because on top of not being quite as good, the other teams are going to be a little bit better, at least those who have taken advantage of the new system to elevate their program, which will make it harder for any to shoot the moon in a given year.
I don't think any sane person expects Alabama to be Alabama of 2011-2020 again - both because the architect of that is gone and the game is different. Frankly I don't think any sane person expects them to be close to that.
But Alabama has enough NIL to compete for players in football and basketball, where they allocate their funds. Their issue (as the article talks about) is funding down the line of sports at the same level of schools like Texas. There just isn't enough cash there to do it at the same level downstream.
This post was edited on 4/3/25 at 2:50 pm
Popular
Back to top
