The Portal - impact on Top 15 AP teams
Earlier this morning, I was channel grazing and a segment on the Big Ten Network with Dinardo and Meyer caught my eye. The topic was - The Portal. I believe there's a correlation between talent / development and performance, and found the data associated with that conversation pretty interesting.
So, what was it? There were six teams in the top 14 of the AP poll that had three or more portal players as starters. One could argue about the rationale for using the portal so much - and, the two most visible examples are Ole Miss (Kiffin may have difficulty signing the highest level prospects out of high school), and first year coaches, an example of which is USC with Riley bringing in a number of starters through the portal.
These are the AP rankings of those teams and the number of portal players who are starters. Other AP teams - ranked 14 through 25 are also have several portal starters - I just couldn't remember them all, and IIRC, of those teams ranked 14 to 25 in this weeks AP pool, the only team with more than four portal transfer starters was James Madison.
Here's the list.
USC: AP 7, 11 portal players are starters. That is half of the USC starting squad
Ole Miss: AP 9, 10 portal players are starters. Kiffin going after players who may not make the two deep on other very competitive teams.
UCLA: AP 11, 7 portal starters.
Oregon: AP 12, 7 portal starters.
TCU, AP 13, 4 portal starters.
Bama: AP 3, 3 portal starters. This one surprised me.
(As a point of reference. Michigan is AP 5 with 1 portal starter, and (IIRC) the Bucks are AP 2, with no portal starters.)
My two perspectives. First, the three Pac-12 teams in this group. That may shed some light about the conference. Second, despite how effective Bama has been at recruiting for over a decade, and their overall team talent - Saban is still using the portal to fill in his roster - and, with three portal players starting for Bama, candidly, that number seems high to me.
It seems like first year head coaches may utilize the portal more heavily to establish their foundation, and the portal isn't going anywhere.
Your thoughts?
October 13th, 2022 at 8:42 AM ^
Cool where does MSU rank?
October 13th, 2022 at 8:57 AM ^
Great question... :) The data presented only captured the AP's Top 25 teams. I guess we all know the answer to that one.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:07 AM ^
missed it by that much! 😂
October 13th, 2022 at 10:57 AM ^
Where would MSU be without Walker last year. They have already shown the importance of the portal.
October 13th, 2022 at 4:17 PM ^
Tuck says these other teams are amateurs.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:26 PM ^
1) who cares?
2) last year worked out well for them with Kenneth Walker
October 13th, 2022 at 8:44 AM ^
Uh, the Buckeyes may not have a starter from the past year's portal but their Heisman candidate QB absolutely started college somewhere else. Stroud is arguably the biggest get ever from the portal and OSU was lucky to have dodged a year or two of Tate Martell.
October 13th, 2022 at 8:47 AM ^
You're mixing up Stroud with Justin Fields. Fields transferred to OSU after his freshman year from Georgia, and started for them in 2019 and 2020.
Stroud joined OSU as a freshman in 2020 and redshirted, and has started in 2021 and 2022.
October 13th, 2022 at 8:56 AM ^
Yeah, I am... nevermind, nothing to see here.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:28 AM ^
Good save.
October 13th, 2022 at 8:48 AM ^
Stroud committed to OSU on 1/6/20 during his senior year of HS. He went to OSU right from HS.
October 13th, 2022 at 2:24 PM ^
I duno if burrow was in the "portal" but for sure he is the biggest get for LSU. But if we're just referring to the last 2 years of portal as "ever" then perhaps. But not stroud...
Also, Texas getting Ewers (if again, that was via portal) may yet be better.
October 13th, 2022 at 8:45 AM ^
How many portal starters for the #131 Spartans?
October 13th, 2022 at 4:51 PM ^
Based on the results this year, apparently not enough.
October 13th, 2022 at 8:50 AM ^
Use the portal to fill holes/weaknesses in your team, don't use it to build your team. It's better to play players you developed from HS. They are more loyal (meaning they're more likely to be OK being in the 2-deep and not starting) and they've been trained in/for your system. It's not better for the trajectory of your program if you're losing games because of obvious holes that needed to be filled through the portal.
MSU is feeling the repercussions of that this year.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:07 AM ^
As we get further into the portal era, I think the veracity of the statement "they're more likely to be OK being in the 2-deep and not starting" will approach zero for blue chips.. Highly ranked kids almost universally see themselves as NFL players and they know the path to getting an NFL paycheck is generally closed to players sitting on a college bench.
