Hypothetical re: Kizer...
by irisharab (2017-04-21 11:19:42)
[ cannot delete ]   [ Edit ]   [ Return to Rock's House ]   [ Show All Thread ]   [ Ignore Poster ]   [ Report Post ]   [ Highlight Poster ]   [ Reply ]

 


Let's say that Kelly had been fired at the end of the 2016 season (which any remotely competent AD would have done).

There's no telling who would have replaced Kelly. But assuming that the replacement was someone who was appreciably better than Kelly, should Kizer have stayed another year at ND?


Should he? I don't know. Would he? No, he'd still be gone.
by rockmcd  (2017-04-21 15:26:14)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I suspect that Kizer's was mostly a business decision, and factored in the possibility that he could get leapfrogged next year by guys who weren't yet eligible for this year's draft. There's also the continued risk of injury.

If Kelly had been replaced, no matter who his replacement was going to be, that would be a new voice in his ear for 2017, to be replaced by another new voice in his ear for 2018 on his first NFL team. If he's already a minimum 2nd round pick, sticking around for a coaching change probably has more downside risk than upside.

I agree that Kelly's poor track record with QBs created a risk if he stayed, but I think starting over with a new coaching staff would have just created a different type of risk, which he'd also be inclined to avoid.


Certainly possible, his rub with Kelly was absolutely
by SEE  (2017-04-21 15:22:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

a factor in his decision from all accounts. I never heard about him throwing notes at meetings, but that sounds like a pretty massive breakdown of respect.

Kizer never lacked confidence, so he may have gone anyway.


I read that and did not get the sense he was being literal
by Moff  (2017-04-21 15:39:00)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

about throwing the notes at them. It did not seem to fit the rest of what he was saying, and would not be a real smart thing to mention. I thought it was more like he was throwing a lot of information at them about the game plan because he had done his prep and had taken notes etc.


I thought the same. *
by fasted68  (2017-04-21 16:45:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I agree. I connected dots that didn't exist... which is of
by SEE  (2017-04-21 16:48:36)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

course the same thing I criticize others for doing. Er.


I, too, thought Kizer literally took aim and pelted
by ACross  (2017-04-21 17:51:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Kelly with wadded up notes as he strolled into the meeting room. Doh!


If only we were that lucky. *
by bleedsgreen04  (2017-04-21 18:30:06)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Literal SEE
by SEE  (2017-04-21 15:55:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Figurative world


Hey, it was a nice thought. *
by Moff  (2017-04-21 18:45:24)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


It used to be a given that we would want players to finish
by Moff  (2017-04-21 12:33:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

out their eligibility, especially those as talented as Kizer. I would say yes if you had a guy like Holtz who took a three year starter with a lousy efficiency rating and the record for most interceptions, and turned him into one of the highest rated QBs in that one final year under Holtz.

In an article listed yesterday, Kizer said he was not a loser until last year. We have players calling themselves losers now thanks to this guy. A guy like Holtz could, and did, fix that too. See also Parseghian, Ara.


give me the lads that want to be here!
by jt  (2017-04-21 15:32:23)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

We need more white kinda guys!


If they're going to be a top 50 pick
by YinzKeenanVisor  (2017-04-21 13:23:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They should go. Especially if they're a RB, WR, LB, or DB.

Between the current rookie wage scale and the many and great risks inherent to football, I think it's foolish to return and turn down $1M+ / year and a guarantee of at least half that (the guarantee percentage gets pretty small after the 2nd round). There's just too much that can go wrong in the interim.

Get in the league. Get to your 2nd contract a year earlier. And then get out with as much of your health as you can (and come back to get your degree during offseasons)


I would narrow that to first round
by RJD  (2017-04-21 18:40:24)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

There is actually a large gap between first and second round money the last time I checked and that is money you can't make up until your second contract-if you get a second contract.

If you believe you are a year away from being a first rounder, the risk reward is very favorable, especially for a QB like Kizer who might have developed into a top five, top ten pick.

Last time I did the math, second rounders were leaving close to $15 million on the table.

Last year:

"According to Spotrac, the 2016 first pick is expected to sign a contract with the Los Angeles Rams worth an estimated $27,729,654. The Denver Broncos 31st pick will sign a contract worth an estimated $8,217,802. The difference between the first and last pick in the first round is worth an estimated $19,511,852."

