Trying to Make Sense of This as Two More Oklahoma State Players Go Portal

VGumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

No I don't. I lived it my entire career.

Your mistake is trying to equate 1) the employment market to the NIL market, and 2) who oversees the implementation of the employment market vs the NIL market.

Let me illustrate.

Generally speaking, in industry (top 500 companies???) the pay scale industry wide (sometimes adjusted for location differences) for a particular job is within a pretty tight range. Accounting staff, clerical staff, IT staff, general labor staff, etc demand compensation within a range. Why? Because that's how CEO's both manage to hire and retain the talent to execute their business plan in tandem with managing their P&L. Business 101.

But it's a much different situation in college football from both a "market" compensation viewpoint and a management viewpoint. There are 130 programs competing for the same prize. Or just 65 P5 programs competing for the same prize. Take your pick. I don't think there is any question as to whether all 130 (or 65) programs are in the same universe with respect to NIL funding. They're not. And it's not close. Just to make some numbers up let's say the aTms, UTs and tOSUs of the world have an NIL budget of $5mm. And let's say the Alabamas, Clemsons, OUs, PSUs of the world have a NIL budget of $3mm. And let's say the OSUs, Baylors, Utahs, Wisconsins, of the world have a NIL budget of $1.5mm. And let's say the KSUs, ISUs, UHs, WFs, WSUs of the world have a NIL budget of $500k. Yes I know, the numbers and schools aren't real, but they are directionally representative of the differences in funding. So if there's a team with $5mm to spend on a roster vs a team that only has $500k to spend, how is the market for a particular position the same throughout D1 or even P5? It's not. Some booster groups will pay their QB $2mm. Others will only be able to afford $100k or less. That's a wildly different market for the same position. And the HC has no control over it. None.

So what's going to happen? Quickly there will be a NIL market established for CFP contenders (tier 1), conference championship contenders (tier 2), .500 teams (tier 3) and bottom feeders (tier 4). Or some such.

But here's the rub, especially as it relates to OSU. OSU in this scenario probably falls into tier 3 in both funding and ultimately results - neither of which is reflective of the quality of the current OSU program, facilities or coaches. But will our fans hold our HC accountable for running a team with tier 3 NIL funding, tier 2 funding or tier 1 funding?

---

Very true Gumby, the highest market value player we have had was Sanders and his offer was roughly $500,000 but you have a good but not great player like Jabbar Muhammad getting a deal worth the neighborhood of $350,000 from Washington! Imagine what they are giving to a "STAR" player! Mason Cob reportedly got a deal in the $400,000 range from USC!

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

TXPoke4Life said:

---

You are making my point. Adapt to the market or die. CEO's don't get the luxury of controlling the market.

A CEO needs a strong Board of Directors. Monarchs may or may not adapt at the rate of necessary change. Who provides HCMG with the value of a strong BOD?

---

Gundy's BOD ( Shrum, Weiburg and the Regents) do not control the amount, disbursement or control of NIL$$$. How can anyone reasonably hold either Gundy or the BOD accountable for the impact of (positive or negative) NIL on OSU sports programs?

---

Spot on, the money is controlled by entities like Pokes With A Purpose who in no way can be affiliated with the University! Basically it is businesses, corporations and individuals who determine the numbers available for NIL through their contributions!

NJAggie said:

---

Yeah, I would think Stan has been around long enough to have not paid out everything up front, or has some recourse if he did. As getting paid for how you play is one thing. Taking the money and running before the contract is even dry off the printer is another.

If Sanders does come back it would probably be at a discount for NIL.

I see a lot being made out of Sanders yelling at the coaches during Bedlam. I'm hoping that is once again something being overblown by the Gundy haters. Frankly I think he was correct to be yelling at them. And, I'd hope that the coaches accepted it and moved forward. And as for him not playing vs WVU, I think they had to bench him as he needed to rest, and WVU was not a game we had to win. Our bowl life was set regardless, and we needed to not get anyone else hurt. The hope being he'd have been near full health for the Bowl game. And, had he stuck it out stayed on roster and played in the bowl he'd have gotten another win, as he'd have eaten that Wisconsin D alive.

