Yep and everything works both ways and especially each time a precedent is set.

I this case, Lanning was hired just over a year ago so perhaps he becomes the standard going forward for other schools, coaches, alumni and fans i.e. "Look what Oregon did in one year...why can't we..."

HOWEVER if Lanning doesn't at least match his 10-3 record this coming season then?

Ultimately he has only put more pressure on himself with this very quick roster makeover.

Likewise the players cannot have it both ways...NIL options and / or Transfer Portal and then expect to be "protected." So yes with freedom comes consequences and one of those may be a HC using their freedom and leverage to push players out the door for whatever reasons.

People forget(or don't know) scholarships are "renewed" annually. They are not a 4-year guarantee. So a HC always has that option to "cut" a player or move a bad attitude.

I guess if I had to choose the most optimistic mindset, instead of thinking the NIL, Transfer Portal and all related issues are ruining college football, they are instead raising the levels of accountability for both coaches and players. Excuses, while not being eliminated entirely, are significantly diminished.

If the 2023 Oregon football team is 75% Lanning's...does anyone now think he has 4-5 years to build a program?

DucksReign wrote:

Yep and everything works both ways and especially each time a precedent is set.

I this case, Lanning was hired just over a year ago so perhaps he becomes the standard going forward for other schools, coaches, alumni and fans i.e. "Look what Oregon did in one year...why can't we..."

HOWEVER if Lanning doesn't at least match his 10-3 record this coming season then?

Ultimately he has only put more pressure on himself with this very quick roster makeover.

Likewise the players cannot have it both ways...NIL options and / or Transfer Portal and then expect to be "protected." So yes with freedom comes consequences and one of those may be a HC using their freedom and leverage to push players out the door for whatever reasons.

People forget(or don't know) scholarships are "renewed" annually. They are not a 4-year guarantee. So a HC always has that option to "cut" a player or move a bad attitude.

I guess if I had to choose the most optimistic mindset, instead of thinking the NIL, Transfer Portal and all related issues are ruining college football, they are instead raising the levels of accountability for both coaches and players. Excuses, while not being eliminated entirely, are significantly diminished.

If the 2023 Oregon football team is 75% Lanning's...does anyone now think he has 4-5 years to build a program?

Here is an article discussing schollies. I think the NCAA is going to have to increase the 85 limit, at least to 90."The NCAA has allowed colleges to provide multiyear scholarships since 2012. Additionally, in 2015, NCAA D1 colleges from the Power Five conferences (colleges in the Football Bowl Subdivision, plus Notre Dame) agreed to implement a rule that prevented multi-year D1 scholarships from being canceled or not renewed for any athletic reason.So, yes, there are athletic scholarships that are guaranteed for four years, but they are not the norm outside of powerhouse football programs."
https://www.sportsengine.com/recruiting/are-athletic-scholarships-guaranteed-4-years

Duckball wrote:

That's crazy. And a sign of the times.

On the one hand, it's wonderful for a new coach to establish his culture as quickly as possible. And any program now can change their fortunes quickly if they get all the puzzle pieces and moving parts put together correctly.

On the other hand, I am saddened by some of the players who will get pushed out. Is there any more room on a team for a player who works his tail off for a few years in obscurity to finally get the chance to play for a school they love? Apparently not. But I think those are the stories we all love as fans of college sports.

On the bright side, we don't have to listen to the "wait until we get our guys" trope about underperforming teams or units for too long, eh?

Yup.  Because you can now radically transform your roster every season via the portal and recruiting, the pressure to "win now" is at an all time high, especially at the schools that have dumped massive resources into facilites and recruiting- like Oregon.  The era of the "blue bloods" may be over and replaced by the new money programs with rabid boosters and fan bases willing to fund NIL programs.  My litmus test on this is Colorado.  Theoretically, this program should not just be competitive next year, it should finish above .500, with the following year (2024) being touted as a playoff contender.  

To your other point, I still believe that room exists on teams for the walk-on or 2-3* "body" who remains loyal and earns his spot in the rotation and even starts and shines with honors.  My favorite award is the Burlsworth Trophy.  This year the winner is Stetson Bennett, who earned it and then some.  Ryan Walk was a semi-finalist.  

Rambling over...

oldretiredguy wrote:

DucksReign wrote:

Yep and everything works both ways and especially each time a precedent is set.

I this case, Lanning was hired just over a year ago so perhaps he becomes the standard going forward for other schools, coaches, alumni and fans i.e. "Look what Oregon did in one year...why can't we..."

HOWEVER if Lanning doesn't at least match his 10-3 record this coming season then?

Ultimately he has only put more pressure on himself with this very quick roster makeover.

Likewise the players cannot have it both ways...NIL options and / or Transfer Portal and then expect to be "protected." So yes with freedom comes consequences and one of those may be a HC using their freedom and leverage to push players out the door for whatever reasons.

People forget(or don't know) scholarships are "renewed" annually. They are not a 4-year guarantee. So a HC always has that option to "cut" a player or move a bad attitude.

I guess if I had to choose the most optimistic mindset, instead of thinking the NIL, Transfer Portal and all related issues are ruining college football, they are instead raising the levels of accountability for both coaches and players. Excuses, while not being eliminated entirely, are significantly diminished.

If the 2023 Oregon football team is 75% Lanning's...does anyone now think he has 4-5 years to build a program?

Here is an article discussing schollies. I think the NCAA is going to have to increase the 85 limit, at least to 90."The NCAA has allowed colleges to provide multiyear scholarships since 2012. Additionally, in 2015, NCAA D1 colleges from the Power Five conferences (colleges in the Football Bowl Subdivision, plus Notre Dame) agreed to implement a rule that prevented multi-year D1 scholarships from being canceled or not renewed for any athletic reason.So, yes, there are athletic scholarships that are guaranteed for four years, but they are not the norm outside of powerhouse football programs."
https://www.sportsengine.com/recruiting/are-athletic-scholarships-guaranteed-4-years

Thanks!

I was JUST coming on here to question the scholarship "renewal" thing as I was really confused and unsure about that. Actually, I'm still unsure and confused........but that's normal.