Judd Anderson #53 and Luke Nickel #30, you guys like this QB recruiting?

[grover]

Judd’s early high school tape was almost unwatchable. He was Sitkowski-esque. He made a huge jump as a senior. I think he’s capable of more. He’s clearly a guy who hasn’t had a ton of coaching.

It was so bad lol. But yeah, he made incredible strides under the new staff when he moved HSs in his senior year. Maybe Dawson can make it worked. I will be shocked if he’s ever more than Klubnick serviceable though, which would in itself be surprising. JMHO.

 

[mirvin88]

I’m all for spending big money on CB, Edge, DT etc but QB isn’t the one to do so out of HS. They almost all transfer nowadays. Save that allotment for portal QBs and do your due diligence/scouting recruiting HS that you may hit on.

 

[grover]

I’m all for spending big money on CB, Edge, DT etc but QB isn’t the one to do so out of HS. They almost all transfer nowadays. Save that allotment for portal QBs and do your due diligence/scouting recruiting HS that you may hit on.

My guess is the NIL contracts for QBs all evolve to ballooning terms. Start off “smaller” in year one. If you’re still living in CG 2 or 3 years in you’re paid increasingly more. That way either side can part ways if things don’t work out.

 

[Calinative]

I like Nickel more than any quarterback we’ve signed in at least 5 years (not transfers). He’s not perfect but he doesn’t have a glaring weakness like pretty much everyone else we’ve signed recently. Judd Anderson is the kind of high upside project I don’t mind grabbing. He’s big, he’s got a big arm and he’s not a statue at 6’7”. I think he has way more upside than Emory Williams who I believe is at best a backup quarterback who can’t win games for you but also won’t totally blow them for you either. Physical traits that can’t be coached are more important to me than a fundamentally sound guy who doesn’t have a good arm and isn’t athletic.

As for chasing elite QB recruits and spending money on them, it’s all about what your coach feels is worth doing. We’re spending a ton of money on Samson Okanlola right now. He did nothing as a freshman and is currently in a competition at left guard. Best case scenario, we have the most expensive left guard in college football or at least the ACC this year. Maybe next year he makes the jump to tackle and truly becomes the dominant player we’re paying for, right? So we’re willing to spend a ton of money and wait a few years on an offensive lineman but spending a ton of money for a quarterback who might not immediately start as a true freshman isn’t worth it? Quarterback is vastly more important than any offensive line position. You can spend on an elite quarterback recruit, let him sit a year and see if he’s making the push to start as a sophomore. If he’s truly elite, he’ll be ready by then. If he’s still struggling, you’re under no obligation to keep him on your roster or your payroll. Let him transfer out. Look at the quarterbacks that were drafted in the first round this year. They were all elite recruits outside of Michael Penix. Yes, some transferred while they were in college but that speaks more about their original programs lack of good development than it does about their elite talent. They still became first round picks.

I get that the portal will always offer options. We totally lucked out and got the best option available this year. Is that going to happen every year? What if Cam hadn’t pulled out of the draft? What were our other options? Will Howard? DJ ukulele? These guys are mediocre at best. Just assuming that we’re going to grab a game changer every year and just do the one year portal rental at quarterback over and over is risky as **** to me.

We need to keep pushing for elite quarterback recruits. At the very least we need to identify and lock up second tier guys like we did with Nickel more often. We can’t just take projects and then hope to sign Cam Wars in the portal every year.

I think you have a point, but it misses that positions have distinct value, and thus different prices associated with them.

A 5star OT may be very very expensive to sign, and for him to sit on the bench 1 year isn't good.

BUT a 5star QB is likely making FAR more money. And at the end of the day It is all coming from the same "nil cap". So having your 5star QB sit the bench for a year is likely closer to having FOUR 5star players at other positions sitting the bench for a year. The difference in pay scale between QB and every other position is and should be quite large. So it has an outsized impact on your ability to bring in talent when that is your situation (sitting a 5star QB).

