Transfer Portal!?

[Ragin9221]

I will give my take on the Transfer Portal. I think the Transfer Portal is a good thing in that it provides mobility to student athletes.

Now I know people on this forum complain about the transfers, but you are not going to force a student athlete to stay if he or she doesn’t want to stay at a school.

I say that to say this. It is in our best interest to use the transfer portal to bring players into the program. I think it works both ways. If a student athlete wants to transfer out let him transfer out, just like the player that may commit to a school but hasn’t seen playing time at Alabama, Tennessee, LSU etc. and wants to have a chance to start we as a football program need to go after these student athletes that want to see playing time. Just like the player who transfer out of UL because he or she wants to be recognized as a student athlete who sees themselves a better fit for a better program or think transferring out may see her chances improve at playing at the next level.

Either way I think the transfer portal works both ways and we need to use this to our advantage and starting using the transfer portal for football.

Look at the success in Softball in using the transfer portal. Same needs to be done in all sports specially football.

Thoughts?

[cajun4life]

I think there is a lot of over reaction to what we saw Saturday. We were out schemed and failed to make adjustments in a timely manner.

We are still talented, we have used the portal, you don’t build rosters through the portal.

[JAB]

If there's anything that I've noticed over the past few years of the transfer portal, it's this:

There are very, very few examples of players who radically change a team after transferring. Why? Because generally speaking, if a player isn't good enough to start on a team like Bama, then they aren't necessarily a high quality talent that will make your team that much better. Of course, there are exceptions. Some players fit better in a different scheme. Some players were undervalued by their past team--e.g. Joe Burrow. But look at someone like TJ Finley. Former LSU and Auburn QB who's now at Texas State. I don't think he will automatically turning Texas State into a power house. There's a reason he left the higher caliber football programs.

Would it help to maybe grab a player here and there? Of course. But we need to temper our expectations. The really good players either (a) aren't transferring or (b) are transferring to a school with more successful program than UL.

[VObserver]

If there's anything that I've noticed over the past few years of the transfer portal, it's this:

There are very, very few examples of players who radically change a team after transferring. Why? Because generally speaking, if a player isn't good enough to start on a team like Bama, then they aren't necessarily a high quality talent that will make your team that much better. Of course, there are exceptions. Some players fit better in a different scheme. Some players were undervalued by their past team--e.g. Joe Burrow. But look at someone like TJ Finley. Former LSU and Auburn QB who's now at Texas State. I don't think he will automatically turning Texas State into a power house. There's a reason he left the higher caliber football programs.

Would it help to maybe grab a player here and there? Of course. But we need to temper our expectations. The really good players either (a) aren't transferring or (b) are transferring to a school with more successful program than UL.

T.J. Finley and 52 other players who were not on Texas State's roster last year, along with an all new coaching staff, have a P5 win over Baylor and a close loss to a UTSA team which is bringing back a solid core of a team that has won 30 games over the last 3 years. Just saying.

[CajunVic]

T.J. Finley and 52 other players who were not on Texas State's roster last year, along with an all new coaching staff, have a P5 win over Baylor and a close loss to a UTSA team which is bringing back a solid core of a team that has won 30 games over the last 3 years. Just saying.

. . . and look at what Prime has done with the portal (but then he is Prime) . . . but both of these are examples of substantial uses of the portal not just one player here and one player there . . .

[JAB]

T.J. Finley and 52 other players who were not on Texas State's roster last year, along with an all new coaching staff, have a P5 win over Baylor and a close loss to a UTSA team which is bringing back a solid core of a team that has won 30 games over the last 3 years. Just saying.

Let's wait a few weeks to see if that Baylor win was really that good or if the UTSA loss is really that forgivable. I'll gladly eat my words if Texas State dominates the Sun Belt.

Though I'll note that we are talking whether the transfer portal can radically change a team, and an all new coaching staff doesn't come from the transfer portal.

[CajunVic]

. . . an all new coaching staff replacing a fired coaching staff would have a greater tendency to utilize the portal because often a fired coaching staff leaves the cupboard somewhat bear and depleted . . .

[JAB]

. . . an all new coaching staff replacing a fired coaching staff would have a greater tendency to utilize the portal because often a fired coaching staff leaves the cupboard somewhat bear and depleted . . .

Yes, but then there's no way of knowing where a team's success is attributable to the new coaching schemes or whether it's attributable to the transfer portal. Probably both, which proves that simply going into the portal to grab a bunch of new players doesn't by itself turn a team around.

[CajunVic]

Yes, but then there's no way of knowing where a team's success is attributable to the new coaching schemes or whether it's attributable to the transfer portal. Probably both, which proves that simply going into the portal to grab a bunch of new players doesn't by itself turn a team around.

. . . you have come full circle . . . not sure your point . . .

