2026 Team Previews

[ncman071]

its crazy that a full athletic scholarship just means nothing now....i mean they get that plus all this other money...rediculous....

[rbarthle17]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... every-team

No one in the SBC above 75 and nine teams below 100 including us. Congrats to everyone that wanted to pay players, you killed football for us.

You're welcome! Sorry for believing everyone should be paid commensurate to their talent. I thought that was generally accepted, but I've learned when it comes to sports, it's not.

Well I believe that talent must generate a profit in order for the company to pay them. Ours does not. It is just that simple.

What's it going to be then? The market has been settling into place the last few years. If we cannot afford to pay the going rate for the talent it will take to be competitive at the level we are at, we either need to find ways to get that money, or drop down to a level we can afford to be at. We have not been successful at the former so far.

There is no coming back from this to the way things were before. Pandora's box cannot be closed. It can at best be tweaked some. It was also the correct thing to do because that money was coming in before, but going into the pockets of those that didn't earn it on the field. There were always going to be casualties of this, and if anyone for one moment thought we would not be one of those casualties, that naïveté has been laid bare.

The best hope is that maybe in 5 or 10 years from now, when the top 30 or so schools, the ones who are winning financially as well as on the field, go their own way that maybe something can be rebuilt from the ashes for the rest of us.

[rbarthle17]

its crazy that a full athletic scholarship just means nothing now....i mean they get that plus all this other money...rediculous....

As a society we have spent the last 20 years plus demonizing higher education as a waste of time and money, that has consequences. People can't on one hand say "this is worthless" and then in the other hand proclaim it as something to be treasured. Maybe for those in the non-revenue generating sports the scholarship still holds value because those kids are going to college to get a degree first. Football and basketball those kids are fewer and further between now than they were before.

[Seattleapp]

its crazy that a full athletic scholarship just means nothing now....i mean they get that plus all this other money...rediculous....

As a society we have spent the last 20 years plus demonizing higher education as a waste of time and money, that has consequences. People can't on one hand say "this is worthless" and then in the other hand proclaim it as something to be treasured. Maybe for those in the non-revenue generating sports the scholarship still holds value because those kids are going to college to get a degree first. Football and basketball those kids are fewer and further between now than they were before.

Respectfully I disagree that society is demonizing a degree for football and basketball players. I’d argue the opposite actually. I think most people actively encourage these athletes to GET their degrees as they can’t rely on “going pro”. I think you are conflating those who are getting endless, pointless degrees that don’t translate once they get into the workforce with a kid who comes from a disadvantaged background and is pursing something he may not have access to if not for his athletic abilities.

[BambooRdApp]

its crazy that a full athletic scholarship just means nothing now....i mean they get that plus all this other money...rediculous....

As a society we have spent the last 20 years plus demonizing higher education as a waste of time and money, that has consequences. People can't on one hand say "this is worthless" and then in the other hand proclaim it as something to be treasured. Maybe for those in the non-revenue generating sports the scholarship still holds value because those kids are going to college to get a degree first. Football and basketball those kids are fewer and further between now than they were before.

Respectfully I disagree that society is demonizing a degree for football and basketball players. I’d argue the opposite actually. I think most people actively encourage these athletes to GET their degrees as they can’t rely on “going pro”. I think you are conflating those who are getting endless, pointless degrees that don’t translate once they get into the workforce with a kid who comes from a disadvantaged background and is pursing something he may not have access to if not for his athletic abilities.

I agree. Although there are some great degrees that provide some great opportunities in society whether it business, medical, education, etc. However, I think universities have also contributed to the issue. Over the past several decades, universities have provided programs, that in some cases, are more hobbies than degrees that provide avenues to find a job related to their degree. My daughter is actually one of those individuals. Great kid and did very well at App. St. However, she is not going to get a job in her degree unless she makes a decision to relocate to NYC, San Fran or LAX. She does not want to do that. Now, she is reevaluating to something that provides an ROI on the investment. Every school should not have a mission to offer every degree.
On the sports side of the equation, for basketball and football, all the players are not making "life changing" money even for those two sports. They will have the next 40 years to work in the real world. There are some that are making life changing money that is for sure

[Seattleapp]

its crazy that a full athletic scholarship just means nothing now....i mean they get that plus all this other money...rediculous....