And as far as Samson playing OG and being too expensive for that position, that may be true. But the NFL is now shifting to paying OGs more. And because we have an incumbent at LT, the Total LT+LG cost may not be all that incredibly expensive, who knows. I'm not sure if Jalen Rivers is making a killing or not. Id assume Mauigoa is. Cooper probably not. Doubt Carpenter was extremely expensive. We probably are spending more than rest of ACC for our Online though ... But we also have the best OL in the ACC so it is what it is.

 

[mirvin88]

My guess is the NIL contracts for QBs all evolve to ballooning terms. Start off “smaller” in year one. If you’re still living in CG 2 or 3 years in you’re paid increasingly more. That way either side can part ways if things don’t work out.

Maybe. But without knowing definitively I’d prefer doing what we’ve done so far.

 

[DTP]

I think it’s a lot more difficult to snag a stud transfer OL than it is a QB. That also factors into it too. There aren’t many first or second round lineman changing teams so you must develop or recruit them. So, it’s not an apples to apples comparison.

Linemen are less likely to transfer but they are also far less likely to play until their third year of college. Not to mention OL has the highest percentage of project types that become star players. Look at the quarterbacks taken in the first round and where they were rated as high schoolers and then look at the OL that were picked in the first. One was a 5 star, the rest were 3 stars.

 

[DTP]

I think you have a point, but it misses that positions have distinct value, and thus different prices associated with them.

A 5star OT may be very very expensive to sign, and for him to sit on the bench 1 year isn't good.

BUT a 5star QB is likely making FAR more money. And at the end of the day It is all coming from the same "nil cap". So having your 5star QB sit the bench for a year is likely closer to having FOUR 5star players at other positions sitting the bench for a year. The difference in pay scale between QB and every other position is and should be quite large. So it has an outsized impact on your ability to bring in talent when that is your situation (sitting a 5star QB).

And as far as Samson playing OG and being too expensive for that position, that may be true. But the NFL is now shifting to paying OGs more. And because we have an incumbent at LT, the Total LT+LG cost may not be all that incredibly expensive, who knows. I'm not sure if Jalen Rivers is making a killing or not. Id assume Mauigoa is. Cooper probably not. Doubt Carpenter was extremely expensive. We probably are spending more than rest of ACC for our Online though ... But we also have the best OL in the ACC so it is what it is.

I’m not sure a 5 star QB is necessarily making FAR more than a 5 star tackle. We’re not privy to NIL contracts so we could both be way off but elite NFL tackles are right after quarterbacks in terms of pay. I’m taking a top quarterback over a top tackle 10/10 because they just mean so much more to a team.

I also don’t have a problem with spending on linemen. It’s just that when people can’t fathom paying a 5 star quarterback but are perfectly fine with paying a 5 star tackle it makes me wonder…why?

 

[BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati]

My guess is the NIL contracts for QBs all evolve to ballooning terms. Start off “smaller” in year one. If you’re still living in CG 2 or 3 years in you’re paid increasingly more. That way either side can part ways if things don’t work out.

I'm not sure how factual this is, but I've heard it mentioned more than once that many schools are now adding clauses into the NIL contracts that essentially say that if the player transfers, he has to repay the monies he collected from the school he is transferring away from. As has been mentioned several times in this thread, we aren't privy to the details so I don't know for sure. I have to imagine the schools are doing something to protect themselves and their investment. I wrote all this to say that NIL and the portal has completely changed elite QB recruiting and as a result, I struggle to form any hard opinions at this point.

 

[hesskilla]

Linemen are less likely to transfer but they are also far less likely to play until their third year of college. Not to mention OL has the highest percentage of project types that become star players. Look at the quarterbacks taken in the first round and where they were rated as high schoolers and then look at the OL that were picked in the first. One was a 5 star, the rest were 3 stars.

I get all that, but I think my point still stands. If you want a stud lineman, you have to recruit him. If you want a stud QB, your best bet is to convince him to transfer to your school. So, I’m ok with spending the money (if it is finite) on a developmental 5* OL over a developmental 5* QB.

 

[joeyhh]

Cam is now - Nickel the future

Keep Nickel at all costs

 

[Home Slice]

Luke should be ranked higher very soon

 

[grover]

Maybe. But without knowing definitively I’d prefer doing what we’ve done so far.

