Regarding the 'Suck Tax'

[SayWhat]

I've seen this mentioned a bunch of times and I've alluded to having to pay a premium going back as far as last year.

Is the problem that we could pay above what others offer, a premium, but there's a limit to that as well?

What I mean by this is that the war chest has largely been unused this year as we see premier prospects pick everyone but us. That would then mean we could offer even more as the list of available guys we want is thin.

The idea then is to throw the **** chest at those that are left on the board. So that brings me to my statement of a limit.

You pay these new guys a **** load of money, enough to steer then here, then what? Is that going to set a precedent for future classes? Next year you've gotta pay up again.

What about those on the roster who are starting ahead of them as the new costly recruits ride the pine getting their feet wet. Would there be discontent and resenrment from the players ahead of them, then the demands start coming from them? Basically it starts a chain reaction of events with some saying you won't pay me that, I'm getting mine elsewhere?

It's a tricky situation I'd think. I know we aren't at the top of the game financially, but if we thought we could get more than we have, the money is still there. Suck Tax makes sense on the surface, but dive deeper and maybe there's some problems that come with that.

 

[supacane]

I've seen this mentioned a bunch of times and I've alluded to having to pay a premium going back as far as last year.

Is the problem that we could pay above what others offer, a premium, but there's a limit to that as well?

What I mean by this is that the war chest has largely been unused this year as we see premier prospects pick everyone but us. That would then mean we could offer even more as the list of available guys we want is thin.

The idea then is to throw the **** chest at those that are left on the board. So that brings me to my statement of a limit.

You pay these new guys a **** load of money, enough to steer then here, then what? Is that going to set a precedent for future classes? Next year you've gotta pay up again.

What about those on the roster who are starting ahead of them as the new costly recruits ride the pine getting their feet wet. Would there be discontent and resenrment from the players ahead of them, then the demands start coming from them? Basically it starts a chain reaction of events with some saying you won't pay me that, I'm getting mine elsewhere?

It's a tricky situation I'd think. I know we aren't at the top of the game financially, but if we thought we could get more than we have, the money is still there. Suck Tax makes sense on the surface, but dive deeper and maybe there's some problems that come with that.

Dont suck. No suck tax. The suck tax supposed to be a temporary thing cuz u gonna perform on the field.

Now listen i been at G5 in Miami and this girl tried to rob me after we agreed a suck tax. So sometimes it doesnt work out the way u think. Actually Dalvin Cook and Njoku was in there that night together. Richt's first season after the season ended

 

[Memnon]

You get what you pay for.

If you’re going to be frugal while trying to land Elite talent, then you’re not going to get Elite talent.

The question then becomes, can you win without Elite talent?

 

[SayWhat]

You get what you pay for.

If you’re going to be frugal while trying to land Elite talent, then you’re not going to get Elite talent.

The question then becomes, can you win without Elite talent?

I agree, but then when you consider gotta pay and suck tax, we can then enter the realm of overpaying. It's been said we won't overpay, so perhaps the things I mentioned is the not overpaying reason. A host of other problems can come with that.

 

[Yoyo82]

You get what you pay for.

If you’re going to be frugal while trying to land Elite talent, then you’re not going to get Elite talent.

The question then becomes, can you win without Elite talent?

And with Mario, the answer is "no" so far.

 

[SayWhat]

Dont suck. No suck tax. The suck tax supposed to be a temporary thing cuz u gonna perform on the field.

Now listen i been at G5 in Miami and this girl tried to rob me after we agreed a suck tax. So sometimes it doesnt work out the way u think. Actually Dalvin Cook and Njoku was in there that night together. Richt's first season after the season ended

Clearly if you're winning, producing next level players, etc you don't need to pay the suck tax.

Still, you set a precedent (which I mentioned) you've got future issues with deals as kids can't keep a wallet secret. Not to mention possible roster issues with people hearing the new guy got that, I want mine.

Simply put, I was trying to bring to light that dropping mega bucks on what's left, it's not that black and white.

 

[Themadcane]

We already spent quite a bit on positions of need
Trader
Robinson
Riley
Lightfoot
Frankanvilla
Pruitt

Certainly we have more budget but let’s not act like we wiffed on everyone. We definitely need to pay the suck tax.
Maybe that tax was less with Breeland and Simmons than Scott and Stewart. If so it was smart waiting and being butt hurt for a little while.

