2024 Transfer Portal Ins/Outs

@Wistrom Disciple All you're really arguing for is that you want more football players who aren't receiving scholarships. And all I can say is that I consider having thousands more students receiving scholarships (20 extra scholarships times 134 FBS teams = up to 2680 extra scholarships) to be a far, FAR better situation than simply having more players on a football team. If you disagree with that, well, alrighty then.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toe said:
@Wistrom Disciple All you're really arguing for is that you want more football players who aren't receiving scholarships. And all I can say is that I consider having thousands more students receiving scholarships (20 extra scholarships times 134 FBS teams = up to 2680 extra scholarships) to be a far, FAR better situation than simply having more players on a football team. If you disagree with that, well, alrighty then.
Click to expand...




You're talking about different things, and putting words in their mouth they didn't say.

You're talking thousands more players getting scholarships. A good thing on it's own.

@Wistrom Disciple is talking about thousands more players never able to play college football. Both things are true. While there are potentially 2,680 players who will now receive D1 scholarships, there potentially 3,082 players who will be forced out of football altogether. The average FBS roster size was 128, and those 3,000 players will move down to FCS (simplifying here), where 3,000 players will then move down to DII, where 3,000 players will then move down to NAIA and DIII, and 3,000 of the players that were already playing NAIA/DIII ball will have nowhere to play.

Since FCS downwards have increasingly rare abilities to provide full scholarships, or don't provide scholarships at all, the amount gained in extra FBS scholarships is pretty much entirely nullified in the amount lost downstream, and for collegiate football players as a whole is pretty much a wash, except for the thousands who won't ever get a chance. But yeah, the very best ones have it better than before.

 
Toe said:
@Wistrom Disciple All you're really arguing for is that you want more football players who aren't receiving scholarships. And all I can say is that I consider having thousands more students receiving scholarships (20 extra scholarships times 134 FBS teams = up to 2680 extra scholarships) to be a far, FAR better situation than simply having more players on a football team. If you disagree with that, well, alrighty then.
Click to expand...
@Lorewarn explained perfectly. Thank you!

Good that the full scholarships were increased from 85 to 105. Bad that roster limits were abruptly capped at 105.

 
@Lorewarn@Wistrom Disciple Yes, it's possible that Little Timmy might not be able to find a walk-on spot on an NAIA roster next year like he'd hoped for, and he might have to settle for a club team instead.

But even with the reductions, college football rosters are still absolutely massive. Across all levels, there's about 97,000 college football players. So we're talking about just a 3% overall reduction in the total number of college football players. Even with the reduction, that's still going to be close to triple the number of men's basketball players (34,000). 

The notion that there's suddenly some serious lack of opportunity to play walk-on college football at all is kinda ridiculous.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toe said:
@Lorewarn@Wistrom Disciple Yes, I suppose it's possible that Little Timmy might not be able to find a walk-on spot on an NAIA roster next year like he'd hoped for. He might have to settle for a club team instead.

But even with the reductions, college football rosters are still absolutely massive. Across all levels, there's about 97,000 college football players. So we're talking about just a 3% overall reduction in the total number of college football players. Even with the reduction, the total number of college football players is still going to be close to triple the number of men's basketball players (34,000). 

The notion that there's suddenly some serious lack of opportunity to play walk-on college football at all is kinda ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Your own logic eliminates the concept of "walk-on" entirely. Every FBS athlete now becomes a scholarship player. +20 scholarships - 70 walk-ons = -50 players on Nebraska's roster next year and future years. You are grasping at straws trying to make an argument that isn't being disputed. Yes, more full ride scholarships are being distributed. Also, there are fewer spots on rosters and subsequently thousands of young men will not be playing college football going forward. 

No idea what you're getting at with the basketball point.

 
Lorewarn said:
Good thing nobody made that notion and you're arguing against either ghosts or motorized goalposts.
Click to expand...


*ahem*

Wistrom Disciple said:
Hopefully it means the FCS, DII, etc. will experience better talent, but also results in thousands of players no longer being able to play college football.
Click to expand...


Wistrom Disciple said:
Also, there are fewer spots on rosters and subsequently thousands of young men will not be playing college football going forward. 
Click to expand...


Lorewarn said:
there potentially 3,082 players who will be forced out of football altogether
Click to expand...