---

There was a lot of yelling from Coaches at players during Bedlam, I got a first hand account from two staffers who were on the sidelines in the middle of it! Ratray, Dunn and the QB GA were telling Spencer to STOP TURNING THE DAMN BALL OVER WITH INTERCEPTIONS!

LS1Z28 said:

---

The world of college sports is changing rapidly. With the transfer portal and immediate eligibility, coaches now have to constantly re-recruit every player on their roster. If what happened in 2020 is any indication, this doesn't appear to be something that Coach Gundy excels at.

I really hope that the NCAA reinstates the rule requiring a player to sit out a year after transferring. They can't control NIL, but this is something they can control. This type of roster turnover isn't healthy for the game.

---

I believe you're right. The courts and legislatures have given us their position on NIL and it's not going to change. While the NCAA might attempt a few new rules and/or enforcement measures regarding NIL, it will never be able to level the playing field.

As you state, the real culprit is the portal. The easy fix is to reinstate the 1-year sit out rule. Here's another potential fix. When initially signing with a university out of HS, give the athlete an option to sign and commit to and for a 1, 2, 3 or 4 year scholarship. Then only after the athlete completes his commitment can he transfer. While not as good of a fix as reinstating the 1-year sit out rule, at least it gets the commitment by both the athlete and university aligned.

So then here's the beauty of the latter. Universities are gonna have to think real hard about signing a 4 or 5 star that's only willing to sign a 1-year scholarship deal. Further, NIL groups are gonna have to think hard about giving meaningful NIL$$$ to athletes only willing to sign a 1-year deal.

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

okstate819 said:

---

Anyone who's paying attention to basic facts for the last several years without America's brightest orange tinted glasses on can see what's going on. Mike has openly said he's not a people person, doesn't communicate with players about important decisions, only sees his assistant coaches twice a week.... i could go on

He's the first guy running for a pay raise after we have one season where expectations are met (not exceeded) and yet snipes at perfectly reasonable questions and is in a "bad mood" at any time when were not winning and the press isn't waving palm palms at the press conference.

Mike has to change to significantly to win in this era where players have flexibility. I see no evidence he will.

---

I like Mike and his approach, yours, not so much. It's time for the feckless woke AD and token woman placeholders to move on and turn this whole university over to Gundy.

---

Tell me you're MAGA without telling me your MAGA.

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

LS1Z28 said:

---

The world of college sports is changing rapidly. With the transfer portal and immediate eligibility, coaches now have to constantly re-recruit every player on their roster. If what happened in 2020 is any indication, this doesn't appear to be something that Coach Gundy excels at.

I really hope that the NCAA reinstates the rule requiring a player to sit out a year after transferring. They can't control NIL, but this is something they can control. This type of roster turnover isn't healthy for the game.

---

I believe you're right. The courts and legislatures have given us their position on NIL and it's not going to change. While the NCAA might attempt a few new rules and/or enforcement measures regarding NIL, it will never be able to level the playing field.

As you state, the real culprit is the portal. The easy fix is to reinstate the 1-year sit out rule. Here's another potential fix. When initially signing with a university out of HS, give the athlete an option to sign and commit to and for a 1, 2, 3 or 4 year scholarship. Then only after the athlete completes his commitment can he transfer. While not as good of a fix as reinstating the 1-year sit out rule, at least it gets the commitment by both the athlete and university aligned.

So then here's the beauty of the latter. Universities are gonna have to think real hard about signing a 4 or 5 star that's only willing to sign a 1-year scholarship deal. Further, NIL groups are gonna have to think hard about giving meaningful NIL$$$ to athletes only willing to sign a 1-year deal.

---

Gumby, I give it up to you .... last month you argued to the death that Gumby held complete dominion over the FB program ... now, I can't tell if your an Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations) or Milton Friedman (Capitalism& Freedom) guy!

Cali? No doubt you are MAGA (authoritarian) all the way!

SMH / LoL

An intersesting statistic this year regarding the transfer portal. Their are currently well over 2500 FBS players in the portal, which generates an average of 19.3 players per FBS team, and the number is growing. Who know where we end up, but as bad as it feels, we are still below the average per team. Let that sink in.