A 5-star who signs with Alabama and doesn't see a starting position going into fall camp of his sophomore year will be more and more likely to look to the portal. At the same time, if Saban isn't happy with the progress of his 5-star rising sophomore, he'll be looking to the portal to get a game-ready transfer.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:46 AM ^
To me the Michigan example right now is Donovan Edwards.
5-star RB should expect to be starting as a sophomore on almost every team. He's clearly behind Corum on the depth chart in spring/fall camp, but is ok being second fiddle this year, having a couple packages built around him, and being the obvious starter next year when Corum goes to the NFL. He's the exact kind of player you want as your second string at a position - young and highly talented.
If Corum and Edwards are in the same class, Edwards is probably looking to transfer. If we didn't have Edwards or Corum, we could probably convince an Edwards level player stuck on the depth chart elsewhere to come play at Michigan to fill a hole.
I'd rather be in the position where we don't have obvious holes on the team that need to be filled with transfer starters, but if they're there, I'd rather fill them with transfers than let them be an obvious weakness of the team.
October 13th, 2022 at 11:17 AM ^
rc,
I see the perspective of your point regarding Corum and Edwards. Respectfully, my view about Michigan's approach to certain position groups - particularly RB, might be a bit different.
My view of the RB position group is this - multiple backs. Last year, we saw a balanced RB position group with Corum and Haskins, until Corum was nicked up. This year, I think we would have seen that same thing with Corum and Edwards - but, unfortunately, Edwards was nicked up.
It's easy to say the ideal approach is - "depth", it's every team's goal. And, while I think Harbaugh and the staff are focused on depth and experience - there also seems to be a blend of RB styles - if it's speed and power, another phrase with "power" as an option.
My expectation is that Michigan will be "multiple" backs whenever possible, with complementary styles. This will reduce the carry count and keep them fresher - both in a specific game, and for the duration of the season.
A final perspective - it's great watching Corum carrying the rock 25+ times per game; IMO, he embraces the approach of being a team player and doing whatever it takes to win. I respect that - and, his carry count was as high as it was because Edwards wasn't available. There's a balance - of doing what is necessary to win on any given Saturday - but also, to be able to contribute throughout the entire season - and, to me, that includes the last regular season game.
Go Blue!
October 13th, 2022 at 12:36 PM ^
re: running backs sharing the rock, I'll add: given it's the position in the NFL with the shortest length of career, if I were in Edwards' shoes, sharing carries doesn't just keep legs fresh during games and for the season, but sharing carries with other talented backs keeps my own long-term hits-received at a reduced level of risk.
So long as he gets the chance to showcase his talent as a "lead back" (a term that is going by the wayside, by and large, at this position), even in a 1A/1B/RBBC situation, the league will take a chance on him and it helps preserve the longevity of his career.
I'd actually argue if a back of Donovan Edwards talent was stuck behind a traditional "bell-cow" like Ron Dayne or Mike Hart in today's era, they'd be more likely to hit the portal, but these days they get sprinkled in to packages/drives and play earlier in their careers as RB carries become more divided across the RB room (by and large)
October 13th, 2022 at 12:49 PM ^
Denver,
Agreed. And, look at what Haskins is doing this season. There's a lot to be said for offenses / teams with multiple RB's carrying the load.
Corum and Haskins were referred to as Thunder and Lightning. I think that's a good profile to maintain with the position group.
Hopefully, Edwards is back to 100% and can complement Corum as, I believe, is planned for.
A parallel thought here - Chase Brown at Illinois has been having a great season. Thus far, Chase has 151 carries. Corum's carried the rock 118 times. Only one player has more carries thus far in the season than Chase Brown - Khalan Laborn at Marshall with 158 carries. (From a ranking perspective, Corum's is ranked 11th in number of carries this season.)
It will be interesting to see them both in the regular season home finale.
October 13th, 2022 at 1:03 PM ^
As long as a RB has the talent to be drafted at a decently high level, it might be advantageous to share your time as a college back from the perspective of wear and tear and NFL longevity.
October 13th, 2022 at 1:24 PM ^
The posts above nail it. RB is different. Edwards is getting plenty of opportunity to show his skills at a high level without putting on the high mileage. Being 2nd fiddle is ok if it's a true platoon situation. If he was only getting in for 5-6 snaps per game, he'd be gone.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:58 AM ^
I don't know about this. It all depends on how many 5* transfers are successful in future schools. If the trend show that kids who stick with their freshman school do well as sophomore or juniors, then the trend will not be transfer. We are way early and time will tell.
