Recruiting never stops. Neither do your questions. Let’s get right to them.
Note: Submitted questions have been lightly edited for clarity and length.
Ari, will Ohio State’s massive spend to bring in talent taint any success they have this year, having not won recently with maybe the best rosters in all college football? — Lance M.
That’s an interesting thought, but no, I don’t think so. Think about it in the reverse, though: If Ohio State spends all this money to assemble a roster that’s superior to most — if not all — teams in college football and still loses to Michigan at home, fails to win the new-look Big Ten and doesn’t win a national title, the Buckeyes will be (rightfully) mocked in the same vein as other big-time recruiting outfits that are better known for signing day success than winning on the field. Ryan Day was under an immense amount of pressure to beat Michigan last year. Now imagine failing to do it this year.
Advertisem*nt
Texas A&M, Miami and other programs are mocked incessantly for recruiting big-time players and still not fielding great football teams. That’s the zone Ohio State is in, but if we’re being truthful, the Buckeyes have been living in that zone for most of the past decade. When it comes to resources invested and strength of the roster, you could make the case that Ohio State has gotten the least return on investment of any team in college football. It used to be Georgia, but now the Bulldogs are finally rolling after ending their national title drought that dated back to 1980 — a narrative people in Athens had to live with for more than four decades.
Ohio State won the offseason with the additions of players like Quinshon Judkins, Caleb Downs and Julian Sayin, but winning the offseason doesn’t mean anything. It’s what we’re talking about now because it’s June and that’s all there is to be consumed with over the summer. When the games start, we’ll go back to analyzing football like we always do. Think about Major League Baseball. If the Los Angeles Dodgers win the World Series this year, there will be some people who give them flack for buying the title, but winning the World Series is winning the World Series.
First time playing in the Shoe ✅
Blessed 🙏🏽 #GoBucks 🌰 pic.twitter.com/kMBqgj6sUl— Quinshon Judkins (@quinshon_) April 15, 2024
Spending money has always been the way of college football. It’s just being spent differently now. In the pre-NIL era, there were many programs — Georgia comes to mind — that had massive recruiting budgets with which most other Power 5 programs couldn’t compete. Most of the time, the programs that won in recruiting were the ones investing in recruiting the most. There is a correlation between money spent and success in college football, business and other realms. You know the saying: “You have to spend money to make money.”
Winning in college football has always been about investment. Now it’s becoming normal to invest in a way that was once taboo. That’s different, but Ohio State certainly isn’t the only program backing up the NIL money truck for players. Is it more than most? Sure. But Ohio State invested more into its football program than most other schools long before directly paying players was the way of the sport. That’s the reason the Buckeyes have never had any prolonged droughts. Football means a lot to people in Columbus.
Advertisem*nt
Ohio State has a national title-or-bust mentality going into the season. The coaches, players and fans are tired of losing to Michigan and not being the kings of the Big Ten. This huge offseason investment in retaining a large chunk of the roster and adding big-time luxury pieces in the portal is a response to that. If Ohio State gets back to beating Michigan and winning the national title, people will try to diminish that. But people have tried to diminish everything the winners accomplish in this sport for 100 years.
Now that all players, and not just graduate transfers, can transfer freely and play immediately, will we see a drop in graduation rates now that the biggest incentive to become a graduate transfer is gone? — Reggie C.
I’m probably speaking for everyone here when I say that I hope being a graduate transfer isn’t the No. 1 incentive for getting a diploma.
It will be really interesting to see what happens to graduation rates when we have 10 years of data. On one hand, continually transferring may set your educational path back a little. But there is a flip side: The emergence of NIL is also a reason for many players to return to school instead of leaving early to become a fifth-round NFL Draft pick.
There are going to be consequences and benefits for all the changes that are happening in the sport. The hope is that players will still see the value in getting a college degree, regardless of whether it impacts their transfer ability.
Ari, if both the Big 12 and the ACC were publicly traded companies, who would you invest in? The ACC is more top-heavy with Clemson and FSU (although they want to leave) while on the other hand, the Big 12 lacks the elite teams but is deeper. — Joe V.
Nobody comes here to listen to my investing thoughts, but I’m really into it and love using it as a way to contextualize college football.
Advertisem*nt
First, in my personal life, I invest only in companies I know I’ll still want to own in 30 years. I don’t sell shares of stock ever. Every time I get paid, I continually pile up my positions in good companies with great balance sheets and staying power. Over time, through the ups and downs of the market, you’re going to be well-served. Funny enough, as a long-term Apple stockholder/compiler, the last few days have been an amazing time to enjoy that approach.
I tell you that semi-personal information as a way to say that I wouldn’t invest in either conference. It doesn’t match up with my investing principles. I am not confident at all that either conference would be a good place to park my money in the future, especially considering it seems like we’re on the brink of a Big 2 scenario with the Big Ten and the SEC. If the ACC were a stock, I’d remove the money from that position and invest in an entity with staying power.
For the sake of your question and having to choose between the two, I’d probably still go with the ACC. Having big-time properties like Clemson, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina and others in a sport that’s dominated by television revenue would be the difference-maker.
It does, however, scare the heck out of me that Florida State has already shown publicly that itwould leave the conference the first chance it gets. And when Florida State succeeds in that endeavor, what is going to happen to the rest of the conference? We basically watched the Pac-12 evaporate in a year. I’ve been around this sport long enough to know that could happen again.
The Big 12 seems to have established itself as a consistent entity after what could have been the death blow of losing Texas and Oklahoma. I think Brett Yormark is a really sharp individual who has done some very smart/innovative things. But to me, that is no longer a power conference. What defines a power conference to me is a league that has programs in it that recruit/spend with the best of them, and right now the ACC is the only conference of the two that possesses that.
Will the ACC have those properties in 10 years? I don’t know. That’s why I wouldn’t touch it with my money.
(Photo: Rick Osentoski / USA Today)
Ari Wasserman is a senior writer for The Athletic covering college football and recruiting nationally. He previously spent 10 years covering Ohio State for The Athletic and Cleveland.com, starting on the Buckeyes beat in 2009. Follow Ari on Twitter @AriWasserman
