Benefits and Synergy of a Front-Loaded Budget Resulting in a Super Team Now

If I'm in a room with big-money boosters, and we're talking about how to fund and budget LSU recruiting money, I'm advocating for front-loaded investments rather than equal annual budgets.

To be more specific, it seems to make tremendous sense to spend more money to acquire additional talent early in a head coach's tenure rather than spread the money equally over that tenure. I'd much rather convince the boosters to front-load that money even if it means less money is donated.

For example, if I'm the head fundraiser for LSU football talent acquisition (aka NIL), and I can raise and spend 150 million dollars over 10 years (($15M per year), I'd be happier to spend $30M in the first year, $20M in the second and third year, and $8M per year after that. The initial talent acquisition is likely to create a team with enough talent synergy to create multiple national championships.

And, after all, national championships are the goal.

Moreover, those national championships purchase media benefits and narratives as well as create recruiting reductions that have value at least as long as that head coach remains at LSU.

The Saban Discount (sometimes called the Bama Discount) is real and has actual financial value. Athletes want to win; they want to play for a winner. Establishing a national championship cachet for a head coach has inestimable benefits for the program.

Indeed, I'd be happier to raise 120 million dollars with $25M in the first year, $15M in the second year, and $8M per year after that. Even though it's less money overall, the benefits of winning national championships creates huge future benefits that exceed the reduction in cash flow.

Of course, properly valuing each player remains essential. That value depends not only on the talent of the player, but also his effect on the overall likelihood of the team to win national championships.

It seems to me that LSU may have already implemented a front-loaded strategy.