Those numbers indicate that ovrerall it has much more to do with potential NIL $$$$ than discontent with the existing team. We have a specific issue with young QB's, and that is hurting us with WR tranfers.

This is almost like drafting an entire new team each year in fantasy football. It's madness. The quality of the football played will suffer and it will eventually ruin the game.

Pistolp said:

---

An intersesting statistic this year regarding the transfer portal. Their are currently well over 2500 FBS players in the portal, which generates an average of 19.3 players per FBS team, and the number is growing. Who know where we end up, but as bad as it feels, we are still below the average per team. Let that sink in.

Those numbers indicate that ovrerall it has much more to do with potential NIL $$$$ than discontent with the existing team. We have a specific issue with young QB's, and that is hurting us with WR tranfers.

This is almost like drafting an entire new team each year in fantasy football. It's madness. The quality of the football played will suffer and it will eventually ruin the game.

---

We (meaning all of college football) are going to run out of players. What the portal is doing is making it where teams don't take near as many high school players. They are just trading portal players. What happens when they all graduate? The pool of talent is going to start shrinking after everyone uses their covid year.

Pistolp said:

---

An intersesting statistic this year regarding the transfer portal. Their are currently well over 2500 FBS players in the portal, which generates an average of 19.3 players per FBS team, and the number is growing. Who know where we end up, but as bad as it feels, we are still below the average per team. Let that sink in.

Those numbers indicate that ovrerall it has much more to do with potential NIL $$$$ than discontent with the existing team. We have a specific issue with young QB's, and that is hurting us with WR tranfers.

This is almost like drafting an entire new team each year in fantasy football. It's madness. The quality of the football played will suffer and it will eventually ruin the game.

---

It is turning into the college basketball model where you literally have 70 to 80% roster turn over every year with many teams!!!!

gary121853 said:

---

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

LS1Z28 said:

---

The world of college sports is changing rapidly. With the transfer portal and immediate eligibility, coaches now have to constantly re-recruit every player on their roster. If what happened in 2020 is any indication, this doesn't appear to be something that Coach Gundy excels at.

I really hope that the NCAA reinstates the rule requiring a player to sit out a year after transferring. They can't control NIL, but this is something they can control. This type of roster turnover isn't healthy for the game.

---

I believe you're right. The courts and legislatures have given us their position on NIL and it's not going to change. While the NCAA might attempt a few new rules and/or enforcement measures regarding NIL, it will never be able to level the playing field.

As you state, the real culprit is the portal. The easy fix is to reinstate the 1-year sit out rule. Here's another potential fix. When initially signing with a university out of HS, give the athlete an option to sign and commit to and for a 1, 2, 3 or 4 year scholarship. Then only after the athlete completes his commitment can he transfer. While not as good of a fix as reinstating the 1-year sit out rule, at least it gets the commitment by both the athlete and university aligned.

So then here's the beauty of the latter. Universities are gonna have to think real hard about signing a 4 or 5 star that's only willing to sign a 1-year scholarship deal. Further, NIL groups are gonna have to think hard about giving meaningful NIL$$$ to athletes only willing to sign a 1-year deal.

---

Gumby, I give it up to you .... last month you argued to the death that Gumby held complete dominion over the FB program ... now, I can't tell if your an Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations) or Milton Friedman (Capitalism& Freedom) guy!

Cali? No doubt you are MAGA (authoritarian) all the way!

SMH / LoL

---

Neither or both, take your pick. What I'm most interested in this regard is 1) implementing rules that level the playing field for all participants, 2) participants following the rules, and 3) having someone monitor and enforce said rules.

None of those 3 items are in effect.

gary121853 said:

---

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

LS1Z28 said:

---

The world of college sports is changing rapidly. With the transfer portal and immediate eligibility, coaches now have to constantly re-recruit every player on their roster. If what happened in 2020 is any indication, this doesn't appear to be something that Coach Gundy excels at.