[fpc4life99]

In today's landscape of college athletics, it's increasingly difficult for Group of Five (G5) programs to sustain success, especially when Power Five (P5) institutions are actively plucking talent from their rosters. The introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rules and the transfer portal have given P5 schools a significant advantage in attracting and retaining top-tier players.

G5 programs often find themselves in a constant struggle to develop and maintain a competitive team. While they may invest time and resources in nurturing young high school prospects, it's becoming evident that these players are ripe for the picking once they show promise. One or two standout years at a G5 institution, and they're lured away by the allure of P5 opportunities and potential financial gains through NIL endorsements.

Consider the past two seasons alone, where numerous players who departed G5 schools would have unquestionably been starters and game-changers, vastly improving the talent pool of our team. This trend poses a severe challenge for G5 programs, as they grapple with the reality that their most promising prospects are not likely to stay beyond a brief stint.

The future of G5 programs may hinge on a delicate balancing act. While highly talented recruits are essential to filling roster gaps and providing leadership, relying predominantly on a revolving door of young players, with a majority consisting of freshmen and sophomores, is simply unsustainable. G5 schools need to acknowledge the harsh reality that they must continuously rebuild their teams, making it difficult to establish long-term consistency and success.

The growing gap between G5 and P5 programs, fueled by the ability of P5 institutions to poach talent from their less-resourced counterparts, poses an ongoing threat to the sustainability and competitiveness of G5 teams. The challenge lies in finding a strategy that allows G5 programs to attract and develop talent while recognizing the limitations imposed by the current collegiate sports landscape.

[CajunVic]

In today's landscape of college athletics, it's increasingly difficult for Group of Five (G5) programs to sustain success, especially when Power Five (P5) institutions are actively plucking talent from their rosters. The introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rules and the transfer portal have given P5 schools a significant advantage in attracting and retaining top-tier players.

G5 programs often find themselves in a constant struggle to develop and maintain a competitive team. While they may invest time and resources in nurturing young high school prospects, it's becoming evident that these players are ripe for the picking once they show promise. One or two standout years at a G5 institution, and they're lured away by the allure of P5 opportunities and potential financial gains through NIL endorsements.

Consider the past two seasons alone, where numerous players who departed G5 schools would have unquestionably been starters and game-changers, vastly improving the talent pool of our team. This trend poses a severe challenge for G5 programs, as they grapple with the reality that their most promising prospects are not likely to stay beyond a brief stint.

The future of G5 programs may hinge on a delicate balancing act. While highly talented recruits are essential to filling roster gaps and providing leadership, relying predominantly on a revolving door of young players, with a majority consisting of freshmen and sophomores, is simply unsustainable. G5 schools need to acknowledge the harsh reality that they must continuously rebuild their teams, making it difficult to establish long-term consistency and success.

The growing gap between G5 and P5 programs, fueled by the ability of P5 institutions to poach talent from their less-resourced counterparts, poses an ongoing threat to the sustainability and competitiveness of G5 teams. The challenge lies in finding a strategy that allows G5 programs to attract and develop talent while recognizing the limitations imposed by the current collegiate sports landscape.

. . . this could not have been more eloquently written . . . this could not be more accurate . . . and those on here acting like all of these tools are readily available to a G5 like Louisiana while not recognizing that these tools taketh away much more than they giveth are living in a false reality . . .

[JMV JustMyView]

In today's landscape of college athletics, it's increasingly difficult for Group of Five (G5) programs to sustain success, especially when Power Five (P5) institutions are actively plucking talent from their rosters. The introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rules and the transfer portal have given P5 schools a significant advantage in attracting and retaining top-tier players.

G5 programs often find themselves in a constant struggle to develop and maintain a competitive team. While they may invest time and resources in nurturing young high school prospects, it's becoming evident that these players are ripe for the picking once they show promise. One or two standout years at a G5 institution, and they're lured away by the allure of P5 opportunities and potential financial gains through NIL endorsements.

Consider the past two seasons alone, where numerous players who departed G5 schools would have unquestionably been starters and game-changers, vastly improving the talent pool of our team. This trend poses a severe challenge for G5 programs, as they grapple with the reality that their most promising prospects are not likely to stay beyond a brief stint.

The future of G5 programs may hinge on a delicate balancing act. While highly talented recruits are essential to filling roster gaps and providing leadership, relying predominantly on a revolving door of young players, with a majority consisting of freshmen and sophomores, is simply unsustainable. G5 schools need to acknowledge the harsh reality that they must continuously rebuild their teams, making it difficult to establish long-term consistency and success.

The growing gap between G5 and P5 programs, fueled by the ability of P5 institutions to poach talent from their less-resourced counterparts, poses an ongoing threat to the sustainability and competitiveness of G5 teams. The challenge lies in finding a strategy that allows G5 programs to attract and develop talent while recognizing the limitations imposed by the current collegiate sports landscape.

I also seen this article. Very accurate.