I'm not saying we should stop looking for transfer QBs. I was all for it and continue to be. I posted we should invest our NIL in a transfer QB over Rashada even before D$ started talking about the fact programs were overspending on high school QBs. But the way we landed Ward woke me up to how risky the portal is, too. It may have been our best option last cycle, but it was a coin toss. Imagine how we would feel if it were Reese v Emory right now?

So you've got to do both. Nickel's a good start. He's looks to most of us to "belong" in that "top QB" category, maybe even elite. We were on him first, way before his stock went up, so should save a few NIL dollars because of it. But we shouldn't be afraid to recruit guys we think are too expensive right now for the 2026 and 2027 classes. The NIL pendulum should correct itself now that several programs have been burnt by overspending on HS QBs who ride pine then transfer out. Maybe that won't happen before the next cycle, but it could. And Mario/Dawson need to be on a full court press for the best 2026 and 2027 HS QBs right now to have options come next Feb when they need to start firming up those classes' commitments.

 

[mirvin88]

I'm not saying we should stop looking for transfer QBs. I was all for it and continue to be. I posted we should invest our NIL in a transfer QB over Rashada even before D$ started talking about the fact programs were overspending on high school QBs. But the way we landed Ward woke me up to how risky the portal is, too. It may have been our best option last cycle, but it was a coin toss. Imagine how we would feel if it were Reese v Emory right now?

So you've got to do both. Nickel's a good start. He's looks to most of us to "belong" in that "top QB" category, maybe even elite. We were on him first, way before his stock went up, so should save a few NIL dollars because of it. But we shouldn't be afraid to recruit guys we think are too expensive right now for the 2026 and 2027 classes. The NIL pendulum should correct itself now that several programs have been burnt by overspending on HS QBs who ride pine then transfer out. Maybe that won't happen before the next cycle, but it could. And Mario/Dawson need to be on a full court press for the best 2026 and 2027 HS QBs right now to have options come next Feb when they need to start firming up those classes' commitments.

I don’t think we disagree. Judd is the most “eh” take, but if we end up landing the Nickels regularly out of HS we will be in a good spot. I also hope we grab multi year kids here and there like Poff. I think he could start next year.

I just don’t think throwing 10mil at a Nico is worthwhile. (Allegedly)

 

[cowboycane]

Hasn't this already been covered? We're largely going to be taking lower ranked, high upside HS QBs because they're essentially lotto tickets and most of them transfer anyway...and then continue to try for a portal guy every year, because pretty much every good QB in collefe football transferred at some point.

 

[Calinative]

I’m not sure a 5 star QB is necessarily making FAR more than a 5 star tackle. We’re not privy to NIL contracts so we could both be way off but elite NFL tackles are right after quarterbacks in terms of pay. I’m taking a top quarterback over a top tackle 10/10 because they just mean so much more to a team.

I also don’t have a problem with spending on linemen. It’s just that when people can’t fathom paying a 5 star quarterback but are perfectly fine with paying a 5 star tackle it makes me wonder…why?

No OTs are actually not right after QBs (in the NFL). They are after QBs, WRs, EDGE, and DTs in terms of pay. And that's across the board - Elite players, starters, rotational players, backups, etc. And it's actually a larger difference in pay between those 4 positions and top OTs among elite players compared to just starters/backups. Top QBs make 2x what top OTs make, and in totality Qbs make double on average what OTs make. Backups/rotational players are closer in pay, however there is a price floor obviously for the NFL, whereas there wouldn't be for NIL. You could have developmental depth guys potentially making nothing...

I would 100% say 5star QBs are making far more than a 5star OT. Lets say a 5star OT makes $1M. That would likely be a lot. I just showed like 3 examples of 5 star Qbs making $2M/yr.