As a society we have spent the last 20 years plus demonizing higher education as a waste of time and money, that has consequences. People can't on one hand say "this is worthless" and then in the other hand proclaim it as something to be treasured. Maybe for those in the non-revenue generating sports the scholarship still holds value because those kids are going to college to get a degree first. Football and basketball those kids are fewer and further between now than they were before.

Respectfully I disagree that society is demonizing a degree for football and basketball players. I’d argue the opposite actually. I think most people actively encourage these athletes to GET their degrees as they can’t rely on “going pro”. I think you are conflating those who are getting endless, pointless degrees that don’t translate once they get into the workforce with a kid who comes from a disadvantaged background and is pursing something he may not have access to if not for his athletic abilities.

I agree. Although there are some great degrees that provide some great opportunities in society whether it business, medical, education, etc. However, I think universities have also contributed to the issue. Over the past several decades, universities have provided programs, that in some cases, are more hobbies than degrees that provide avenues to find a job related to their degree. My daughter is actually one of those individuals. Great kid and did very well at App. St. However, she is not going to get a job in her degree unless she makes a decision to relocate to NYC, San Fran or LAX. She does not want to do that. Now, she is reevaluating to something that provides an ROI on the investment. Every school should not have a mission to offer every degree.
On the sports side of the equation, for basketball and football, all the players are not making "life changing" money even for those two sports. They will have the next 40 years to work in the real world. There are some that are making life changing money that is for sure

Hobbies more than degrees. That’s a very poignant statement.

[Bigdaddyg1]

I’ve been one to ask if there is any academic criteria any longer for “college athletes” primarily at major universities for (mainly football and basketball). With all of the seemingly annual transfers it seems almost impossible to maintain the required academic qualifications at any reputable university. That being said back in the “old days” didn’t we still see loads of college athletes in these two sports fail to complete a degree?

I think an interesting statistic to see would be- over the past 40 years how many former college football and basketball players, post college got jobs in the fields (or reasonably close to) of their academic studies. As a comparison how many college graduates in general over the same period of time achieved the same result. I have a son who graduated 10 years ago and briefly worked in his chosen field but primarily hasn’t been close to it and for what he’s done over the past 9 years or so the degree was relatively worthless. Hate to say that but I think it’s true.

I once heard someone say that most employers don’t view a prospective employee based on what his or her degree was in but rather something else. That young man or woman took on a 4 year (or maybe slightly more) challenge and completed it. That person could be viewed as someone who could learn a job quicker than someone of the same age who spent the same 4 years wandering aimlessly.

I have another son who graduated from App last December. He struggled out the gate and needed some summer and an extra semester. He worked most of the time he was at App and needed about 5 months to find a job- it worked out. Sorry for the long reply.

[T-Dog]

After the Spring Tour event in Boone last, I gotta say I'm feeling better about the team this season. I can see more clearly what Dowell is trying to do.

I'm also surprised at how involved Steve Wilks has been so far and he has spoken highly of Dowell's mentality.

Wish everyone could listen to Wilks' speech. He got me excited.

[Stonewall]

Looking at the schedule, week two is huge and three no less so. Start out 3-1 and I’ll be excited. Go 1-3 , I can see a 1-7 start. With Steve standing in the wings …. that's a ton of pressure.

[bcoach]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... every-team

No one in the SBC above 75 and nine teams below 100 including us. Congrats to everyone that wanted to pay players, you killed football for us.

You're welcome! Sorry for believing everyone should be paid commensurate to their talent. I thought that was generally accepted, but I've learned when it comes to sports, it's not.