I really hope that the NCAA reinstates the rule requiring a player to sit out a year after transferring. They can't control NIL, but this is something they can control. This type of roster turnover isn't healthy for the game.

---

I believe you're right. The courts and legislatures have given us their position on NIL and it's not going to change. While the NCAA might attempt a few new rules and/or enforcement measures regarding NIL, it will never be able to level the playing field.

As you state, the real culprit is the portal. The easy fix is to reinstate the 1-year sit out rule. Here's another potential fix. When initially signing with a university out of HS, give the athlete an option to sign and commit to and for a 1, 2, 3 or 4 year scholarship. Then only after the athlete completes his commitment can he transfer. While not as good of a fix as reinstating the 1-year sit out rule, at least it gets the commitment by both the athlete and university aligned.

So then here's the beauty of the latter. Universities are gonna have to think real hard about signing a 4 or 5 star that's only willing to sign a 1-year scholarship deal. Further, NIL groups are gonna have to think hard about giving meaningful NIL$$$ to athletes only willing to sign a 1-year deal.

---

Gumby, I give it up to you .... last month you argued to the death that Gumby held complete dominion over the FB program ... now, I can't tell if your an Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations) or Milton Friedman (Capitalism& Freedom) guy!

Cali? No doubt you are MAGA (authoritarian) all the way!

SMH / LoL

---

I am one of an Arthur Laffer guy myself, he was the one who basically gave us the 1980s under Reagan!

RAllenisadumass said:

---

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

okstate819 said:

---

Anyone who's paying attention to basic facts for the last several years without America's brightest orange tinted glasses on can see what's going on. Mike has openly said he's not a people person, doesn't communicate with players about important decisions, only sees his assistant coaches twice a week.... i could go on

He's the first guy running for a pay raise after we have one season where expectations are met (not exceeded) and yet snipes at perfectly reasonable questions and is in a "bad mood" at any time when were not winning and the press isn't waving palm palms at the press conference.

Mike has to change to significantly to win in this era where players have flexibility. I see no evidence he will.

---

I like Mike and his approach, yours, not so much. It's time for the feckless woke AD and token woman placeholders to move on and turn this whole university over to Gundy.

---

Tell me you're MAGA without telling me your MAGA.

---

tell me you don't really have a moniker calling the host of this site fulgor names.

Really.

What twisted reality do you exit in?

Pistolp said:

---

An intersesting statistic this year regarding the transfer portal. Their are currently well over 2500 FBS players in the portal, which generates an average of 19.3 players per FBS team, and the number is growing. Who know where we end up, but as bad as it feels, we are still below the average per team. Let that sink in.

Those numbers indicate that ovrerall it has much more to do with potential NIL $$$$ than discontent with the existing team. We have a specific issue with young QB's, and that is hurting us with WR tranfers.

This is almost like drafting an entire new team each year in fantasy football. It's madness. The quality of the football played will suffer and it will eventually ruin the game.

---

where did you get those numbers? How did you separate the FBS players from the rest of Division 1 players?

Walk ons enter the portal too. are you talking about scholarship players.... that 19.3 number looks very suspicious.

Those numbers might be correct, but could you tell us where you got them please? Thanks.

gary121853 said:

---

Gumby, I give it up to you .... last month you argued to the death that Gumby held complete dominion over the FB program ... now, I can't tell if your an Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations) or Milton Friedman (Capitalism& Freedom) guy!

Cali? No doubt you are MAGA (authoritarian) all the way!

SMH / LoL

---

I don't need any name calling by the likes of you.

I am not a MAGA guy, I am a pure constitutionalist / individual liberty guy (probably closer to Friedman)

.... and.... MAGA is not authoritarian.... King Obama had the phone and pen, Manchurian President Biden is signing illegal orders. and NO POLITICS on the sports board. ***.

This message board sucks ass.

eddy.mcdaniels said:

---

This message board sucks ass.

---

What, not enough Gundy bashing for you?

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

gary121853 said:

---

Gumby, I give it up to you .... last month you argued to the death that Gumby held complete dominion over the FB program ... now, I can't tell if your an Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations) or Milton Friedman (Capitalism& Freedom) guy!

