Keli Lawson was one of last August's top Virginia Tech prospects, and rightfully so. (Jon Fleming)
1) In your Top Prospects article on Virginia Tech football, you listed LB Jaden Keller, TE Dae'Quan Wright, and LB Keli Lawson as your top three prospects. How do you feel about those ratings six months later, and how much are you kicking yourself for ranking Mansoor Delane 5th? Is there anyone you wish you added to that list in hindsight? – MBHokie90
This article is for TSL Pass subscribers
Get full access to premium articles, recruiting intel, and analysis from the team that's covered Virginia Tech sports since 1996.
Just curious. Can a walk-on at BYU take the NIL money intended for room, board, tuition and instead head for an extended party in the Bahamas?
LXNTN_HOKIE
Chris, I think they should hire you as a part time advisor. You seem to know your stuff analyzing college football.
HarvardHokie
Chris, great analysis on the increased funding for the coaching staff — especially analysts. But, it does make our abysmal offensive production that much more damning knowing we’re paying an extra $1M to our offensive staff! That’s a lot to pay for arguably Tech’s worst offense perhaps ever…
Long-Lost Hokie
Thanks for addressing my question.
I'm not sure if there are 35 "preferred" walk-ons or not. Probably not, but I could be wrong.
I guess I'm not thinking of it as akin to giving 35 Rudys a free ride, just for the feel-good story. It could be much more targeted than what BYU seems to be doing.
I'm thinking of it as a way to get five to ten more legitimate in-state 3-star prospects every year, effectively upping the "scholarship limit" to 90 to 95. Kids you might otherwise lose to scholarship offers from Charlotte or JMU or Liberty or Marshall. That's a far smaller chunk of change using the numbers you cited. $150k - $300k per year -- which it sounds like some NILs are throwing at a single player, possibly even HS recruits. And it could be less than that. The NIL could simply cover the family's FAFSA "expected family contribution," which is calculated after other need or merit-based grants and scholarships are subtracted from the total cost of attendance.
At the very least it could be something like a discretionary fund -- where if, in a given year, the coaching staff wants to attract a few more recruits than they technically have room for, either HS or portal guys, they can point them in the direction of Triumph NIL or The Hokie Way. As far as I can tell, that's within the rules -- at least right now.
Totally agree there would be roster churn. But a scholarship guy who can't beat out the walk-ons probably isn't a scholarship guy to begin with -- and a walk-on who can beat out a scholarship guy deserves a scholarship.
Not sure playing time for current walk-ons is the best metric, either. Kaleb Smith doesn't seem to factor into that calculation, though he was a preferred walk-on who developed into the best player on the offense last year, and he has a fighting (Irish) chance to play in the NFL. Plus, players down on the depth chart can contribute in other ways -- I remember reading on TSL how frustrated JC Price was getting one day in practice when the scout team OL was getting thrown around like rag dolls running drills against the first-team defense.
All that's to say, it wouldn't have to be all or nothing. 90 to 95 scholarship-worthy players is inherently better than 85. And that probably wouldn't be prohibitively expensive.
HokieBurger
Exactly. I think we've been overlooking real issue here as you've just pointed out. I'll add that it's not hard to imagine a scenario where schools like OSU and Alabama annually convince a few 4* kids that they normally wouldn't have room for to sign as walk-ons, knowing they will have all the benefits of a scholarship. The days of middle tier schools signing that 4* kid who has offers that "may or may not be committable" from some of the blue bloods would likely be over.
Long-Lost Hokie
Certainly could be an accordion effect, yeah. I'm just wondering if this is one way to Money-Ball things a little bit -- with your analogy, the larger market (bluebloods) might be more inclined to throw big money at the top of their rosters whereas smaller market (middle tier schools) programs would be better served investing smaller sums in more prospects.
And the kicker is this could change sooner or later, if the regulations get tighter. Not sure if they will or not.
7 Comments