If we still strike out…

 

[WeBallinBoyz]

We already spent quite a bit on positions of need
Trader
Robinson
Riley
Lightfoot
Frankanvilla
Pruitt

Certainly we have more budget but let’s not act like we wiffed on everyone. We definitely need to pay the suck tax.
Maybe that tax was less with Breeland and Simmons than Scott and Stewart. If so it was smart waiting and being butt hurt for a little while.

If we still strike out…

I think I've seen it all now.

 

[supacane]

Clearly if you're winning, producing next level players, etc you don't need to pay the suck tax.

Still, you set a precedent (which I mentioned) you've got future issues with deals as kids can't keep a wallet secret. Not to mention possible roster issues with people hearing the new guy got that, I want mine.

Simply put, I was trying to bring to light that dropping mega bucks on what's left, it's not that black and white.

I have explained that very thing multiple times and i could swear u were one of the antagonista saying its all excuses and defending Cristobal.

I think there must be some balance. U cant just stick to your guns and miss out on every kid. And u cant just be spraying everyone with Benjamins. But like i said, the suck tax goes away with winning. Its just tax after that.

 

[Memnon]

I agree, but then when you consider gotta pay and suck tax, we can then enter the realm of overpaying. It's been said we won't overpay, so perhaps the things I mentioned is the not overpaying reason. A host of other problems can come with that.

Beggars can’t be choosers.

Unless Miami can win without landing top talent, then you have to pay the costs of what it takes to get to that point.

If we can win without having Elite classes, then we’ll never have to overpay; but when you’re a losing program trying to come up, then you can’t get fiscally conservative with the money distribution.

In the words of Q-Tip, “Scared Money don’t make none..”

 

[Geddy Lee]

They call me The Taxman Mondays and Wednesdays

 

[grover]

Best answer to the suck tax is to stop sucking. Until then, we will need to pay a premium for certain guys. Just be smart about it. I trust Mario to know when it's needed.

 

[Brains]

You can drive down the price by winning. Until then, you will have to consistently overpay.

 

[Dude]

I've seen this mentioned a bunch of times and I've alluded to having to pay a premium going back as far as last year.

Is the problem that we could pay above what others offer, a premium, but there's a limit to that as well?

What I mean by this is that the war chest has largely been unused this year as we see premier prospects pick everyone but us. That would then mean we could offer even more as the list of available guys we want is thin.

The idea then is to throw the **** chest at those that are left on the board. So that brings me to my statement of a limit.

You pay these new guys a **** load of money, enough to steer then here, then what? Is that going to set a precedent for future classes? Next year you've gotta pay up again.

What about those on the roster who are starting ahead of them as the new costly recruits ride the pine getting their feet wet. Would there be discontent and resenrment from the players ahead of them, then the demands start coming from them? Basically it starts a chain reaction of events with some saying you won't pay me that, I'm getting mine elsewhere?

It's a tricky situation I'd think. I know we aren't at the top of the game financially, but if we thought we could get more than we have, the money is still there. Suck Tax makes sense on the surface, but dive deeper and maybe there's some problems that come with that.

We will likely see this dynamic play out at A&M this season. Perhaps we already have.

 

[grover]

You can drive down the price by winning. Until then, you will have to consistently overpay.

In general, I'm for paying a suck tax selectively. But not everywhere. For example, I'm totally against paying above market rates for a guy like Rashada at the top end or that WR who committed to Nebraska at the lower end. Those guys aren't even matches for me. The German OL was a match but not "match+" for me. But recruits like Simmons and Scott are definitely "match+" guys for me.

We took a dozen* 3 stars for a reason. I'm sure the staff believes their evals were good. But it wasn't just because of evals. They must have been cheaper relative to higher-ranked kids that our coaches saw as equivalent talent who were commanding a NIL premium. And we conserved money so could pay up at other positions of need. So now it's time to win the battles we need to win.

*Actually it was 13, but Pruitt got his bump to 4 stars after his commitment.

 

[01Canes]

We already spent quite a bit on positions of need
Trader
Robinson
Riley
Lightfoot
Frankanvilla
Pruitt

Certainly we have more budget but let’s not act like we wiffed on everyone. We definitely need to pay the suck tax.
Maybe that tax was less with Breeland and Simmons than Scott and Stewart. If so it was smart waiting and being butt hurt for a little while.