There is also a major difference in guaranteed money between rounds.


Most top players have insurance worth much more
by 84david  (2017-04-21 13:59:31)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

than a million.

Still, these guys have the NFL as their dream, and I would not substitute my
judgement for theirs.

The players I dont get are those that leave early for non-guaranteed late round/FA
money, just to be practice squad punching bags, that could be cut without pay on
a moments notice. You have to really hate college or your coach for that.


No they don't. Smith's insurance is a good example
by btd  (2017-04-21 20:15:52)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He lost 10+ million even with his insurance. Insurance is tax free, so for the sake of argument every $1 is worth $2 of taxable income. Smith got somewhere between $1 and $4 million of insurance. That's 2 to 8 million of salary equivalent. He then got a 2nd round contract that I don't remember his salary, but perhaps as much as $2 million per year with incentives and maybe a 2 year deal. Net that out he got $4 million salary and 2 to 8 million equivalent in insurance payments. 6 - 10 million total.

As a top 5 pick his signing bonus alone would have been 10+ million, he would have had guaranteed payments of 10-20 million more in his original contract. He lost at least 10 million because he came back to ND and got injured in spite of his insurance.

A lessor talent would have had a lessor insurance policy and the magnitude of the loss would have been the same for them. For example they would have ended up with 2 million with insurance instead of 4 - 6 million sans being injured and drafted in the 2nd round. The net effect is they too would have lost about 50% because they came back and got injured.

In this era, a player that can get drafted in the 1st round should leave virtually every single time and most that can be drafted in the 2nd round or better should also leave. A few that could move from 2nd round to top 10 pick perhaps should roll the dice, but Smith is a strong argument of why that risk is very high. He likely was the same pick or slightly higher a year earlier as where he ended up -- but sans being damaged goods he would have gotten a better initial contract worth more than what he actually ended up with. Any way you slice it he lost money.

You can always get your degree in parallel with playing in the NFL.


Thank you *
by weirdo0521  (2017-04-23 15:30:33)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Very hard to collect on those policies
by weirdo0521  (2017-04-21 16:14:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

for full value. Jaylon Smith who was a much higher rated prospect going into his Jr. year is going to collect less than $800,000. The insurance money is a fraction of what these could potentially make.


He's only collecting that amount because he was still...
by FL_Irish  (2017-04-21 19:34:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...drafted in the second round, which enabled him to sign a contract with a couple million dollars guaranteed on top of his insurance payout. There's no reason to believe he wouldn't have collected the full $5 million had he fallen farther.

But you're correct that it's still less than what he would have made as a high first rounder. I'm not a fan of skipping bowl games once you've decided to stay, but I don't fault anyone for bolting a year early and getting paid.


Do the math. Even with the full $5 million that's 50%
by btd  (2017-04-21 20:20:16)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

at best of what he would have received had he come out a year early. The insurance does not cover the actual lost revenue. It is better than a stick in the eye, but it is nowhere near enough money to cover the actual risk.


I've done the math. You do the reading.
by FL_Irish  (2017-04-21 20:28:32)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

"But you're correct that it's still less than he would have made as a high first rounder."


Yeah, I put an if in there for a reason. I had no problem
by Moff  (2017-04-21 13:37:42)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

With Rocket, Bettis, Clausen and others leaving early. But I am also not excited about a hard and fast rule that everyone should go regardless of the situation out of fear of injury. Tim Brown would have been top 50 after his junior AA season and front runner for the Heisman status. We wouldn't have done so hot my senior year and our last Heisman would be 1964. 1988 might not have happened without the momentum he helped build. He wanted to win a National Championship or otherwise add to our great legacy. Since that is now out of the question, I guess these guys would be fools for risking their health for a school that doesn't really give a crap about hi quality football anymore, while being subjected to the purple faced wonder who may, at any moment, be out on a job interview.


The financial gap is close to 10x more now than 30 years
by btd  (2017-04-21 20:27:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

ago. That's why the logic today is different. Tim Brown wasn't risking 20-30 million by coming back an extra year. He was risking 2-5 million. A lot of money, but nowhere near the same risk and calculus.

