2024 Transfer Portal Ins/Outs

Mavric said:
Yeah, I said at that time I thought that was not the right split.  Although, to be fair, where we're at now is more than I though as well.

I don't have an issue with it.  Just interesting.

I thought for several years that Husker basketball should probably be mostly portal guys because of our disadvantages in football.  I wasn't sure that was working out very well for Fred for awhile but they seem to have figured out the right guys to target.

I didn't think it would be quite this heavy in football because I thought development would be more important than in basketball.  But we still do face the same recruiting disadvantages and have a pretty noticeable NIL advantage.  So I'm not sure this year is all that abnormal.  Other than a hard roster cap may move both numbers down somewhat.
Click to expand...
Also note that taking an equal number of transfers and high school players each year does not mean we have 50% transfers on the team - it'll still be mostly high school players (unless a really high percentage of the high school players transfer out every year). Not disagreeing with what you're saying, just pointing it out.

 
The Murphinator said:
If you don't adapt you will be left behind. Got to play the game to win
Click to expand...
Yep, and I imagine Rhule was conflicted about running guys off that don't meet expectations but with NIL to me it's a junior NFL anyway.  Once that money comes in it's their job to perform at a Big Ten level.  I'm thankful Rhule is pivoting to the new world environment in college football.  Hoiberg recognized the Matt Abdelmassih era wasn't working and he made changes.  I'm happy we have leaders in both men's revenue sports that don't let pride or friends get in the way of their vision to get better as a team.  An issue that fans have been frustrated with prior coaches about.

 
To be fair that was also said before the 105 man limit was a thing also.  You could bring in 20 portal guys in one year and still be at a high percentage of development players when we had 150-160 players.

 
Mavric said:
Yeah .... about that .... (from 13 months ago).

We are closing in on taking as many transfers as high school guys.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to remember if the 105 roster limit was official when he said that.  I mean if you bring in 15 portal guys a year to a roster of 150, that means around 90% of your roster each year is kids you presumably recruited.  

edit:  I should have kept reading before responding.  Looks like it was pointed out by others already..... :thumbs

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver said:
Also note that taking an equal number of transfers and high school players each year does not mean we have 50% transfers on the team - it'll still be mostly high school players (unless a really high percentage of the high school players transfer out every year). Not disagreeing with what you're saying, just pointing it out.
Click to expand...


soup said:
To be fair that was also said before the 105 man limit was a thing also.  You could bring in 20 portal guys in one year and still be at a high percentage of development players when we had 150-160 players.
Click to expand...


funhusker said:
I'm trying to remember if the 105 roster limit was official when he said that.  I mean if you bring in 15 portal guys a year to a roster of 150, that means around 90% of your roster each year is kids you presumably recruited.  

edit:  I should have kept reading before responding.  Looks like it was pointed out by others already..... :thumbs
Click to expand...


All that is only true if you only brought in the 20 portal guys for one year and then no more for the next 3-4years.  If you're doing that every year, it's a much higher percentage, even if you have 150 guys on the roster.  15 guys every year would be 60-ish on the roster, which is 40% of a 150-man roster.

We have brought in about 30 portal guys over the past two years (though some are already gone).  Even just that is twice the percentage that Rhule mentioned on a 150-man roster, let alone a 105-man roster.  Let alone doing it for four consecutive years.

Again, I don't have an issue with it.  We should probably be among the highest percentages among the Power 4.  I just think it's interesting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
All that is only true if you only brought in the 20 portal guys for one year and then no more for the next 3-4years.  If you're doing that every year, it's a much higher percentage, even if you have 150 guys on the roster.  15 guys every year would be 60-ish on the roster, which is 40% of a 150-man roster.

We have brought in about 30 portal guys over the past two years (though some are already gone).  Even just that is twice the percentage that Rhule mentioned on a 150-man roster, let alone a 105-man roster.  Let alone doing it for four consecutive years.

Again, I don't have an issue with it.  We should probably be among the highest percentages among the Power 4.  I just think it's interesting.
Click to expand...
Maybe he assumed we would be losing and gaining a similar amount of portal guys each year?  In the end, it was a quote on a radio show.  I'm sure he didn't have his hand on a bible or sign anything binding.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The point was not to have to bring in 20 players a year though.  It was 5-8 players or so to fill in some gaps on the recruits that didn't pan out.  It was all good in theory, and since then the whole process has changed so it means about as much as the paper it wasn't written on.

 
Mavric said:
All that is only true if you only brought in the 20 portal guys for one year and then no more for the next 3-4years.  If you're doing that every year, it's a much higher percentage, even if you have 150 guys on the roster.  15 guys every year would be 60-ish on the roster, which is 40% of a 150-man roster.

We have brought in about 30 portal guys over the past two years (though some are already gone).  Even just that is twice the percentage that Rhule mentioned on a 150-man roster, let alone a 105-man roster.  Let alone doing it for four consecutive years.

Again, I don't have an issue with it.  We should probably be among the highest percentages among the Power 4.  I just think it's interesting.
Click to expand...
Um, if the coaches bring in 30 1-year transfer players every year, that's less than 30% of a 105 man roster. If the coaches bring in 20 transfer players every year and 50% are 1-year and 50% are 2-year players, that's the same 30 players out of 105.

 
RedDenver said:
Um, if the coaches bring in 30 1-year transfer players every year, that's less than 30% of a 105 man roster. If the coaches bring in 20 transfer players every year and 50% are 1-year and 50% are 2-year players, that's the same 30 players out of 105.
Click to expand...


OK.  Thanks for the math lesson.

That's not at all what we're doing.  But it's good to note, I guess.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think once Rhule has an entire roster of his players and we have the talent him and his staff needs and we are winning games. 90% is probably the plan. But right now he is trying to flip the roster to upgrade talent. Once you got roster talent where u want it you don’t need as many portal moves. 

 
RedDenver said:
Aren't we bringing in 30 transfer players, who have mostly 1 or 2 years left?
Click to expand...


Depending on where you draw the line on "mostly", technically yes.  But your examples keep changing.  Your first example said 30 one-year players.  That's nowhere close.  Your second example said 50% one-year and 50% two year.  That's not very close either.  And even if either of those were what we are doing, according to your numbers, that's still three times what Rhule said a year ago. 

Now you're at "mostly" one or two years, which could be significantly less than either of your previous examples.  Plus, you're allowing for transfers to be gone in a year or two but not high school recruits.  

Of the guys this year, 5 have 1 year, 5 have two years, 5 have three years and 2 have four years.  That seems to be a pretty good mix of all different eligibilities.

 
RedDenver said:
Aren't we bringing in 30 transfer players, who have mostly 1 or 2 years left?
Click to expand...


Nope.

We've brought in 16 so far, probably will max right around 20.

5 are seniors (including a punter and long snapper)

5 are juniors

4 are sophomores

2 are freshmen

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top