Well I believe that talent must generate a profit in order for the company to pay them. Ours does not. It is just that simple.

What's it going to be then? The market has been settling into place the last few years. If we cannot afford to pay the going rate for the talent it will take to be competitive at the level we are at, we either need to find ways to get that money, or drop down to a level we can afford to be at. We have not been successful at the former so far.

There is no coming back from this to the way things were before. Pandora's box cannot be closed. It can at best be tweaked some. It was also the correct thing to do because that money was coming in before, but going into the pockets of those that didn't earn it on the field. There were always going to be casualties of this, and if anyone for one moment thought we would not be one of those casualties, that naïveté has been laid bare.

The best hope is that maybe in 5 or 10 years from now, when the top 30 or so schools, the ones who are winning financially as well as on the field, go their own way that maybe something can be rebuilt from the ashes for the rest of us.

Well we are in the same boat as the rest of G5 so going back does nothing. I have a real question though. Just who was getting all this money that was pooring into APP over the years?

[Bootsy]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... every-team

No one in the SBC above 75 and nine teams below 100 including us. Congrats to everyone that wanted to pay players, you killed football for us.

You're welcome! Sorry for believing everyone should be paid commensurate to their talent. I thought that was generally accepted, but I've learned when it comes to sports, it's not.

Well I believe that talent must generate a profit in order for the company to pay them. Ours does not. It is just that simple.

What's it going to be then? The market has been settling into place the last few years. If we cannot afford to pay the going rate for the talent it will take to be competitive at the level we are at, we either need to find ways to get that money, or drop down to a level we can afford to be at. We have not been successful at the former so far.

There is no coming back from this to the way things were before. Pandora's box cannot be closed. It can at best be tweaked some. It was also the correct thing to do because that money was coming in before, but going into the pockets of those that didn't earn it on the field. There were always going to be casualties of this, and if anyone for one moment thought we would not be one of those casualties, that naïveté has been laid bare.

The best hope is that maybe in 5 or 10 years from now, when the top 30 or so schools, the ones who are winning financially as well as on the field, go their own way that maybe something can be rebuilt from the ashes for the rest of us.

Well we are in the same boat as the rest of G5 so going back does nothing. I have a real question though. Just who was getting all this money that was pooring into APP over the years?

That’s just it: money hasn’t been pouring into App Athletics over the years.

The department was proud of its ability to operate successful programs on a shoestring budget. Meaningful success with low financial commitment spoiled App fans, and this put the school at a disadvantage when TP/NIL arrived.

[bcoach]

You're welcome! Sorry for believing everyone should be paid commensurate to their talent. I thought that was generally accepted, but I've learned when it comes to sports, it's not.

Well I believe that talent must generate a profit in order for the company to pay them. Ours does not. It is just that simple.

What's it going to be then? The market has been settling into place the last few years. If we cannot afford to pay the going rate for the talent it will take to be competitive at the level we are at, we either need to find ways to get that money, or drop down to a level we can afford to be at. We have not been successful at the former so far.

There is no coming back from this to the way things were before. Pandora's box cannot be closed. It can at best be tweaked some. It was also the correct thing to do because that money was coming in before, but going into the pockets of those that didn't earn it on the field. There were always going to be casualties of this, and if anyone for one moment thought we would not be one of those casualties, that naïveté has been laid bare.

The best hope is that maybe in 5 or 10 years from now, when the top 30 or so schools, the ones who are winning financially as well as on the field, go their own way that maybe something can be rebuilt from the ashes for the rest of us.

Well we are in the same boat as the rest of G5 so going back does nothing. I have a real question though. Just who was getting all this money that was pooring into APP over the years?

That’s just it: money hasn’t been pouring into App Athletics over the years.

The department was proud of its ability to operate successful programs on a shoestring budget. Meaningful success with low financial commitment spoiled App fans, and this put the school at a disadvantage when TP/NIL arrived.

