The Bryce Underwood Experiment Has Become A Cautionary Tale For College Football

There is no savior in Ann Arbor — not after last week. You’ve heard the tale by now. That Michigan outlasted LSU for a local five-star phenom. That billionaire Larry Ellison had a hand in helping secure the prominent passer. That this was the dynamic quarterback hand-selected to anchor the transition from Jim Harbaugh into the Sherrone Moore era. So much for all that. Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood walked toward the sidelines on Saturday, slipped off his helmet toward the tail end of the first half after another underwhelming outing against Penn State and frustratedly barked toward the bench. No lip-reader needed. Two years, two staffs, and a dozen middling performances later, Underwood is a sunk cost — around $3 million annually, to be more precise. Consider that cash flushed. “Underwood’s value, I think, what Michigan was willing to pay him was way more than what anyone else was willing to pay him,” said longtime recruiting analyst Steve Wiltfong. “I don’t think it was just a little more. At some point, they were bidding against themselves.” It wasn’t supposed to be this way. The hometown kid staying home. The enormous contract. The billionaire booster’s wife. The headlines, everywhere. That was all supposed to equal wins, extending one era of dominance into the next. Those rosy fantasies ended on Saturday with Underwood’s benching. Perhaps it’s short-term. Perhaps backup Tommy Carr struggles on Saturday against No. 6 Indiana. Perhaps Underwood flashes once more in maize and blue, or elsewhere. But, realistically, the Michigan chapter of this experiment is over — and front offices across America are taking notice. “Sometimes you have to walk away and get your ego out of the way,” said one Power Four general manager on the condition of anonymity, in order to speak freely. “[Michigan] didn’t need Bryce Underwood. Let him go somewhere else for $3 million. There are plenty of quarterbacks that can get you to a championship that are not named Bryce Underwood. “And now you’ve seen it.” Michigan and Underwood haven’t exactly been the rosiest marriage — and there are plenty of parties to blame for that. There’s the former Michigan staff that was ousted amid the fallout of the Sherrone Moore scandal. There’s the new group of Kyle Whittingham and offensive coordinator Jason Beck that has been patient, but seen little to no tangible results on Saturdays. There’s Underwood himself, too, who clearly hasn’t made the strides expected of an elite passer with the pedigree of the No. 1 overall recruit despite Zeus-like measurables and a howitzer arm. But wherever that blame may be placed, the broader sentiment is that Underwood’s deal is a cautionary tale about big spending on prep prospects in a new-look world in which everyone in front offices is still developing best practices. “I always try and lean toward paying for guys that come with less projection,” said a second Power Four general manager. “Ideally, you see what you’re getting before you buy it. Spending big on a high school QB is a massive gamble, and it’s really hard on both sides because there is an urgency to play that player early because of the money.” Consider college football staffs these days like a teenager landing their first credit card. They conceptually understand the card translates to money. Utilizing it responsibly is another challenge in itself. Underwood is simply the latest example. “Like five years ago, we were trying to figure out the karaoke song for a mom on a Friday night. Now, all of a sudden, we’re talking to CAA, negotiating contracts,” quipped a Big Ten front office staffer. “It’s like, ‘What the f— are we doing?’” Common knowledge in college football recruiting circles — new as these philosophies might be — would state money is best spent on experienced transfers compared to developmental projects, no matter how elite they might be coming out of the high school ranks. The market has borne that out. Opendorse, one of the industry’s leading NIL data providers, provided information that showed four-year transfers are receiving around 48% of football revenue share dollars, while only about 9% has been earmarked for high school recruits. Transfers are also receiving a little more than double what the average high school recruit makes, while their market share has jumped from 36% of spend last year to 54% this year. There have been outliers. Underwood is one. Nico Iamaleava’s $8 million deal with Tennessee was another. As was the Jaden Rashada saga at Florida. Not exactly ringing endorsements. For each Underwood or Rashada, there are also homegrown success stories. CJ Carr at Notre Dame. Kamario Taylor at Mississippi State. Julian Sayin at Ohio State, recent injury aside. “Transfer data on top quarterbacks has always shown it to be a bit of a crap-shoot anyway, so in most cases, it’s a much smarter business decision to invest significant dollars in a portal quarterback over a high school player,” said a third Power Four general manager. “Most of us believe it’s too big a risk to invest huge dollars into an unproven player at that position.  And honestly, it’s a huge risk at every position, but the other markets haven’t caught up — or slowed down — with the QB market yet.” Underwood is expected to hold a clipboard Saturday vs. No. 6 Indiana, which figures to have a broader impact on front office operations and how their decision-making might be scrutinized. The majority of general managers that spoke with me this week pointed to the Underwood situation as an indicator of poor evaluations and a responsibility that should fall on the front office as much as an indictment of development or a lack of meshing with the new staff. That carries its own microscope. Think in an NFL context. General managers oversee draft picks, roster construction, etc. When those results don’t bring success, there’s accountability. College football could be due for its own reckoning. “Much like an NFL Draft situation, if you draft your quarterback at 16 overall and you think that he’s going to be the guy, you better put him in a position to succeed,” said Rivals national recruiting analyst Sam Spiegelman. “… The truth is, high school quarterback recruits are not all always ready to play right out of high school. That takes an extremely gifted quarterback to be able to come in and make an impact from Friday nights and then onto Saturdays. But when you have a million-plus dollar price tag attached to your name coming out of high school, the pressure is certainly on.” “It highlights how strictly GMs will be evaluated moving forward,” added a fourth Power Four general manager. “There’s a real cost to having money on the sidelines. If you have too much of it, there will likely be consequences.” There will almost certainly be no parades in Ann Arbor this fall. No dreams of Heisman trophies. No thoughts of a CFP run. No celebrations of the local boy done good. The Underwood era at Michigan started with promise. No. 1 overall recruits and a price tag in the tens of millions of dollars bring such aspirations and expectations. It hasn’t worked out. It doesn’t always. But when there’s that kind of money involved, perhaps it will serve as a case study for front offices to spend their resources elsewhere — or not. “Giving $3 million out of high school, I don’t think I’d ever feel great about doing that,” said a fifth Power Four general manager. “But if you can show me this guy [can play], I think there’s probably a couple of them in the 2028 class. “If you told me some of those guys might cost $3 million — whether it’s (Ohio State commit Christopher) Vargas or (Indiana commit) Lukas Prock — I might think about doing it.”