What does a good team cost?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-20-2025, 10:08 PM
Bothrops

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinto

There is a 5 star in state kid who?s asking price is just over 1 million. So if you apply that to a two deep roster that is roughly 45 million for a competitive team.

What is the price tag for a playoff team? I?d say a minimum of 30 million with 45 million being a guarantee. Granted this is indicative of getting the right value for the price.

Lastly, talking about alumni- we have 150,000 living alumni. If we could get $100 a month from each alum, that would equal 180 million a year. Take 80 and give to nil/athletics and 100 to academics/endowment. State can be a powerhouse. We just have leadership and drive to unite us and get us moving together.

A good team here would probably take $30 million for 2026.
11-20-2025, 10:20 PM
CaptainObvious

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

Assume we lose egg, we should have finished 8-4. I'd say that is a good team - what did we spend for that?

Now a NC or great or elite team that is another question?

What? No. State spent what they spent on a 5-7 team if they lose to Ole Miss. There is no should have. To play that mind game, you have to say State also should have been 3-9 losing also to ASU and Arkansas.
11-21-2025, 12:54 AM
parabrave

Question for Future NIL. When will the schools, NCAA, start making these kids sign 2 year contracts with buyout clauses? They are going to have to do something because the current format will devour NCAA football and sports where a the outlandish money spending will eventually burst the balloon and people will tire of crappy products and the cost and go find other crap to do on Sat.
11-21-2025, 01:00 AM
Todd4State

Quote:

Originally Posted by parabrave

Question for Future NIL. When will the schools, NCAA, start making these kids sign 2 year contracts with buyout clauses? They are going to have to do something because the current format will devour NCAA football and sports where a the outlandish money spending will eventually burst the balloon and people will tire of crappy products and the cost and go find other crap to do on Sat.

Quite a bit of risk there is a player doesn't pan out. Imagine if we gave Kroemehoek a two year deal for a million a year.
11-21-2025, 03:12 AM
parabrave

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd4State

Quite a bit of risk there is a player doesn't pan out. Imagine if we gave Kroemehoek a two year deal for a million a year.

Hey Burrow sucked his 1st year. Then O got Brady to run an offense designed around Burrow. Even though paying a backup a mil a year to sit on the bench doesn't even go in the NFL. You never know QBs need time to learn systems. Having a 2 year contract cools their jets and lets them learn and adjust to the facets of the game.
11-21-2025, 05:16 AM
Cowbeller

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd4State

Quite a bit of risk there is a player doesn't pan out. Imagine if we gave Kroemehoek a two year deal for a million a year.

Ill take this over getting a stud who leaves after a year bc the price just went up
11-21-2025, 08:04 AM
maroonmania

Yes, we need better players but if we are going to be serious about our football program our biggest issue right now is we need a major upgrade in our coaching staff. So what does a competent SEC coaching staff cost? And primarily talking about our assistants coaches even moreso than our HC. The OM staff is so much better than ours its a joke.
11-21-2025, 01:55 PM
Lord McBuckethead

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach34

This. Winning and losing is decided in the trenches

Can you run the ball when you need to?
Can you pass protect?
Can you slow down the run?
Can you pressure the other QB to help your Secondary?

The answers to those questions right there tell you how good your team is

Yep. That is precisely our problem, we can't do any of those.
11-23-2025, 08:44 PM
Bothrops

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEDawg

25M gets you 8-4/9-3

I disagree
11-23-2025, 10:29 PM
BlackSailsDawg

All I know is what I am told, be it accurate is to be seen. We have the money to buy the OL and DL in the portal. We will take JUCOs on the cheap for depth (remember they still have 4 years unless a court rules other wise). For me, it also means a QB from the portal and I know we do not like to hear that because of Taylor. But Lebby's job is to bring in the best chances to win, and he will need a QB if for nothing else but depth.

Having said that, we will still be behind in spending. Ark is now looking at 40 Million. Think That alumni from Vandy isn't going to get involved now?

What our fan base has to come to terms with is this. You can't blame coach who does not have the players to compete. You can't say their recruiting sucks and it's all their fault, because it's not about that any more. It's about payments. Until we reach that level, we should already know what to expect. A year where we overachieve, and years where we don't. Should we reach that point and have the players, and we under perform, then you can look at coaches. Example, LSU. UF... TEXAS...
11-23-2025, 10:32 PM
Harrydawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by maroonmania

Yes, we need better players but if we are going to be serious about our football program our biggest issue right now is we need a major upgrade in our coaching staff. So what does a competent SEC coaching staff cost? And primarily talking about our assistants coaches even moreso than our HC. The OM staff is so much better than ours its a joke.