October 13th, 2022 at 3:14 PM ^
That's not very true. I can tell you that kids at Bama know they are coming behind other very talented players and are aware that all they need to do is shine when their opportunity comes up, even if it's a final season for them to get a legit shot at the NFL. Bama is a different animal, you don't need multiple years of good tape, just 1.
Many of the kids that leave Bama leave because they don't fit in with the culture. If you want to go to school to have fun and enjoy college, then Bama isn't the life for you.
October 13th, 2022 at 8:58 AM ^
Aside from Bama I don't see a contender there. I think the portal will be used to more or less allow teams to go from terrible to alright but I think elite teams will still be built the old fashion way.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:06 AM ^
I think this will be highly dependent on how NIL turns out. If NIL allows (and in Addison's/USC's case it already has) the top teams to poach the best of the also-rans, it would be very easy to see an all-star team get put together for a team with really deep pockets (a la the Yankees or Dodgers). But point taken by the OP, in that the "best" teams are likely going to be the ones that are home-grown and able to "purchase" the all-start missing piece or two, not replace a whole side of the ball.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:27 AM ^
I think there is a large degree of uncertainty in terms of how NIL is going to impact the game. Personally, I think there are going to have to be a lot more "legislative" checks on NIL, because the idea behind it is not that donors should just be able to essentially funnel tens or hundreds of million dollars into a program without consideration of any kind. (In fact, I think that issue will kind of be a self-fix once the Matt Ishbias get tired of paying the Mel Tuckers for nada) As it stands now, NIL "solved" a myriad of problems with regard to compensation of players, but also created a myriad of new ones that are only now starting to come into focus.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:45 AM ^
330 -
Though I would like to agree with you about your Legislative comment, I'm very leery to expect it to yield anything.
First, the NCAA seems even less effective than it has ever been before. As much as I would like to see some kinds of standard across all of college athletics, it isn't coming from the NCAA. In fact - the NCAA is why NIL is in the state it is.
Second, the "buck" seems to be passing to state legislatures. For what legislation has been developed and signed by various states, there is no consistent definition.
Third, federal / US Congress and their developing a single national law for NIL - again, there are WAY too many other priorities right now for this to even be brought to the floor in some sort of bill that can be voted on.
My expectation is that NIL will be the wild, wild west for quite a while.
Your point about wealthy donors, NIL sponsors, potentially reducing or stopping their contributions based on return is fair. Though, again, there are schools with such deep pocketed alumni who will do anything for their team to win - it will take a while for that revenue stream to slow down.
I do expect players that have great years with "less than conference competitive" teams, to enter the portal to perceived CFP teams, and NIL will influence where they go.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:00 AM ^
MSU has 6 portal starters (3 offense, 3 defense) MSU is unranked on AP or any other poll other than the Defeat with Dignity poll where they are ranked #1
October 13th, 2022 at 3:02 PM ^
Yeah, that Graham Couch piece (from Opponent watch) is delusional, at best. They scored 6 offensive points before it got out of hand. The score was 21-13 halfway through the 2nd quarter before osu decided to stop screwing around. msu was outscored 28-0 the rest of the way until they scored a garbage time touchdown in the 4th quarter. The offense scored 6 points in non-garbage time play. That's bad, mmkay.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:04 AM ^
I think USC's numbers won't stay like this going forward. How many of those 11 players followed Riley from Oklahoma?
October 13th, 2022 at 9:06 AM ^
I was just about to ask that very question...... the USC numbers are quite different than the rest of this list due to that.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:34 AM ^
Doesn't appear to be many:
https://247sports.com/college/usc/Season/2022-Football/TransferPortal/?institutionkey=24257
I count three OU transfers. Both Williams are starting. The transfer CB (McCutchin) wasn't a starter on the depth chart released in September.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:06 AM ^
Interesting, I wonder how it compares to the average team. It also seems to me like these numbers may trend up overall as the freedom to transfer (and lure of NIL money?) changes things but would vary by team and year. New coaches will probably have more outgoing and incoming transfers, for example.
I think what we may see emerging is an attitude of Go Redshirt Somewhere Else as the top teams balance the weight of a scholarship for an incoming recruit vs experienced portal player.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:57 AM ^
I think what we may see emerging is an attitude of Go Redshirt Somewhere Else as the top teams balance the weight of a scholarship for an incoming recruit vs experienced portal player.
