So which teams have below average on-paper talent and have competed? Here is the Venn diagram of 2024 top 25/top 40 teams in reality (merely top 40 marked with asterisk) and not top 40 talent on paper, with the number of incoming transfers noted for each:
2024 Indiana - 31
2024 Baylor* - 15
2024 Illinois* - 13
2024 Minnesota* - 12
2024 Kansas* - 11
2024 Kansas State* - 10
2024 BYU - 8
2024 Iowa State* - 4
So 2024 was 11.5 and other than Cignetti transforming Indiana (including via massive transfer influx) the ceiling for these teams was respectable but not truly competitive, the 26-40 echelon. That's ok. We need to walk before we run. What really jumps out to me here is that these were the classic culture building stable programs. These were coaches in their fourth years or later cooking with programs fully molded in their image. This data set is the case for 2029 Stanford football after we've given Tavita the space to do his thing. It is not a case for having hope for 2027 or 2028 absent big transfer help. So what did the Venn diagram look like in 2025?
2025 Louisville - 31
2025 Virginia* - 31
2025 Arizona* - 28
2025 Indiana - 23
2025 Utah - 22
2025 Vanderbilt - 20
2025 NC State* - 17
2025 Illinois* - 16
2025 Pitt* - 16
2025 BYU - 14
2025 Iowa - 9
2025 Duke* - 9
So 2025 was 18.5, part of that trend I observed about transfers becoming more salient each year. The teams that went against trend and succeeded were, again, entrenched culture builders or a team that got Darian Mensah to transfer to them.
Almost halfway through the 2026 season, here's the Venn diagram of top 25/40 and not top 40 composite talent for 2026:
Now that some good data is in, here’s 2026 so far:
Oklahoma State* - 56
UCF* - 32
Baylor* - 30
Wake Forest* - 24
Arizona* - 23
Duke* - 20
Houston - 20
Northwestern - 17
Utah - 17
Pitt - 16
Iowa - 15
BYU - 9
The trends of increased reliance on transfers continued again. The median for good teams without standout on-paper talent (i.e., above average high school recruiting) is now 20. Twenty! Those below the median are, again, the sui generis LDS faith boosted programs and highly stably coached programs we aren’t remotely analogous to.
I know I have priors on this and want to leave space for alternate theories I may not be crediting. Does anyone look at the evidence and think Stanford has a snowball's chance in hell in 2027 or 2028 without 15+ transfers annually (conservatively)? When I say more transfers, I am not talking about more than six and trying to make sure that a good QB and OT are in the group. It seems to me, from the evidence, that there is no choice but to significantly turn over the roster every year with both high school recruiting and a transfer cohorts closer to 20 or more. Stanford people don't like to think about "running off" players before their degree completion, but this doesn't work without like 35+ new players a year (between high school and transfers) until the roster is healthy and competitive. Right?
2024 Indiana - 31
2024 Baylor* - 15
2024 Illinois* - 13
2024 Minnesota* - 12
2024 Kansas* - 11
2024 Kansas State* - 10
2024 BYU - 8
2024 Iowa State* - 4
So 2024 was 11.5 and other than Cignetti transforming Indiana (including via massive transfer influx) the ceiling for these teams was respectable but not truly competitive, the 26-40 echelon. That's ok. We need to walk before we run. What really jumps out to me here is that these were the classic culture building stable programs. These were coaches in their fourth years or later cooking with programs fully molded in their image. This data set is the case for 2029 Stanford football after we've given Tavita the space to do his thing. It is not a case for having hope for 2027 or 2028 absent big transfer help. So what did the Venn diagram look like in 2025?
2025 Louisville - 31
2025 Virginia* - 31
2025 Arizona* - 28
2025 Indiana - 23
2025 Utah - 22
2025 Vanderbilt - 20
2025 NC State* - 17
2025 Illinois* - 16
2025 Pitt* - 16
2025 BYU - 14
2025 Iowa - 9
2025 Duke* - 9
So 2025 was 18.5, part of that trend I observed about transfers becoming more salient each year. The teams that went against trend and succeeded were, again, entrenched culture builders or a team that got Darian Mensah to transfer to them.
Almost halfway through the 2026 season, here's the Venn diagram of top 25/40 and not top 40 composite talent for 2026:
Now that some good data is in, here’s 2026 so far:
Oklahoma State* - 56
UCF* - 32
Baylor* - 30
Wake Forest* - 24
Arizona* - 23
Duke* - 20
Houston - 20
Northwestern - 17
Utah - 17
Pitt - 16
Iowa - 15
BYU - 9
The trends of increased reliance on transfers continued again. The median for good teams without standout on-paper talent (i.e., above average high school recruiting) is now 20. Twenty! Those below the median are, again, the sui generis LDS faith boosted programs and highly stably coached programs we aren’t remotely analogous to.
I know I have priors on this and want to leave space for alternate theories I may not be crediting. Does anyone look at the evidence and think Stanford has a snowball's chance in hell in 2027 or 2028 without 15+ transfers annually (conservatively)? When I say more transfers, I am not talking about more than six and trying to make sure that a good QB and OT are in the group. It seems to me, from the evidence, that there is no choice but to significantly turn over the roster every year with both high school recruiting and a transfer cohorts closer to 20 or more. Stanford people don't like to think about "running off" players before their degree completion, but this doesn't work without like 35+ new players a year (between high school and transfers) until the roster is healthy and competitive. Right?