- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Word that LSU likely to land 2 portal WRs
Posted on 12/4/23 at 2:45 pm to TheHumanTornado
Posted on 12/4/23 at 2:45 pm to TheHumanTornado
quote:
I thought I read Zavion was given a big NIL deal this year at MSU. Do they have to pay that back?
NIL deals cannot be incentive-based on playing performance. So i'd say no.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 2:48 pm to MrJimBeam
quote:
Sheppard is a stud. Both would be solid additions and much needed.
I was looking at his stats and noticed the majority of his yards came in the non-conference. 25% of his SEC receiving yards came on one play.
Yes I know Vandy sucks.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 2:51 pm to JKChesterton
Even Aaron Anderson could be a contributor, plus this year’s freshmen like Sampson and Brown
Posted on 12/4/23 at 2:57 pm to Pollo10
quote:
Even Aaron Anderson could be a contributor, plus this year’s freshmen like Sampson and Brown
I agree. All those guys are ones that can step up.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 2:59 pm to TeamLSU
quote:
This must mean Brian Thomas has a very favorable grade from the NFL.
I would be stunned if he doesn't. He's also likely looking at a dropoff at QB if he returns, so he may want to strike while the iron is hot.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 4:00 pm to Wrucker16
I think LSU needs to bring in one portal WR, but I'm not sure I think it's a good idea to bring in two.
I understand that we may not necessarily be fully confident in our WR corps as it would stand after the addition of one clear starter via the portal, but bringing in two guys risks handicapping the long-term potential of the room by prompting guys to leave.
There's definitely circumstances under which it makes sense to recruit over top of the guys on your roster, but I'm not convinced this is one of those circumstances. For one, this was a VERY highly rated group out of HS. For two, even if the WR room isn't necessarily ideal entering next year, it's at least got highly talented guys in it who can hold down the fort. And for three, the current group of rising sophomore WRs projects to be one of strengths of the roster going forward; I'm not sure that's worth trading for anything short of two surefire stars. That's even more true when you factor in how razor thin the incoming WR class is. We're gonna NEED this big group of rising sophomores to hold down the position for at least one more season after next year.
Bottom line: Unless we're extremely confident that these guys are legit studs, this feels like a move where we're potentially trading upside for certainty. I'm not sure I like that.
I understand that we may not necessarily be fully confident in our WR corps as it would stand after the addition of one clear starter via the portal, but bringing in two guys risks handicapping the long-term potential of the room by prompting guys to leave.
There's definitely circumstances under which it makes sense to recruit over top of the guys on your roster, but I'm not convinced this is one of those circumstances. For one, this was a VERY highly rated group out of HS. For two, even if the WR room isn't necessarily ideal entering next year, it's at least got highly talented guys in it who can hold down the fort. And for three, the current group of rising sophomore WRs projects to be one of strengths of the roster going forward; I'm not sure that's worth trading for anything short of two surefire stars. That's even more true when you factor in how razor thin the incoming WR class is. We're gonna NEED this big group of rising sophomores to hold down the position for at least one more season after next year.
Bottom line: Unless we're extremely confident that these guys are legit studs, this feels like a move where we're potentially trading upside for certainty. I'm not sure I like that.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 4:05 pm to Clockwatcher68
quote:
I vaguely recall someone stating that NIL deals could not be contingent on attendance at a specific school.
They can't. They're not in any way allowed to be tied to attendance at or performance for a particular school. However, it's not hard at all to get around that. For example, if a kid had an NIL deal with a car dealership that unofficially required him to attend Miss St., that unofficial requirement could be enforced by requiring a weekly in-person "marketing" appearance at the actual dealership in Starkville. Doesn't technically require anything in regards to a particular university, but it's gonna be pretty hard to satisfy the contract if you're living in Baton Rouge.
Posted on 12/4/23 at 4:10 pm to Fast Times @ LSU
quote:
Correction... i think we offered Ja'Mori Maclin instead of Brown.
Maclin has a ton of offers from big schools
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:42 pm to Wrucker16
Where are they both playing at in 2023?
Posted on 12/4/23 at 9:48 pm to 6R12
Sheppard vandy
Thomas- MS state
Thomas- MS state
Posted on 12/4/23 at 11:17 pm to Tubedog13
Fair catching makes perfect sense when you have Jayden Daniels and this offense. Just get the ball and hand it to Jayden . Next year a return game would be nice.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 4:10 am to LifeAquatic
quote:
They're not in any way allowed to be tied to attendance at or performance for a particular school
Who is regulating this? The only thing I’ve heard is state laws. Is this some NCAA last gasp? Courts would eat this clause alive.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 4:39 am to Wrucker16
quote:
(soon come)
Easy now..
Posted on 12/8/23 at 6:19 am to Fast Times @ LSU
J Maclin from St Louis? No way he isn't related to Jeremy
Posted on 12/8/23 at 6:56 am to 5iveEuax4eaux
Cousin. Had some behavior and work ethic issues at Mizzou and transferred
Popular
Back to top