Cali? No doubt you are MAGA (authoritarian) all the way!

SMH / LoL

---

I don't need any name calling by the likes of you.

I am not a MAGA guy, I am a pure constitutionalist / individual liberty guy (probably closer to Friedman)

.... and.... MAGA is not authoritarian.... King Obama had the phone and pen, Manchurian President Biden is signing illegal orders. and NO POLITICS on the sports board. ***.

---

definitely MAGA ... no doubt now...

lol

You can always go to Pistols Firing, 24/7, or Rivals, if they still exist, nobody is holding a gun to your head!

gary121853 said:

---

definitely MAGA ... no doubt now...

lol

---

good gawd Gary.

did too. did not. did too. did not.

Pistolp said:

---

An intersesting statistic this year regarding the transfer portal. Their are currently well over 2500 FBS players in the portal, which generates an average of 19.3 players per FBS team, and the number is growing. Who know where we end up, but as bad as it feels, we are still below the average per team. Let that sink in.

Those numbers indicate that ovrerall it has much more to do with potential NIL $$$$ than discontent with the existing team. We have a specific issue with young QB's, and that is hurting us with WR tranfers.

This is almost like drafting an entire new team each year in fantasy football. It's madness. The quality of the football played will suffer and it will eventually ruin the game.

---

Excellent post.

To add to your statistics (might have already been mentioned) 61% of players find a new D1 scholarship home, 39% do not. Not included in the 61% are those that fall into D2 or lower ball. Article is on ESPN if you want to find it.

We do have young QB's, but not clear that we have any "issues" with them. Rangel is a 6'2" bonafide 4 star that threw for +9000 yards in 3 season playing Dallas 6A ball. In contrast Sanders was a 6A 4 star for his running ability and "good enough" passing.

I slow-mo'ed several of our games and not surprisingly our QB's were throwing into 7-8 sometimes 9 man coverages when opposing DLines were getting pressure with 3 or 4. That's 2 to 1 pass defenders vs Receivers. Sucks for the QB (and receivers) when the D can roll Man coverage, Lineback Zone .AND. Cover 2 all at the same time. LOL

Yes - this revolving door is already souring me on NCAA football. College football is just the latest century old institution teetering on the precipice.

Sadly this is coming at a time when Gundy & staff have been recruiting excellent home grown kids that, at least for myself, adds a richness to my football fan experience. I would recommend we all consider ALL THE PLAYERS THAT ARE LOYAL to the commitments. Most of the team is standing by their commitments, but it's easy for us to whinge on about the one's that got away.

At some point we can all focus on the fish on our stringer as opposed to that big lunker we "know" is in the depths.

Quote:

---

Very true Gumby, the highest market value player we have had was Sanders and his offer was roughly $500,000 but you have a good but not great player like Jabbar Muhammad getting a deal worth the neighborhood of $350,000 from Washington! Imagine what they are giving to a "STAR" player! Mason Cob reportedly got a deal in the $400,000 range from USC!

---

Mr. Sanders career stat of 68 passing TDs vs 40 Interceptions likely gives OC's pause.

For Sanders, it's looking like his "highest value" might have been finishing at OKState and destroying every QB career record on the books in his 5 years starting. But that's all "coulda been".

On to 4 star 6A HS gunslinger Garrett Rangel. Kid's a stud if we can get our RB run game up to 150 yards/game.

I'd like to know what the percentage is of players that added value to the team. Most transfers from A&M or Alabama were backups. We are losing players that played every game. The value of our losses hurt more than the actual number. I'd rather lose 19 backups with 0 playing time than 8-10 guys who played 90% of snaps.

OT said:

---

Pistolp said:

---

An intersesting statistic this year regarding the transfer portal. Their are currently well over 2500 FBS players in the portal, which generates an average of 19.3 players per FBS team, and the number is growing. Who know where we end up, but as bad as it feels, we are still below the average per team. Let that sink in.

Those numbers indicate that ovrerall it has much more to do with potential NIL $$$$ than discontent with the existing team. We have a specific issue with young QB's, and that is hurting us with WR tranfers.

