And Oklahoma was missing two of its best players. Really impressive win for the Sooners.
One problem: Where is Mizzou getting that money to pay a head coach $8 million? They're operated at a budget deficit for several years - and that was before a revenue-busting pandemic. MU just tapped into two donors for $10M each. If Drinkwitz wins enough games to the point where he's commanding $8 million on the open market, he'll be coaching somewhere else. I understand your logic. Yes, a nationally elite program will help pay for itself over time, but there is no finish line when it comes to these costs in college athletics. The more these schools make, the more they spend. That's how they operate. They can't net huge profits, because then they can't justify not paying the labor. So, as long as the coaches know how the system works and they see these revenues climb, the $8 million coaches will command $10 million and the $10 million coaches will command $12 million. Given how the system works, Mizzou just isn't in that tier when it comes to spending money - and doesn't have the demographics to feed its program with the kind of revenue it would take to pay a coach that much money.
Drinkwitz has admitted his staff didn't make immediate traction in KC. I listed all the Power 5 schools where KC kids have signed the last few years. Oregon, Clemson, Iowa, just to name a few. Mizzou has two 2022 commitments from Kansas City area players.
It's a school-friendly, incentive-laden based deal that made sense for Michigan. It won't be hard for the school to fire him should he flop in 2021.
Not 2021. She can't see beyond that.
I don't know the deadline off the top of my head. And I'm not sure if the NCAA has established a deadline yet for basketball players. Everyone is making up the rules as they go along here.
I take him at his word after the season's last game when he said he was sticking with defense.
I'm not sure I agree with that. Some of it is about the eye test, too. Teams like Iowa and Ohio State aren't at the top of the Big Ten standings - that would be Michigan and Illinois right now - but when I watch them play, they look better than the third and fourth place teams in the SEC. Same with the Big 12.
It's a mystery. Greg Sankey said last week that some teams are just going to have to accept that they're not going to play all 18 nonconference games. If you have multiple make up games I'm not sure how you get to decide which one you'd rather play. Stay tuned.
I don't think it's a concern for the NCAA. What's the downside? They're technically not allowed to coach on the field. They're essentially hired to conduct scouting reports. Some coaches put more stock in having those experienced coaches in the building. Other coaches don't want all that ego under the same roof.
I'm not much of a video game guy, so probably not. Those are for my kids.
Which player is he using as a grayshirt? Off the top of my head ... maybe Luper?
I think it's clearly just a basketball trend. Teams that rely heavily on high-profile freshmen (Duke, UNC, Kentucky) didn't have as much time together during the summer and preseason ... and you're seeing more veteran teams that have common experiences on the floor and in the locker room thrive. Missouri, Michigan, Oklahoma, Drake, Boise, Colorado. Those are some of the most experienced teams per KenPom's metric. All are having good seasons. Some of theD least experienced: Duke, Kentucky, Kansas State. All having bad seasons. (K-State isn't a blue blood but still struggling like those others.)
OK, friends, we're out of time. We'll do this again next week. Enjoy the Super Bowl