Thoughts on the transfer portal - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Thoughts on the transfer portal (/thread-18721.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Thoughts on the transfer portal (/thread-18721.html)
Thoughts on the transfer portal - 82lsju - 12-12-2019
So I did some poking around on the transfer portal site
https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Football/TransferPortal/
by my estimate there are on order of 500 players in it currently (no I did not count them individually), last year it looks like there were on order of 1000 players so plenty more will join the portal in the coming weeks.
A rough SWAG says that ~10% of players entered the portal last year (using as my pool 130 teams x 80 players/team (10,400 players) who could have entered the portal - yes the 80 is just a SWAG but for many teams would seem to me to be about the number of players with at least one year of remaining eligibility, either on scholarship or walk-ons without a scholarship)
I looked at some other programs to see how many players they lost in the portal last year (gross number who entered the portal and either transferred or did not transfer/did not return to their original school. On casual inspection relatively few return to their original school, they appear to either transfer or not continue with school elsewhere)
- Alabama 9
- Ohio State 10
- Michigan 18 (that is not a typo)
- C.a.l 9
- Washington 7
- Oregon 9
- Oklahoma 10
so while our 11 so far this year is a lot more than the 2 last year it does not seem all that out of line compared to some other programs.
I would image that at least some players on teams with bowl games might wait until after their bowl game to enter the portal which is probably why there are only ~500 in the portal today vs ~1000 last year.
RE: Thoughts on the transfer portal - Austroturf - 12-12-2019
Players enter the portal for many different reasons; but, ultimately, it boils down to their perspectives at their current university (both educationally and athletically). It seems reasonable that programs like Alabama and Ohio State have a lot of players entering the portal: they recruit a lot of players, and some just don't make it at those places. Joe Burrow transferred from OSU to LSU because he didn't think he would be the starter for the Buckeyes. Now he will probably win the Heis-man. The more competitive the program, the more you will have such cases.
What worries me at Stanford is that we are losing starters to the portal. Hamilton, Hattis, Williams and Swann could all have been expected to have significant playing time next year; but they apparently want out and are looking for greener pastures. That is a big concern. When Hogan had his down year in 2014, there were rumors that he might transfer for his final (5th) year and join Harbaugh in Michigan. Hogan was baffled by this speculation: he was a member of Cardinal nation and had never entertained that scenario. Evidently, there are a few players who no longer feel that way. Wake up call for Carberry and Reynolds? And for their boss?
RE: Thoughts on the transfer portal - qwerty49 - 12-12-2019
What bothers me is that the portal is the type of "new" development in the landscape that requires some degree of adjustment to the way the program views and addresses some issues (e.g. redshirting freshmen, some aspects of recruiting, etc). Another such "new" development would have been the early signing period and its implications on the recruiting process (including spring official visits).
I don't really see a lot of evidence that our program handles change very well. The optics, which unfortunately tend to be personality-driven, seem to suggest otherwise.
Of course, the proof will ultimately be in the pudding, in terms of W-L performance, player development, recruiting success, etc. And with Stanford, there's just very little margin for error -- I'm sure a lot of us feel that this year we could have easily been anywhere from 3-9 to 7-5 with a few breaks either way.