Recent Comments
Lawson as OC
I would argue that the activities for "Director of Player Personnel + Spreadsheet" and NFL GM are more similar than they are dissimilar. At its core, they boil down to "what are the desired players for our football team" with "how do we get and keep these players".
Obvious (and significant) differences being what you mentioned: college players have virtually unrestricted movement, they don't sign with the GM, essentially renegotiating for money every year, etc.
Also I think it's very unlikely an NFL GM is leaving their job to become a college GM, so likely you'd be getting someone from an NFL front office who would probably be more aligned to the specific activities of a college GM (i.e. head of scouting, analytics, etc.)
This made me chuckle.
A college GM is probably more similar to a pro GM than it is to 90% of other careers a college GM could come from
This is where I disagree. I think College GMs are going to be either:
- Director of Player Personnel + a spreadsheet - Today, DPP are responsible for overseeing the entire recruiting operation, managing player evaluations, roster organization, and serving as a liaison for compliance and player support. Their role has expanded in recent years to include advanced analytics, transfer portal management, etc. The only 'new' thing added is managing rev share. Which, honestly, I think is a lot simpler than a lot of other pieces of their role.
- Associate ADs of Football - An Associate Athletic Director (AD) of Football on a college football team oversees major aspects of the football program's administration, strategic planning, compliance, and external relations. This leadership role functions as a bridge between the athletic department, coaching staff, support units, and university administration, directly managing key areas to support the program's athletic and academic success. The often have some football knowledge, and are expected to have the skillset to evaluate a coach's performance
Both of these titles/roles are pretty common today.
Contrast these jobs to the NFL GM, which is responsible for:
- Construct and maintain the team's roster by drafting players, negotiating trades, signing free agents, and releasing or reassigning personnel according to team needs.
- Oversee player scouting, including coordinating draft preparations, evaluating college prospects, interviewing athletes at the NFL Combine, and delegating work among a scouting department.
- Negotiate player and coach contracts, manage the salary cap, and ensure roster compliance with NFL rules and regulations.
- Collaborate with the head coach and owner to formulate team-building strategies and make decisions on hiring or firing coaches and staff.
- Has final veto authority on football-related decisions, even above the head coach in most organizations.
- Accountable for both the successes and failures of player acquisitions and draft picks, often serving as the key figure held responsible for team performance.
- Firing/Hiring staff
At the end of the day, college athletes have significantly more influence over what team they join than NFL players do... and college athletes don't agree to play for a GM; they play for a coach - Players follow a coach when they move (or at least leave their current spot) in an instant. Scheme often changes between coaching hires, so is a GM going to fire a coach then restrict his (or her) replacement search to only people who run the same scheme? I just don't don't buy it. I don't think an NFL GM role is as relevant to college ball as others do.
THAT SAID:
- if there's an antitrust exemption that passes, and that restricts player movement, then everything changes, and I can see the NFL model being more applicable
- I do think the NFL model is better at lower level schools that want to run a specific system (the Dakotas, the service academies, etc)
It's going to be Drew Harris
source: trust me bro
Join The Key Player's Club to read comments posted in exclusive content and its members only forum.
🍺MAKES "BEER" ⚗️🦃
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 Are we a university or a semi-pro football team that provides education? What is our identity
This is simple, we want to be a premier American Land Grant University. This means a great education and a great experience (i. e. athletics, clubs, Greek life etc), at a great price. States and govt seemed to forget their role in funding their land grants and the price part is slipping faster than expectations. Does Virginia want to run with the big boys? Then it's about striving to be in top 25% of big public U in ALL facets.
.COM
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 The separation of the logos has never made sense to me. If they were drastically different (i.e. pylons vs VT) you might have some differentiation by the public. But especially with how similar they are, I'd expect if you asked a regular fan, they would have no idea that there is any separation organizationally.
In my last company, there were very different divisions in the business (mining, cranes, construction, refrigerators, etc) and minor divisions within those (excavators, haul trucks, dozers, etc.) Our customers who spent millions of dollars on these machines had no idea those divisions existed and didn't care. If it had our logo, even one with a variant, it was all the same to them.