I think that's easier said than done though, actually getting the portal players to commit.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:20 AM ^
Both Portal and Portal 2 are fantastic video games.
October 13th, 2022 at 9:24 AM ^
Alabama also lost over 20 players to the portal last year. Of the 3 starters, one was an All-American at LSU, the second was the second-leading receiver for the National Champion Georgia Bulldogs, and the other averaged over 5 ypc for Georgia Tech last season and was a 5-star transfer (apparently, that's a thing now).
October 13th, 2022 at 9:56 AM ^
This is where Harbaugh can excel, but we need to lower our admission standards for transfer athletes. Period.
We don't need to outbid A&M for kids (because, we'll likely lose).
Although $100,000/ year in NIL deals is great (@ say A&M), these kids want to play in the NFL and their only way to do so is play in college. So, why not play for a former NFL coach in an NFL system, for a "decent" (not necessarily $100,000) NIL payday?
October 13th, 2022 at 10:03 AM ^
How many of those PAC-12 portal starters are orginally from out west and sort of transfered home? I think that could be a confounder in the numbers, but sample size is so low and the immediate transfers thing is so new to draw any great conclusions. I'm just thinking that the West coast and California have such huge recruiting grounds that some kids may leave the region, then transfer back closer to home after a few years.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:23 AM ^
The portal and specifically grad-transfers is a great way to fill holes on the roster if you are already a really good team (like Michigan). You can find guys like Olu who are high level FBS players who may be fringe draft picks and bring them into a better program with better coaching and more exposure. Defensive line is another area where I think we need to consistently be grabbing a player or two every year. Sometimes you get a bit rotational player (Cam Goode) sometimes you get a guy who can't cut it but is a big body (Whitley) a real good quasi-starter (Danna) and sometimes you may hit on a guy who needs a new place to blow up (Okie).
Where I think teams are going to run into trouble are schools like MSU who have put that as 1b on their recruiting strategy. You can't expect to pull 6-7 players and expect them to instantly start and everything be okay. In a way, Kenneth Walker III probably has blinded them a bit. They will never have a transfer be that impactful. Short of QBs like Wilson, Mayfield, Murray, Hurts, Fields, Williams, you don't see that kind of impact from transfers.
I think Michigan has a decent strategy with transfers. They can fill gaps in position groups to improve depth and maybe even start. But relying on transfers to fill holes in recruiting is not a sustainable strategy.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:56 AM ^
I think you are correct in this assessment. I think adding is that if you are a big time program, you're also generally looking for up transfers. Like a guy at a smaller program playing at a very high level. Like Olu this year or UM, or hell, Walker III for MSU last year (although that went way beyond any reasonable expectations), or even Jayden Reed for MSU when he tranferred in several years ago after a AA freshman season from Western. I tend to think that lateral or down transfers from bigger programs are not the instant impact contributors. Like, there is a reason why they weren't starting at their original school. See Berger at MSU this year, or the swatch of DBs and LBs that are still not producing.
I still think with the NIL era that transfers will be more important than pre-free transfers and NIL, and some programs will use them to more effect that others. But I tend to think the backbone will still be recruiting and developing younger players and creating a team based on years of bonding. But who knows, the NFL and most professional leagues put players in and out all the time, it just takes a different management style.
October 13th, 2022 at 11:10 AM ^
Yeah, I never quite got the consternation around Michigan not getting a bunch of guys from the portal. With few exceptions - e.g. QB, where you can really only have 1 player - if you're picking up a guy from another team it's likely because he couldn't quite break through and wants a change of scenery. Sure, you can get a grad transfer like Olu who wants to up his draft stock or was on a bad team for a while, but typically if you're picking up 5-6 guys from a portal it's because you don't have a ton of faith in your recruited talent and trying to plug a hole. Kenneth Walkers are pretty rare, though, and instead you typically wind up with guys who are fighting the same 2-deep battles they were at the last place or, worse, beating out your other mediocre guys and are a 1-year rental.
If you go into the portal mostly expecting depth and maybe a high-end starter periodically then that's great, but as we've seen with MSU and (I suspect) UCLA and USC next year you're mostly getting rentals and it's not sustainable. USC can recruit and I get why Riley just imported his OU team over, but a team like UCLA might be this year's MSU in which they aren't structurally that sound in terms of recruiting and just hit on guys like Charbonnet. If I'm UCLA I'm still not excited about Chip Kelly pulling in the 91st-ranked class per 247 this year after #30 last season because that's going to mess you up once your very old and experience team graduates guys.