I literally just explained why paying 5star Qbs vs 5star OTs is different if they are sitting on the bench. There is a major difference in pay. Literally no backup Qb should cost over 4% of the NIL budget period. And with QB its very set in stone you have A as your starter and B as your backup that rarely plays. At OT you have 5 starters probably another 2 or so you expect to get legit PT due to injury at some point. And Really what you want to do is count the entire position group spending as a whole. It's a lot easier to stomach a 5star OT on the bench for a year because there are greater odds some of your starters who were maybe 3stars that developed aren't as costly along the OLine - at the end of the day you have 5 spots vs 1 for Ol vs QB. With QB, you're almost definitely paying your starter a lot of money. So having your backup QB also earning a lot of money just doesn't make financial sense. Again, like I pointed out you have to basically be in the situation of you have a cheap senior who developed and won starting job for a year, and then expect that 5star to take over the following year.

This is about how I'd like to spend our NIL:

Position	Total Players	% of Budget
QB	4	17%
RB	6	4%
WR	11	15%
TE	6	4%
OT	7	11%
iOL	8	5%
DT	9	13%
EDGE	8	14%
LB	8	5%
CB	10	8%
S	6	4%

Realistically though, the QB could get above 20% easily.

 

[Rickd]

People that have seen Nickel play ... knowledgeable people ... believe he is one that has legit NFL upside. Kid was making very difficult throws look easy and threw with accuracy. Just finishing his junior year in high school. Most important recruit on the commit list.

 

[Trav]

Probably won't get any top QBs until Mario proves he doesn't ruin them.

You mean like the one we literally just got?

 

[mcnaire2004]

You mean like the one we literally just got?

 

[DTP]

No OTs are actually not right after QBs (in the NFL). They are after QBs, WRs, EDGE, and DTs in terms of pay. And that's across the board - Elite players, starters, rotational players, backups, etc. And it's actually a larger difference in pay between those 4 positions and top OTs among elite players compared to just starters/backups. Top QBs make 2x what top OTs make, and in totality Qbs make double on average what OTs make. Backups/rotational players are closer in pay, however there is a price floor obviously for the NFL, whereas there wouldn't be for NIL. You could have developmental depth guys potentially making nothing...

I would 100% say 5star QBs are making far more than a 5star OT. Lets say a 5star OT makes $1M. That would likely be a lot. I just showed like 3 examples of 5 star Qbs making $2M/yr.

I literally just explained why paying 5star Qbs vs 5star OTs is different if they are sitting on the bench. There is a major difference in pay. Literally no backup Qb should cost over 4% of the NIL budget period. And with QB its very set in stone you have A as your starter and B as your backup that rarely plays. At OT you have 5 starters probably another 2 or so you expect to get legit PT due to injury at some point. And Really what you want to do is count the entire position group spending as a whole. It's a lot easier to stomach a 5star OT on the bench for a year because there are greater odds some of your starters who were maybe 3stars that developed aren't as costly along the OLine - at the end of the day you have 5 spots vs 1 for Ol vs QB. With QB, you're almost definitely paying your starter a lot of money. So having your backup QB also earning a lot of money just doesn't make financial sense. Again, like I pointed out you have to basically be in the situation of you have a cheap senior who developed and won starting job for a year, and then expect that 5star to take over the following year.

This is about how I'd like to spend our NIL:

Position	Total Players	% of Budget
QB	4	17%
RB	6	4%
WR	11	15%
TE	5	4%
OT	7	11%
iOL	8	5%
DT	9	13%
EDGE	9	14%
LB	8	5%
CB	10	8%
S	6	4%

Realistically though, the QB could get above 20% easily.

Even if a qb is paid twice what a tackle makes, he’s more than twice as important.

 

[Hold My Beer]

Lincoln Riley just produces Heisman winners and first round picks. The “busts” he’s had are guys who lost their jobs to more talented quarterbacks. Say what you want about his lack of interest in defense and questionable recruiting but he’s produced more star quarterbacks than any coach in the modern game.

Spot on.

Slightly OT: Riley seems to be a smalltown West Texas weirdo who literally doesn't give a **** about anything in football other than drawing up plays and being a QB whisperer. Sort of Chip Kelly 2.0.

No actual HFC in his right mind would've brought back USC's defensive staff after that 2022 disaster