The money that UM spends sure helps those coaches look good. It?s about the Jimmy?s and the Joe?s more than the X?s and O?s
11-23-2025, 10:59 PM
parabrave

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harrydawg

The money that UM spends sure helps those coaches look good. It?s about the Jimmy?s and the Joe?s more than the X?s and O?s

Look at the money Texas spends and their return on their investment. Not very good. Got to have the right coach make good evaluations and puts the right persons on the field. Lane Kiffen says hello. I mean Trinidad who would've taken a chance on him and then stuck with him when your high prized up and comer got well/.
11-24-2025, 06:50 PM
R2Dawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainObvious

What? No. State spent what they spent on a 5-7 team if they lose to Ole Miss. There is no should have. To play that mind game, you have to say State also should have been 3-9 losing also to ASU and Arkansas.

Sorry you are wrong. It is about context. We had the talent to win 8 games period. Lebby and poor coaching cost us 3 wins. NIL and buying players is about buying talent and we talented 8 wins on the field. Now if you are talking more money for better coaching that is a valid argument.

I watched MSU outplay ASU, UT, Tex and UF but for coaching. Talent wasn't the issue. End of year is about just tired of crap and time to look out for #1.
11-24-2025, 06:52 PM
R2Dawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harrydawg

The money that UM spends sure helps those coaches look good. It?s about the Jimmy?s and the Joe?s more than the X?s and O?s

You got to have both and either one can make the other look good. It ain't just get one side of it and you'll win. Moorhead lost 5 games with a team that should have been in the playoffs. MSU still the only team with #1 D in nation not to make playoffs and that record will stand forever now with 12 teams.
11-24-2025, 06:53 PM
DEDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bothrops

I disagree

How so? Add that to rev sharing and we are about 90% of the rest of the P4 and probably 7-10 range in the SEC. That guys you 4 OOC wins and 4 SEC wins.
11-24-2025, 06:55 PM
DEDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

Sorry you are wrong. It is about context. We had the talent to win 8 games period. Lebby and poor coaching cost us 3 wins. NIL and buying players is about buying talent and we talented 8 wins on the field. Now if you are talking more money for better coaching that is a valid argument.

I watched MSU outplay ASU, UT, Tex and UF but for coaching. Talent wasn't the issue. End of year is about just tired of crap and time to look out for #1.

This is a horrible argument. Lebby could have a completely different play book, strategy, sub package, etc. if he had the money for the players he wants.

We probably spent more than Kentucky this year and that is it. We are doing more, with less.
11-24-2025, 07:08 PM
R2Dawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEDawg

This is a horrible argument. Lebby could have a completely different play book, strategy, sub package, etc. if he had the money for the players he wants.

We probably spent more than Kentucky this year and that is it. We are doing more, with less.

No that is a lame argument. Give me an NFL team and Micky Mouse can coach us to wins. Did you watch us play UT, Tex etc? We had talent to compete and win. It was 38-21 in 4th quarter with TX. We didn't lose that game due to talent. Tenn scored two D TDs. Our no talent D stuck Tenn worse than anyone all year.

It takes players and coaches to win. More money is what many think solves all problems in todays world, well it don't. You do have to have money but it ain't as simple as spend more and win. TAMU spent more than anyone and didn't win until they got good coaching to go with it. One could argue TAMU is less talented than previous years yet the win this year.
11-24-2025, 07:09 PM
R2Dawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEDawg

This is a horrible argument. Lebby could have a completely different play book, strategy, sub package, etc. if he had the money for the players he wants.

We probably spent more than Kentucky this year and that is it. We are doing more, with less.

Lebby ran the playbook he wanted and he played the QB he wanted, period.
11-24-2025, 08:24 PM
Maroon Glasses

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

No that is a lame argument. Give me an NFL team and Micky Mouse can coach us to wins. Did you watch us play UT, Tex etc? We had talent to compete and win. It was 38-21 in 4th quarter with TX. We didn't lose that game due to talent. Tenn scored two D TDs. Our no talent D stuck Tenn worse than anyone all year.

It takes players and coaches to win. More money is what many think solves all problems in todays world, well it don't. You do have to have money but it ain't as simple as spend more and win. TAMU spent more than anyone and didn't win until they got good coaching to go with it. One could argue TAMU is less talented than previous years yet the win this year.

Agree with you that money doesn't necessarily buy you championships. Could you out talent a team and win every now and then? Yes. But in the SEC everybody is talented. Coaching matters. We have seen teams spend ridiculous amounts of money and win 7-9 games a year. When we beat A&M in '22.. that was the most talented recruiting class in history. Now granted, they were young. But all of their recruiting classes out wayyyyyyy better than ours and we had their number until recently when they hired a new coach. You have to have good coaching in this league AND the talent for that coach to be able to win.

This isn't a knock to Lebby, btw. I've spoke my opinion on him.
11-24-2025, 09:55 PM
The Federalist Engineer

LSU probably 7-5 but maybe 8-4 ... spent 20M to 22M

Just a few guys gave 13M of the 22M. The Raising Canes guy was big for this.

Let's start frying and salting chicken tenders.

I think this NIL era will pass, no need to take money from our pockets. The 50 biggest NIL guys are going to meet in a Colorado Mountain retreat and collectively cut donations by 80%.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page