0 of Top 30 transfers in ACC per 247

[Sean Miller Fan]

CBS Pod talked about this. Were asking: "Is the ACC poor?" And to an extent, that answer is yes. The ACC isnt spending as much in pay for play NIL salaries relative to their peers. That said, there are so many transfers that there's very little difference between #10 and #100. Very little difference between #50 and #200. Its a really difficult to rank these guys which is why I think teams like Pitt and Wake have been able to do really well in this market cheaply.

 

[DT_PITT]

CBS Pod talked about this. Were asking: "Is the ACC poor?" And to an extent, that answer is yes. The ACC isnt spending as much in pay for play NIL salaries relative to their peers. That said, there are so many transfers that there's very little difference between #10 and #100. Very little difference between #50 and #200. Its a really difficult to rank these guys which is why I think teams like Pitt and Wake have been able to do really well in this market cheaply.

Capel's been able to get 2 First Team guys from the portal and neither was ranked in the top 100 of transfer rankings. Ish would be a third if he gets there. I agree that's it's difficult to rank these guys.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Capel's been able to get 2 First Team guys from the portal and neither was ranked in the top 100 of transfer rankings. Ish would be a third if he gets there. I agree that's it's difficult to rank these guys.

Yea, I think transfer rankings are incredibly innacurate because there's just so many. Its like trying to rank every player in college basketball. Is there that much difference between the 200th best player and 500th best player? That said, I think these rankings do show that the ACC teams don't spend as much as their peers. Maybe that's by design because is it really worth it to pay a Top 10 transfer 500K when you can get 3 guys ranked 88th, 95th, and 122 for 100K each?

 

[Ski11585]

Yea, I think transfer rankings are incredibly innacurate because there's just so many. Its like trying to rank every player in college basketball. Is there that much difference between the 200th best player and 500th best player? That said, I think these rankings do show that the ACC teams don't spend as much as their peers. Maybe that's by design because is it really worth it to pay a Top 10 transfer 500K when you can get 3 guys ranked 88th, 95th, and 122 for 100K each?

I think making any assumptions about how much ACC teams pay without seeing actual, reputable information about NIL pay is pretty pointless.

 

[pschaum98]

CBS Pod talked about this. Were asking: "Is the ACC poor?" And to an extent, that answer is yes. The ACC isnt spending as much in pay for play NIL salaries relative to their peers. That said, there are so many transfers that there's very little difference between #10 and #100. Very little difference between #50 and #200. Its a really difficult to rank these guys which is why I think teams like Pitt and Wake have been able to do really well in this market cheaply.

Thats cause 247 sucks at player evaluations.
Ven allen lubin, jaeden zackery, ty laur johnson, kasean pryor, mike james, chucky hepburn, skyy clark, dontrez styles, kevin miller, omaha biliew and cam corhen are all too low, some way too lowly rated. Ven allen lubin(unc), jaeden zackery(clemson), dontrez styles(ncst)and kevin miller(smu) are probably all top 30 guys. Thats not to mention the fact that their are 200-300 quality transfers and little difference between the top 100 outside of maybe the top 10

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Thats cause 247 sucks at player evaluations.
Ven allen lubin, jaeden zackery, ty laur johnson, kasean pryor, mike james, chucky hepburn, skyy clark, dontrez styles, kevin miller, omaha biliew and cam corhen are all too low, some way too lowly rated. Ven allen lubin(unc), jaeden zackery(clemson), dontrez styles(ncst)and kevin miller(smu) are probably all top 30 guys. Thats not to mention the fact that their are 200-300 quality transfers and little difference between the top 100 outside of maybe the top 10

Listing 3 ACC to ACC transfers isnt helping your argument, really.

 

[pschaum98]

Listing 3 ACC to ACC transfers isnt helping your argument, really.

What about 9 of the top 25 hs recruits going to the acc, does that boost the nil perspective, or retaining all american level players across multiple schools. Its lazy to say the acc has an nil problem b/c they arent getting top transfers. Look at retention, actual talent of the players and also hs recruits still exist. Duke would kill the transfer market if they wanted to, instead they got the top 2 hs recruits and alot of the top acc players were retained

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

This is probably starting to show itself. The ACC is, indeed, poor.

 

[pschaum98]

This is probably starting to show itself. The ACC is, indeed, poor.

Dude, not everything is about nil. The biggest fall off the acc has had is simply coaching. I mean who is the best coach?
Jim larranaga?? It went from having jamie dixon as the 7-8 best coach to having capel as probably a top 5 coach. Louisville shouldve grabbed will wade