This is almost like drafting an entire new team each year in fantasy football. It's madness. The quality of the football played will suffer and it will eventually ruin the game.

---

Excellent post.

To add to your statistics (might have already been mentioned) 61% of players find a new D1 scholarship home, 39% do not. Not included in the 61% are those that fall into D2 or lower ball. Article is on ESPN if you want to find it.

We do have young QB's, but not clear that we have any "issues" with them. Rangel is a 6'2" bonafide 4 star that threw for +9000 yards in 3 season playing Dallas 6A ball. In contrast Sanders was a 6A 4 star for his running ability and "good enough" passing.

I slow-mo'ed several of our games and not surprisingly our QB's were throwing into 7-8 sometimes 9 man coverages when opposing DLines were getting pressure with 3 or 4. That's 2 to 1 pass defenders vs Receivers. Sucks for the QB (and receivers) when the D can roll Man coverage, Lineback Zone .AND. Cover 2 all at the same time. LOL

Yes - this revolving door is already souring me on NCAA football. College football is just the latest century old institution teetering on the precipice.

Sadly this is coming at a time when Gundy & staff have been recruiting excellent home grown kids that, at least for myself, adds a richness to my football fan experience. I would recommend we all consider ALL THE PLAYERS THAT ARE LOYAL to the commitments. Most of the team is standing by their commitments, but it's easy for us to whinge on about the one's that got away.

At some point we can all focus on the fish on our stringer as opposed to that big lunker we "know" is in the depths.

---

Good post.

CProc7 said:

---

I'd like to know what the percentage is of players that added value to the team. Most transfers from A&M or Alabama were backups. We are losing players that played every game. The value of our losses hurt more than the actual number. I'd rather lose 19 backups with 0 playing time than 8-10 guys who played 90% of snaps.

---

Having 20-25 Players playing 90% (+/-) has always been part of the problem IMHO.

When you put in the type of effort/time these dudes commit to then you want to PLAY!

IMO if you believe a recruit has enough D1 talent to recruit .... then for gosh sakes.... if developed correctly then should they not be able to contribute 20-25%(+/-) each game? By the end of the season the Starters are either completely 'spent' or 'injured'.

Gundy and his Cowboy Culture should include a recruiting pitch that says ...'come to OSU and PLAY' ... guaranteed you will see the field if you commit to our development program starting day 1. I am not sitting on the bench after putting the type of effort/time required. I am going to go where I can play .... period. That is not a cop-out .... That is desire in my book. It's like having a dormant asset on you balance sheet .... Mr CEO (Gundy likes to call himself)

CProc7 said:

---

I'd like to know what the percentage is of players that added value to the team. Most transfers from A&M or Alabama were backups. We are losing players that played every game. The value of our losses hurt more than the actual number. I'd rather lose 19 backups with 0 playing time than 8-10 guys who played 90% of snaps.

---

The contributors lost were Sanders, Green, Step Johnson, JP Richardson and Dom Richardson on offense. The contributors lost on defense were Cobb, Muhammad and Harper and MAYBE Samuel T although he really didn't get much action until the last three games of the season when we started getting hits to the D Line from injuries! To show you how insanely deep we were at receiver, you still have Jayden Bray (injured), Talon Shettron, Blaine Green (injured), Rashod Owens, Brennan Presley and Cale Cabbiness from the two deep at the four designated wide receiver positions plus you add Stribling from Washington State and Cam Hurd a true freshman! That is basically two deep eight there!

gary121853 said:

---

CProc7 said:

---

I'd like to know what the percentage is of players that added value to the team. Most transfers from A&M or Alabama were backups. We are losing players that played every game. The value of our losses hurt more than the actual number. I'd rather lose 19 backups with 0 playing time than 8-10 guys who played 90% of snaps.

---

Having 20-25 Players playing 90% (+/-) has always been part of the problem IMHO.

When you put in the type of effort/time these dudes commit to then you want to PLAY!

IMO if you believe a recruit has enough D1 talent to recruit .... then for gosh sakes.... if developed correctly then should they not be able to contribute 20-25%(+/-) each game? By the end of the season the Starters are either completely 'spent' or 'injured'.