Look at it this way, Smith lost 10 million by getting injured -- minimum. Whack half of that for taxes. He's down 5 million net. At 5% that's an infinite stream of $250k per year that he lost. In his lifetime, assume he lives to 75, he lost that 250k / year annuity for at least 52 years. $13 million. Also, that 250k basically is enough for him to be a top 5% earner forever. A really big cushion for life -- gone. Arguably, he could have played 3 years, sucked, retired and never worked another day of his life -- living off that lost 250k annuity.

At 1 to 4 million -- the risk Brown was taking -- that's 500k to 2 million lost. An annuity of 25k to 100k. Better than $0, but not retirement money. He still has to work after football. So, roll the dice and come back another year and see if you can move up a level whereby you do have an annuity rolling in whereby you have the option to never work again the rest of your life.


Where do you think Brown would have gone after 1986? *
by Moff  (2017-04-21 20:33:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


2nd round
by btd  (2017-04-22 18:25:27)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He had a ton of name recognition after his junior year. He might have even gone late first round given his combine numbers would have been the same either way.


They'd be fools to risk it for any school
by WilfordBrimley  (2017-04-21 16:51:24)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

if they're in the first three rounds or so, especially as a skill position player and especially what is known about the medical side effects of the sport now vis a vis 1987. Tim Brown didn't face a severely restricted rookie wage agreement and a league in which skill players, even good ones, were commodities.


I would have always agreed as to most schools,
by Moff  (2017-04-21 19:17:49)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

because most schools were factories that used them up and spit them out, sometimes unable to read, and were not inclined to pay for them to come back and finish later once their eligibility was up. And there were and are really only a small subset where winning a championship was possible.

Other than CTE, I don't know what has been learned about the medical effects. Tim Brown used to pride himself on making guys miss. We knew back then that guys with too many concussions had to hang it up. We had guys on our team that limped around due to permanent knee injuries. The medical technology back then was such that easily repaired damaged today was considered career ending back then. It was a minor miracle that his blown out knee at the start of his second year in the NFL was repaired, and he went on to do what he did.

I stopped watching the NFL when the last of the guys I knew retired so I cannot claim to know the details of the rookie wage agreement. As far as being a commodity, he was taken with the 6th overall pick and complained that his owner didn't feel like playing him. One of the other teams we played in 1987 had three WRs taken in the first two rounds of the same draft, so there seemed to be a lot of talent to go around then too. has the average tenure changed in the NFL since then? How were NFL players less of a commodity then?

Under the current arrangement, if Brown had come out after his junior season, where do you think he would have gone versus 6th overall with the Heisman after his senior year? He was considered a very good player, but I didn't realize just how great until a couple games into his senior year.

Putting all of the above aside, the condition you guys are describing sounds like a justification for a Kentucky basketball-like system. I am glad my experience was back in the day where guys wanted to stay and win something and maybe that is another reason I have really stopped caring relative to then.

This focus on money would seem a lot more important to me if I did not know what percentage of them blow it all in record time, with 50 or 60 years to go in life.


The economics of the game have changed a lot,
by WilfordBrimley  (2017-04-22 01:05:00)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

particularly at the professional level, even if we wish it were not so. It has changed a tremendous amount even since I was a kid in the early- and mid-1990's.

Most important is that medical and economic information is readily available to all players as transparent as possible at virtually every step of the process.

Brown would've been selected at probably roughly the same spot had he come out his junior year, but given the variables, he would've lost $10 - $40 million over the course of his career if the 2017 paradigm were implemented. That is generational money, and anyone from any school - ND, Alabama, Stanford, USC, or whoever else - would be a fool to not look at the economics and probabilities and figure that out. Do you think Will Fuller didn't love ND? Because he looked at something roughly approximating the same odds as Brown and decided it was in his best interest to eschew a last year. Ditto Golden Tate. Michael Floyd would've been gone had it not been for personal problems. It doesn't matter who the coach is, and I don't care for Kelly one iota. Over the long run, they are self-interested homo economicus actors who are interested in maximizing their economic value through whatever means possible, and Notre Dame is just a means to that end, as hard as it is for some of us to see that. As ACross has said many times on here, you win by getting players who view ND as not necessarily the best lifestyle opportunity, but the best football opportunity, and those kids will be going to pro in droves as juniors no matter where they go to school.