If that's not talking about a lack of opportunity to play college football, then exactly what the hell are you two talking about? :facepalm:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toe said:
*ahem*

If that's not talking about a lack of opportunity to play college football, then exactly what the hell are you two talking about? :facepalm:
Click to expand...




The reality that thousands less players will be able to play college football moving forward is true as a fact.

"The notion that there's suddenly some serious lack of opportunity to play walk-on college football at all is kinda ridiculous." is your editorializing a subjective opinion about the fact that nobody claimed. There is a lack of opportunity coming for thousands. Whether that's 'serious' or not is a different point, and something people will disagree on.

 
USA Today thinks highly of our transfer portal class.

College football transfer portal rankings: LSU leads the 10 best classes

1. LSU

2. Texas Tech

3. Oregon

4. Mississippi

5. Missouri

6. Miami

7. Auburn

8. Florida State

9. Nebraska
Top three transfers: OL Elijah Pritchett (Alabama), WR Dane Key (Kentucky), OL Rocco Spindler (Notre Dame).

The Cornhuskers acquired two plug-and-play offensive linemen in Pritchett and Spindler, with Pritchett set to step in at left tackle. Key should be the team’s leading receiver, while young Kentucky transfer Hardley Gilmore might take a year to develop. Nebraska also added one of top Group of Five defenders in former Georgia Southern linebacker Marques Watson-Trent and some needed flexibility in the back seven in Oklahoma transfer Dasan McCullough.

10. Wisconsin

Top three transfers: QB Billy Edwards Jr. (Maryland), TE Tanner Koziol (Ball State), DL Parker Petersen (Tulane).

Wisconsin lost several key pieces to the portal, including Lucas, running back Tawee Walker (Cincinnati) and wide receiver Will Pauling (Notre Dame). The Badgers could offset those departures with an 18-member transfer class headlined by the in-conference addition at quarterback and a potential breakout talent in Koziol. Idaho wide receiver transfer Mark Hamper averaged 20.1 yards per catch last season and could provide a major spark to the passing game.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc said:
USA Today thinks highly of our transfer portal class.

College football transfer portal rankings: LSU leads the 10 best classes

1. LSU

2. Texas Tech

3. Oregon

4. Mississippi

5. Missouri

6. Miami

7. Auburn

8. Florida State

9. Nebraska
Top three transfers: OL Elijah Pritchett (Alabama), WR Dane Key (Kentucky), OL Rocco Spindler (Notre Dame).

The Cornhuskers acquired two plug-and-play offensive linemen in Pritchett and Spindler, with Pritchett set to step in at left tackle. Key should be the team’s leading receiver, while young Kentucky transfer Hardley Gilmore might take a year to develop. Nebraska also added one of top Group of Five defenders in former Georgia Southern linebacker Marques Watson-Trent and some needed flexibility in the back seven in Oklahoma transfer Dasan McCullough.

10. Wisconsin

Top three transfers: QB Billy Edwards Jr. (Maryland), TE Tanner Koziol (Ball State), DL Parker Petersen (Tulane).

Wisconsin lost several key pieces to the portal, including Lucas, running back Tawee Walker (Cincinnati) and wide receiver Will Pauling (Notre Dame). The Badgers could offset those departures with an 18-member transfer class headlined by the in-conference addition at quarterback and a potential breakout talent in Koziol. Idaho wide receiver transfer Mark Hamper averaged 20.1 yards per catch last season and could provide a major spark to the passing game.
Click to expand...


I like the class too, but I hate this type of "journalism." Pretty sure the coaches already confirmed Pritchett would stay at RT, and McCullough (despite showing up on all these lists as a Safety) is going to be a Jack - not play in the back seven. I understand national writers don't want to dig through local coverage for accurate information, but make an intern do it. Or just stop pretending to know how the players actually fit the teams and admit the rankings are based entirely on 247/On3/whatever grades.

 
Double-checking against the updated Huskers.com roster, I have us still at 133 on the roster.  So we probably need to have 30 guys leave after spring, considering we might still add a guy or two.

By my count, we have 35 guys who were walk-ons.  So most of that number will still be them.  Though not all as Mekhi Nelson, Rowdy Bauer, Luke Lindenmeyer Grant Seagren, David Hoffken, David Borchers, Nico Ottomanelli, Kamdyn Koch and John Hohl seem likely to make the roster.  Probably Aidan Flege as well as we only show two long snappers.  So that's 10, meaning at least five scholarship-type guys will probably be gone.

But there are always at least a couple surprises.

 
Back
Top