While I'm less concerned, at this point, about our financial commitment to and strategy regarding recruiting than some (and am also in my self-imposed three-year no BMW window that follows a natty), I do increasingly suspect that Bjork is the putz that most of us figured he was based on his A&M track record. As for being a market setter on NIL, I wonder if "the complaints" from people like Pantoni are ways for good copping/bad copping the big donors without Day himself risking political capital.
The big donors clearly spent big time last year, and we may just find that working this current and likely temporary "system" means being a big spender in some years and not as much in some others. I'd also note that for whatever reason top recruiting classes don't follow nattys, at least not at Ohio State. The 2015 class was 7th nationally, and the 2003 class was a disaster by Ohio State standards (25th by Scout and 41st by Rivals).