Gundy and his Cowboy Culture should include a recruiting pitch that says ...'come to OSU and PLAY' ... guaranteed you will see the field if you commit to our development program starting day 1. I am not sitting on the bench after putting the type of effort/time required. I am going to go where I can play .... period. That is not a cop-out .... That is desire in my book. It's like having a dormant asset on you balance sheet .... Mr CEO (Gundy likes to call himself)

---

yet, that's not really realistic at all. We have a 2-deep. (that's more than 25 players)

Certain positions simple do not rotate much (notably QB, OLine - for obvious reasons). Our DLine rotated a lot, a whole lot. LBs got some rotation too, but the 2 kids were pretty raw and needed most of the early season snaps. Same with some of the DB positions, we had new kids that needed a lot of PT.

Eddie use to play 8 guys at most (for minutes). That's just the way it is sometimes.

and that HAS NOT always been part of the problem. We had better rotation on years when we had a more senior team.

Almost all teams do it that way.

gary121853 said:

---

CProc7 said:

---

I'd like to know what the percentage is of players that added value to the team. Most transfers from A&M or Alabama were backups. We are losing players that played every game. The value of our losses hurt more than the actual number. I'd rather lose 19 backups with 0 playing time than 8-10 guys who played 90% of snaps.

---

Having 20-25 Players playing 90% (+/-) has always been part of the problem IMHO.

When you put in the type of effort/time these dudes commit to then you want to PLAY!

IMO if you believe a recruit has enough D1 talent to recruit .... then for gosh sakes.... if developed correctly then should they not be able to contribute 20-25%(+/-) each game? By the end of the season the Starters are either completely 'spent' or 'injured'.

Gundy and his Cowboy Culture should include a recruiting pitch that says ...'come to OSU and PLAY' ... guaranteed you will see the field if you commit to our development program starting day 1. I am not sitting on the bench after putting the type of effort/time required. I am going to go where I can play .... period. That is not a cop-out .... That is desire in my book. It's like having a dormant asset on you balance sheet .... Mr CEO (Gundy likes to call himself)

---

Let me get this straight. We have starters (Ford, JPR, D Richardson, B Johnson and B Green) leaving because they feel are either under-utilized or threatened by newcomers, and we have meaningful contributors (D Jones, Tuilhalamaka and S Jones) leaving so they can get more PT, and your answer is to give everyone PT? Talk about a recipe for pissing off everyone but the scout team. Jeeez GFL with that.

Then the question begs to be asked.. Why are we offering that many more WRs in the portal? The issue at Oklahoma State is almost never WRs. Why be 3 deep at Wr and 1 deep at Tackle lol

I don't understand the Defensive guys leaving after watching their competition walk out before them. Man up and compete for your spot.

McCPokes said:

---

Let's not fool ourselves here. TCU is drawing away top SEC players, and yes while they are about to play for a national championship, they aren't an NIL goldmine. We have a coach who, will not accept that Kasey Dunn is not the guy, Gundy said he would be a power 5 head coach, and after this year no one wants that mess, at the end of last season, Dunn was in consideration for ASU. Gundy is the guy, he bleeds state, and he's cleaned up this program, but his loyalty to this guy is going to hurt us going forward. Yeah we need to improve NIL, but we also have to get rid of issues like expired products in this case Kasey Dunn…

---

Are you wanting to get rid of the Kasey Dunn from the first 7 games, or the Kasey Dunn from the last 6? Two completely different rosters.

The one that couldn't generate enough offense to get into the playoff with last year's defense.

Swcu21 said:

---

The one that couldn't generate enough offense to get into the playoff with last year's defense.

---

Which is the same guy that had his healthy offense #3 in the country in scoring after 7 games this year. Did he then forget how to put together a game plan or call plays?

In an article talking about his brother Cale, Gundy said that Cale is a people person with lots of friends all over the place. He, on the other hand, liked to be out on his ranch away from people.

It shows and it's bad. Really really bad.

Not exactly the personality type suited for his position. Especially in these times with these kids. I'm not sure Gundy could have misplayed this hand worse if he had actually tried.