That is exactly correct. That is why I was asking about what happened to all this money he claimed was coming in. You can't share what you don't have.

[AppStFan1]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... every-team

No one in the SBC above 75 and nine teams below 100 including us. Congrats to everyone that wanted to pay players, you killed football for us.

You're welcome! Sorry for believing everyone should be paid commensurate to their talent. I thought that was generally accepted, but I've learned when it comes to sports, it's not.

Well I believe that talent must generate a profit in order for the company to pay them. Ours does not. It is just that simple.

What's it going to be then? The market has been settling into place the last few years. If we cannot afford to pay the going rate for the talent it will take to be competitive at the level we are at, we either need to find ways to get that money, or drop down to a level we can afford to be at. We have not been successful at the former so far.

There is no coming back from this to the way things were before. Pandora's box cannot be closed. It can at best be tweaked some. It was also the correct thing to do because that money was coming in before, but going into the pockets of those that didn't earn it on the field. There were always going to be casualties of this, and if anyone for one moment thought we would not be one of those casualties, that naïveté has been laid bare.

The best hope is that maybe in 5 or 10 years from now, when the top 30 or so schools, the ones who are winning financially as well as on the field, go their own way that maybe something can be rebuilt from the ashes for the rest of us.

Money is still going to people who don't earn it on the field. Agents, mentors, etc are all scamming these players and getting a cut of the money when they really don't need to be involved. I am all for actual NIL but not pay to play and knew this would be a death wish for programs like us. We are never going back for sure but definitely need something built from the ashes that can sustain.

I am wondering if maybe in 15-20 years we see all programs going to LLC and dropping non-revenue sports or we get collective bargaining and a salary cap based on revenue or something.

[Bootsy]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... every-team

No one in the SBC above 75 and nine teams below 100 including us. Congrats to everyone that wanted to pay players, you killed football for us.

You're welcome! Sorry for believing everyone should be paid commensurate to their talent. I thought that was generally accepted, but I've learned when it comes to sports, it's not.

Well I believe that talent must generate a profit in order for the company to pay them. Ours does not. It is just that simple.

What's it going to be then? The market has been settling into place the last few years. If we cannot afford to pay the going rate for the talent it will take to be competitive at the level we are at, we either need to find ways to get that money, or drop down to a level we can afford to be at. We have not been successful at the former so far.

There is no coming back from this to the way things were before. Pandora's box cannot be closed. It can at best be tweaked some. It was also the correct thing to do because that money was coming in before, but going into the pockets of those that didn't earn it on the field. There were always going to be casualties of this, and if anyone for one moment thought we would not be one of those casualties, that naïveté has been laid bare.

The best hope is that maybe in 5 or 10 years from now, when the top 30 or so schools, the ones who are winning financially as well as on the field, go their own way that maybe something can be rebuilt from the ashes for the rest of us.

Money is still going to people who don't earn it on the field. Agents, mentors, etc are all scamming these players and getting a cut of the money when they really don't need to be involved. I am all for actual NIL but not pay to play and knew this would be a death wish for programs like us. We are never going back for sure but definitely need something built from the ashes that can sustain.

I am wondering if maybe in 15-20 years we see all programs going to LLC and dropping non-revenue sports or we get collective bargaining and a salary cap based on revenue or something.

With its current trajectory, will college football even exist 15-20 years from now?

[AppStFan1]

You're welcome! Sorry for believing everyone should be paid commensurate to their talent. I thought that was generally accepted, but I've learned when it comes to sports, it's not.

Well I believe that talent must generate a profit in order for the company to pay them. Ours does not. It is just that simple.

What's it going to be then? The market has been settling into place the last few years. If we cannot afford to pay the going rate for the talent it will take to be competitive at the level we are at, we either need to find ways to get that money, or drop down to a level we can afford to be at. We have not been successful at the former so far.