And to answer your other questions, yes, wide receivers and running backs have become commodized in the NFL with the exception of a very small handful of extraordinary athletes that number roughly ten or twelve in the entire league. That Theo Riddick is the prototype for modern NFL running backs should be your answer. The compensation and draft structure is plainly obvious.

The major difference between a Kentucky basketball and a Notre Dame football is the fact that the NBA deigns that players can be drafted a year out of high school and the NFL deigns three years. We would become a Duke basketball - utilizing the one and done just as much - if we had the coaching pipeline to do it if we thought we could. To pretend otherwise is lying to yourself.


I have no doubt that you are right about the vast majority
by Moff  (2017-04-22 10:06:53)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Of this. For many of the reasons you cite, i tuned out of the NFL a long time ago. Watching a bunch of guys mainly concerned about maximizing future annuity streams just doesn't do it for me, and as it creeps into college, I care less and less about that. One thing I am not so sure of is your belief about where Brown would have gone if he came out after his junior year. I think it would have been significantly lower. That's why I wanted to get btd's feel for it as he knew those guys. I am also not convinced that our current guys care as much about winning or the tradition, but that could be a function of the parade of incompetents we have subjected them to.


Maybe this is a better rule:
by YinzKeenanVisor  (2017-04-21 13:54:07)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Especially for QB's: Do the opposite of what Brian Kelly says.


Coach Costanza *
by graNDfan  (2017-04-21 18:53:52)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Drag a Heisman around the parking lot *
by Moff  (2017-04-21 19:04:17)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Amen, brother *
by Moff  (2017-04-21 13:58:29)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Apropos coaching (or lack thereof)
by NJDoubleDomer  (2017-04-21 12:53:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I was astounded to read that Kizer was completely unaware that he was inconsistent with foot placement prior to the snap. You were around great coaches...doesn't SOMEBODY have the job to watch stuff like this?


Holtz would correct multiple guys after each practice rep
by Moff  (2017-04-21 13:06:17)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

for the slightest misstep. During the first winter work outs, the assistants had guys learn how to form a proper Huddle. We wore Adidas then and if there was one guy who did not have his three Adidas stripes perfectly aligned with the next guy, they would do it again. "Adidas stripe on Adidas stripe!" If there was a fumbled snap in practice, you would see the QB and center staying a few minutes after with Lou staring at them point blank and telling them exactly what they were doing wrong. I remember we were having a team meal in Miami and Lou read from a Miami paper which said that, in 1985, Miami was calling out run or pass before every play by our offense. Turns out they watched our film and saw that on one OL had a slightly different stance on run versus pass plays.

Entire practice periods we spent working on stances and first steps. Guys were not balanced in their stances and were putting pressure on their fingers. The feet were too wide apart. The ball of one foot was not perfectly aligned with the heel of the other. The first step and freeze. You over strided. Do it again.

Many years ago now, my wife went with the woman next door to an event at Giants Stadium with former Jets players. The next door neighbors were big fans. They got to play a flag game in the field and former players ran them through a practice before hand. When they got to the RB station, one of the players asked my wife where the hellshe learned to form a proper shelf to take a hand off like that, with the proper elbow up. She said "Lou Holtz by way of my husband." I didn't want her to go inthere unprepared.


I would like all of ND's players to finish at least 4 years
by 1978Irish  (2017-04-21 12:53:03)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

at ND. I understand that may not be the best thing for some athletes. The more you play in college the greater the chance to get injured.

Clausen probably could have used an extra year in college. I can't see that it would have done any good with Kelly coaching.

Who knows who ND would have hired. If they bought in Bob Stoopes or Meyer, that would have been a big upgrade that Kizer could have benefitted from. If they bring in the next Bob Davie or Ty Willingham, he should run away.


What about guys on track to graduate in less than 4 years?
by weirdo0521  (2017-04-21 16:17:43)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

If they are NFL 1st round talent, it's hard to argue they should stay other than a hope for a National Title. Other than 2012, those hopes have been crushed by the end of September most of the last 2 + decades.


Agree completely. *
by Moff  (2017-04-21 13:07:44)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


The contents of this post represent the views of the author. NDNation.com is not responsible for its contents.