If we still strike out…

 

[Astcloud11]

Spend on QB, spend on WR, spend on DLine. Follow the lead of the only 2 ACC teams that have won Championships in the last decade. Elite QB and passing game, OLine holding up enough for a RB to do damage, devote the rest of your resources to trying to build a top 5 defense.

 

[TRick72]

This is now a business so let’s just apply basic labor market dynamics to it.

A new hire at Google is starting at a higher salary than a new hire did last year who was higher than the year before. Does the guy who started 2 years ago get upset because the new guy just started at a higher rate than he did? Yeah….occasionally, especially if he’s outperformed and his salary is still the same. At that point you have an option, increase their salary past that of a new hire to make them content, risk losing them or having a malcontent who’s underperforming or just replace them with a new cheaper higher who may or may not be as good as they were. Happens all the time in business and it’s not going to be avoided here.

Now if you’re starting a new business and your goal is to compete with Google you have 2 “options”. First you can go to Stanford, MIT and Cal Tech and try to hire their best talent by offering oversized packages than Google does or you try to hire the talent from lesser known schools at “market rates”.

Under the first option, some of talent you offer are still going to opt the “safer” option to go work at Google. Others you hire are never going to live up to your expectations and must be replaced. Occasionally some of the high performing ones you hire will leave and will have to be replaced. Finally, there’s no guarantee you will ever catch up to Google but the only realistic chance you have of doing so is hiring talent as good or better than them while simultaneously keeping top talent from them. If you eventually catch them or come close to it then you can offer packages to new hires similar to them.

Second option you’re guaranteed to never catch Google. You’ll have some “diamonds in the rough” that will certainly outperform expectations but the talent gap will just keep widening and you’ll never catch them. You can still have a “successful” company but you’re just going to have to redefine “success” by significantly lowering expectations.

 

[SayWhat]

This is now a business so let’s just apply basic labor market dynamics to it.

A new hire at Google is starting at a higher salary than a new hire did last year who was higher than the year before. Does the guy who started 2 years ago get upset because the new guy just started at a higher rate than he did? Yeah….occasionally, especially if he’s outperformed and his salary is still the same. At that point you have an option, increase their salary past that of a new hire to make them content, risk losing them or having a malcontent who’s underperforming or just replace them with a new cheaper higher who may or may not be as good as they were. Happens all the time in business and it’s not going to be avoided here.

Now if you’re starting a new business and your goal is to compete with Google you have 2 “options”. First you can go to Stanford, MIT and Cal Tech and try to hire their best talent by offering oversized packages than Google does or you try to hire the talent from lesser known schools at “market rates”.

Under the first option, some of talent you offer are still going to opt the “safer” option to go work at Google. Others you hire are never going to live up to your expectations and must be replaced. Occasionally some of the high performing ones you hire will leave and will have to be replaced. Finally, there’s no guarantee you will ever catch up to Google but the only realistic chance you have of doing so is hiring talent as good or better than them while simultaneously keeping top talent from them. If you eventually catch them or come close to it then you can offer packages to new hires similar to them.

Second option you’re guaranteed to never catch Google. You’ll have some “diamonds in the rough” that will certainly outperform expectations but the talent gap will just keep widening and you’ll never catch them. You can still have a “successful” company but you’re just going to have to redefine “success” by significantly lowering expectations.

I agree and like your approach on all of that.

Still, if we go BIG on some of these new kids, like some are suggesting, then it isn't a competitive salary at all. In the business world, they're usually in the same ballpark.

Whatever works to make us better. I just think when someone like Cribby says we won't overpay, I do wonder if some of the considerations brought up in this thread is what that's about.

 

[MikeCane18]

Beggars can’t be choosers.

Unless Miami can win without landing top talent, then you have to pay the costs of what it takes to get to that point.

If we can win without having Elite classes, then we’ll never have to overpay; but when you’re a losing program trying to come up, then you can’t get fiscally conservative with the money distribution.

In the words of Q-Tip, “Scared Money don’t make none..”

I think we’ve landed some elite talent since Mario has gotten here, but the question is it championship/playoff level talent, and is it enough of it? I think the answer to that, from what we’ve seen in our own product and other perennial playoff teams.

We will get ours, because we kind of always have. We need to get more of it. You’ve been pretty adamant over not letting UGA to continue to do what they are doing, but they are the example of when you haven’t done **** in over 30 years how you build top to bottom in this era.

We probably will never be that level of spend, but we need to realize that some level of overspend is necessary to get depth and a foundation.