There is no coming back from this to the way things were before. Pandora's box cannot be closed. It can at best be tweaked some. It was also the correct thing to do because that money was coming in before, but going into the pockets of those that didn't earn it on the field. There were always going to be casualties of this, and if anyone for one moment thought we would not be one of those casualties, that naïveté has been laid bare.

The best hope is that maybe in 5 or 10 years from now, when the top 30 or so schools, the ones who are winning financially as well as on the field, go their own way that maybe something can be rebuilt from the ashes for the rest of us.

Money is still going to people who don't earn it on the field. Agents, mentors, etc are all scamming these players and getting a cut of the money when they really don't need to be involved. I am all for actual NIL but not pay to play and knew this would be a death wish for programs like us. We are never going back for sure but definitely need something built from the ashes that can sustain.

I am wondering if maybe in 15-20 years we see all programs going to LLC and dropping non-revenue sports or we get collective bargaining and a salary cap based on revenue or something.

With its current trajectory, will college football even exist 15-20 years from now?

It will exist but will be a lot different I'm sure.

[EastHallApp]

its crazy that a full athletic scholarship just means nothing now....i mean they get that plus all this other money...rediculous....

As a society we have spent the last 20 years plus demonizing higher education as a waste of time and money, that has consequences. People can't on one hand say "this is worthless" and then in the other hand proclaim it as something to be treasured. Maybe for those in the non-revenue generating sports the scholarship still holds value because those kids are going to college to get a degree first. Football and basketball those kids are fewer and further between now than they were before.

Respectfully I disagree that society is demonizing a degree for football and basketball players. I’d argue the opposite actually. I think most people actively encourage these athletes to GET their degrees as they can’t rely on “going pro”. I think you are conflating those who are getting endless, pointless degrees that don’t translate once they get into the workforce with a kid who comes from a disadvantaged background and is pursing something he may not have access to if not for his athletic abilities.

I agree. Although there are some great degrees that provide some great opportunities in society whether it business, medical, education, etc. However, I think universities have also contributed to the issue. Over the past several decades, universities have provided programs, that in some cases, are more hobbies than degrees that provide avenues to find a job related to their degree. My daughter is actually one of those individuals. Great kid and did very well at App. St. However, she is not going to get a job in her degree unless she makes a decision to relocate to NYC, San Fran or LAX. She does not want to do that. Now, she is reevaluating to something that provides an ROI on the investment. Every school should not have a mission to offer every degree.
On the sports side of the equation, for basketball and football, all the players are not making "life changing" money even for those two sports. They will have the next 40 years to work in the real world. There are some that are making life changing money that is for sure

I'm not going to argue for the merit of every single degree program offered anywhere. But broadly speaking, I think the issue you're getting at is the attack on liberal arts education, which is both politically motivated and misguided even from a workforce preparation perspective.

I completely disagree with the idea that higher education should serve solely as a job training program. However, that debate has much larger implications than college sports.

[BambooRdApp]

its crazy that a full athletic scholarship just means nothing now....i mean they get that plus all this other money...rediculous....

As a society we have spent the last 20 years plus demonizing higher education as a waste of time and money, that has consequences. People can't on one hand say "this is worthless" and then in the other hand proclaim it as something to be treasured. Maybe for those in the non-revenue generating sports the scholarship still holds value because those kids are going to college to get a degree first. Football and basketball those kids are fewer and further between now than they were before.

Respectfully I disagree that society is demonizing a degree for football and basketball players. I’d argue the opposite actually. I think most people actively encourage these athletes to GET their degrees as they can’t rely on “going pro”. I think you are conflating those who are getting endless, pointless degrees that don’t translate once they get into the workforce with a kid who comes from a disadvantaged background and is pursing something he may not have access to if not for his athletic abilities.