🦃 LEG KING 🦃
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 I'm just saying, when academia is arguing optics to try and sway the public (and lets be realistic for a second, that is what is going on when you have to make those remarks on their behalf in an open to the public BoV meeting that you all know is extremely high profile for the university and will be reported on by the media) you kind of forfeit the ability to argue nuance when that same attention gets redirected back to academia.
You said what you needed to say, and I don't blame you all for having the opinions that you do. But you have to realize that the optics right now is that you're complaining that the university doesn't care about academia when all the public has seen is basically a complete modernization and infrastructure overhaul of the academic side of the university including the building out of a new state of the art campus in DC while the athletic department has been allowed to wither and die on the vine. We can't see the inner workings, and to a certain point the general public doesn't care. We've seen tuition skyrocket to pay for academic ventures, so hearing these kind of complaints will largely fall on deaf ears, if not have the opposite effect in the public that you would have liked.
Like Nancy Dye grandstanding about something like a $300 raise in tuition for athletic fees (which will still be the lowest in the commonwealth) when tuition is already $17k in state and $38k out of state. Like, really, that's where you draw the line on keeping things affordable?
🤮UVA💩
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 I can say this: in 1997 my 2.0 high school gpa was good enough to be accepted into the forestry and wildlife conservation program; fast forward to 2023 and my sons 4.16 high school gpa was not good enough for mechanical engineering (not necessarily all related to gpa but moreso that it is way more competitive with fewer spots). The overall point i'm trying to make is that; in that timeframe the standards, the competition and the quality of student has definitely changed and improved.
Join The Key Player's Club to read comments posted in exclusive content and its members only forum.
Join The Key Player's Club to read comments posted in exclusive content and its members only forum.
🎸OG LEG KING 🎸
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 I admit it's a multifaceted issue, and the points raised are very valid. The single biggest increase to VT's enrollment was joining the common application a few years ago. Our offer rate is obviously way down as a result, but yield (offered students who accept) is pretty flat. And among the 55-60k applicants per year, we're turning down students that would have been absolute locks in years past. Now everybody has a 4.0+ GPA, multiple extracurriculars, compelling personal essays, etc. So it's not easy to track. But what I'll say is that from those administrative offices, they don't see athletics generating any difference in the quality of the applicant pool. Overall number, yes, to an extent.
🎸OG LEG KING 🎸
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 For the record, we hate the constant construction, too. But the physical construction (pun not intended in my previous message) is because of state allocations and private donations. Those are dedicated capital projects, and they don't compete for resources in the same way as we're discussing.
But now that the athletic side needs to be picked up off the mat, now is the time the faculty is worried about where the money is going?
It's not a new thing at all.
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 I doubt if one year of success necessarily affects the following year of applications all that much.
But I would absolutely bet that the trajectory since 1999 was an improvement.
Not sure how you'd measure it accurately, so the resulting footnote explaining that correlation may rely on the intent of the entity doing the study. Also, Alum makes a good point - increased number of applications should improve the yield. Note that during this time, more admission slots were opened up as well.
Are you saying Jeff King is the next coach of VT, big if true
Agreed, but the concept of a college football GM started like 10 seconds ago. So it's not like there's a large candidate pool to choose from.
A college GM is probably more similar to a pro GM than it is to 90% of other careers a college GM could come from. So as long whoever that ends up being for us, can articulate the differences (of which there are many) and has a reasonable plan for them, i think that's as good as Virginia Tech (or anybody) is going to do
DON'TNEEDNOSTINKING⭐
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 Don't forget about staff. If you want to see pure rage, ask the staff and faculty how much they love having to give up their parking spots for tailgating and getting forced to park in Timbuktu.
CLASS WAR VETERAN
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | GIFTORY: Frame-by-Frame Highlight Reel of Virginia Tech's 23-21 Win Over NC State Join The Key Player's Club to read comments posted in exclusive content and its members only forum.
🦃 LEG KING 🦃
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 Interestingly enough, admissions tracks this and has been studying it. There is no correlation between applicant quality or quality of admitted student in terms of high school credentials, time to degree completion, or GPA while enrolled at VT as a function of successful vs. unsuccessful periods in athletics. We get *more* applicants but not necessarily *better* applicants.