October 13th, 2022 at 11:38 AM ^
Charbonnet is an interesting case. Like he is clearly good, but he was also clearly behind two pros who were better. Kind of like that Jamison Williams. It's not like either were benched but both took lateral or down transfers after being buried in depth chart and it really worked out. I still think they are the exception.
October 13th, 2022 at 12:13 PM ^
Bronx,
I like that you noted the QB position group. There are several teams that may be "more visible" where QB situations have arisen, and the results have varied.
Where am I going with this? How easy is it to keep multiple highly rated QBs on a team?
At Georgia, they signed a number of "star" QB's in the recent past, and several of them transferred. The Bucks have recruited strong QB's out of high school, used the portal, and seen talented QB's transfer to other schools. Bama, until this season, seemed to have strong depth and was effective at retaining those "star" QB's for a longer term.
This season, at least at the moment, it appears that Bama doesn't have depth in the QB position group - or that depth is not as strong as its been in years past.
This leads to a Michigan related view, which is. It seems like the lead time to recruit a highly rated QB is long. Michigan gained a commitment from JJ early in his high school years - and we see how different that experience may be, as compared to going to the portal to bring in a QB. My hope for the Maize & Blue is - the offensive scheme will attract talented young men to the program and we'll be solidly 2+ deep for the future. Few things could be better for the program than a pipeline of QB's with ability similar to JJ and Cade.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:35 AM ^
Sometimes you need a second chance. And a third chance. And a fourth chance. I mean, all of us can see that Eyabi Okie is coming into his own. He was at Alabama, and then Houston, finally to UT-Martin. Now, at Michigan, he really seems to be putting it together. He said,
“I mean, maturity, I’m gonna be real,” Okie said. “Me, personally, it was just a hard time adjusting to not being able to play immediately. Certain things were said, that didn’t go immediately (well). But, you live and learn, everything happens for a reason. It happened and I grew from it.
Most everyone thinks they're hot stuff, and they should be starting right away. Between hangers-on, and "friends," and agents, you're the best player in the world. Not every player manages to figure things out. But there is room for guys to grow up and start fresh. We all need that opportunity.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:55 AM ^
In most cases a lot of these 5* have been the best football player anyone has ever seen when they have been growing up. Granted a lot end up at powerhouses with other 5* (Okie went to St. Frances in Baltimore which is a powerhouse). Still, for a lot, they have been so much better than everyone around them for their entire lives, that it can be shocking to show up with dozens of guys who are as talented or more than you. Not to mention a year to several years older and developed.
This I think in most has to show why so many 5* QBs struggle to be successful. In any given area there hardly is even a college-level QB at all. If you are a talented QB you are going to be so much better than everyone around you. When you get to college that isn't the case.
October 13th, 2022 at 1:54 PM ^
In one sense, every one of us who went to Michigan should be able to relate. We were the best and brightest when we were in High School and grade school. Then we started classes at Michigan, and all of a sudden, we were no longer a big fish in a small pond.
Pulling it back to sports, the numbers are very clear:
- One out of every 36 high school players make it to a D-1 roster
- If one out of every 20 freshmen on a roster starts, that means one out of every 180 high school football players will start.
- Only 1.6% of college players are even DRAFTED by the NFL
The odds of making it to the NFL are astronomically stacked against you. As Michigan fans, we all know the story of Tom Brady, and how low he was drafted. But we often forget that this is the norm, and not the exception.
October 13th, 2022 at 4:21 PM ^
This is why I had trouble in college (with engineering, not football). It's not that I couldn't understand the work, and it's not that I couldn't put in the time to do the work. It was psychological -- I couldn't handle the fact that I was all of a sudden an A- / B+ / sometimes B student. Unfortunately, there was no support system there (or anywhere) to tell me that I didn't have to be 100% all the time.
It sounds like Mr. Okie is getting the coaching -- and the support -- he needs to succeed. That's one of the best things about Harbaugh's Michigan.
October 13th, 2022 at 10:56 AM ^
Private schools will hurt the most. They develop their players and then transfer out... While it is very hard for kids to transfer in.
Michigan needs to be more flexible if they want to survive the coming era of CFB.
October 13th, 2022 at 11:57 AM ^
Alabama has at least one, probably two losses without Jahmyr Gibbs (transfer from Georgia Tech).