I agree. Although there are some great degrees that provide some great opportunities in society whether it business, medical, education, etc. However, I think universities have also contributed to the issue. Over the past several decades, universities have provided programs, that in some cases, are more hobbies than degrees that provide avenues to find a job related to their degree. My daughter is actually one of those individuals. Great kid and did very well at App. St. However, she is not going to get a job in her degree unless she makes a decision to relocate to NYC, San Fran or LAX. She does not want to do that. Now, she is reevaluating to something that provides an ROI on the investment. Every school should not have a mission to offer every degree.
On the sports side of the equation, for basketball and football, all the players are not making "life changing" money even for those two sports. They will have the next 40 years to work in the real world. There are some that are making life changing money that is for sure

I'm not going to argue for the merit of every single degree program offered anywhere. But broadly speaking, I think the issue you're getting at is the attack on liberal arts education, which is both politically motivated and misguided even from a workforce preparation perspective.

I completely disagree with the idea that higher education should serve solely as a job training program. However, that debate has much larger implications than college sports.

When you say you "think" it would mean you are making an assumption. We know what they about people that "assume" ideas.
Second, politics never entered my mind in my response.
Good Grief, why do people think politics enters every conversation or background for a significant number of conversations. Maybe turn off CNN, Fox, MSNBC, or whatever other conservative or liberal networks are spewing political divide.

[EastHallApp]

As a society we have spent the last 20 years plus demonizing higher education as a waste of time and money, that has consequences. People can't on one hand say "this is worthless" and then in the other hand proclaim it as something to be treasured. Maybe for those in the non-revenue generating sports the scholarship still holds value because those kids are going to college to get a degree first. Football and basketball those kids are fewer and further between now than they were before.

Respectfully I disagree that society is demonizing a degree for football and basketball players. I’d argue the opposite actually. I think most people actively encourage these athletes to GET their degrees as they can’t rely on “going pro”. I think you are conflating those who are getting endless, pointless degrees that don’t translate once they get into the workforce with a kid who comes from a disadvantaged background and is pursing something he may not have access to if not for his athletic abilities.

I agree. Although there are some great degrees that provide some great opportunities in society whether it business, medical, education, etc. However, I think universities have also contributed to the issue. Over the past several decades, universities have provided programs, that in some cases, are more hobbies than degrees that provide avenues to find a job related to their degree. My daughter is actually one of those individuals. Great kid and did very well at App. St. However, she is not going to get a job in her degree unless she makes a decision to relocate to NYC, San Fran or LAX. She does not want to do that. Now, she is reevaluating to something that provides an ROI on the investment. Every school should not have a mission to offer every degree.
On the sports side of the equation, for basketball and football, all the players are not making "life changing" money even for those two sports. They will have the next 40 years to work in the real world. There are some that are making life changing money that is for sure

I'm not going to argue for the merit of every single degree program offered anywhere. But broadly speaking, I think the issue you're getting at is the attack on liberal arts education, which is both politically motivated and misguided even from a workforce preparation perspective.

I completely disagree with the idea that higher education should serve solely as a job training program. However, that debate has much larger implications than college sports.

When you say you "think" it would mean you are making an assumption. We know what they about people that "assume" ideas.
Second, politics never entered my mind in my response.
Good Grief, why do people think politics enters every conversation or background for a significant number of conversations. Maybe turn off CNN, Fox, MSNBC, or whatever other conservative or liberal networks are spewing political divide.

Sorry for misinterpreting, and apparently for touching a nerve. I probably should have responded to rbathle's comment rather than yours.

My comments, other than the line you referenced, were my own thoughts. It certainly is a political issue, whether or not that was what you meant to allude to.

I don't watch cable news, FWIW. Though I don't know that they're the primary sources of "spewing partisan divide."

[Bootsy]

Historically speaking, the purpose of a “liberal arts education” was to create a well-rounded individual who was subjected to a wide variety of educational subjects, taught critical thinking skills and a capacity to effectively reason and argue/debate from a reasoned perspective.

Many distinguished people in America and elsewhere were the benefactors of a “liberal arts education” and went on to achieve great things.

This was before the specialization of college curricula and changes higher education incorporated into the “liberal arts” degree path.