Even if you get the same distribution of applicants, a higher volume of applicants means you are filling out your admissions and enrollments with a higher quality of student, on average, because the number of available slots does not change. You just have a higher volume of overall better/good students to choose from and you're able to pack in more of them before going to the 'average' applicant.
🦃 LEG KING 🦃
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 Now we're struggling to find an identity, but that identity is only in terms of athletics; the academic side has always had an identity that we're trying to build upon. But we see the building is being done where there is less certainty.
Funny you word it that way, because every time I visit campus, the only thing I can notice is how much actual physical building is being done on the academic side. How many hundreds of millions if not into the billions of infrastructure investment has happened on the academic side over the last 20 years?
But now that the athletic side needs to be picked up off the mat, now is the time the faculty is worried about where the money is going?
I'm sorry, but as an outsider this very much sounds like a bunch of people who were content with out of control spending when it benefited them, but the second that money might be diverted elsewhere, now they're all clutching their new pearl necklaces wondering how they're ever going to make ends meet again.
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 Is there a good place to get public information on what the buckets of funding in the budget truly are? I know there is some info out there but haven't had the time to dig through it and make it into something meaningful. I would be really curious to see how the various budget items have looked over time and what are tangible areas to be more efficient while maintaining a top tier education level for the students.
🎸OG LEG KING 🎸
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 Academia is the primary beneficiary of athletics doing well. They get better students
Interestingly enough, admissions tracks this and has been studying it. There is no correlation between applicant quality or quality of admitted student in terms of high school credentials, time to degree completion, or GPA while enrolled at VT as a function of successful vs. unsuccessful periods in athletics. We get *more* applicants but not necessarily *better* applicants.
better talking conferences and concerts that will put money into academia
Most of the revenues from these events go right into auxiliaries, not the campus itself.
Personally, I think the Thursday and Friday of a Thursday Night game should be campus holidays. During home basketball games, classes should be blacked out from a half hour before a game starts to a half hour after.
Never going to happen because of SCHEV requirements for number of contact hours for classes, and presidential policy memoranda regarding instructional days (those could be changed, admittedly). It's a surprisingly big ask to do something like this. Although, fun fact, there is a resolution in process that proposes making a two-day fall break in some form, which could include a Thursday "off" that coincides with a football game. That will require some larger policy changes, though. But it's moving through governance, so stay tuned.
🎸OG LEG KING 🎸
|
9 months 2 weeks
# | VT BoV Approves increase of athletics budget by $47.1m this year, growing to a total budget of $212m in 2029 The perspective I can share is this - in the current environment, everyone expects funding to suck and for there to be layoffs at the university over the coming years. Discontinuation of programs, reduction in force, and hitting the enrollment cliff (the administration has more favorable projections about enrollment for us, but this is a national problem, not just VT).
What I said at the BOV yesterday was a microcosm of this - time and time again, athletics gets whatever they want and we're told to pick ourselves up by our bootstraps and keep going. There won't be raises, there won't be increases in support for most academic programs, etc. It's not dire, and we do get good support for really important initiatives, but the undercurrent is there. Are we a university or a semi-pro football team that provides education? What is our identity? I don't think this is unique to VT, per se, but I think it's probably magnified because we aren't a program with a storied football history like Notre Dame, Michigan, Alabama, anOSU, etc. We had flash-in-the-pan success in the late 90's/early 00's and played with the big dogs for a while. Now we're struggling to find an identity, but that identity is only in terms of athletics; the academic side has always had an identity that we're trying to build upon. But we see the building is being done where there is less certainty.
That's kind of rambling, but it's where most faculty minds are, as best I can tell.
There is really no evidence any current GM has been overly successful regardless of their background. This is an office/position that is in its infancy across college football. Hard to discount the experience of someone with an NFL background versus "knows college ball" when the ins and outs of the portal, the NIL landscape and almost every other aspect of the financial landscape of college football are being overwritten every year and in some cases week to week. There aren't many college background guys that have much experience in contracts and the business side of this emerging field and when it comes to talent evaluation and approach I think it really will come down to how well they identify staff to pursue this.