Why recruiting gurus don’t get the portal
- Thread starter PurpleJ
- Start date
Nothing makes a recruit stick so rankings on incoming freshmen are even more inaccurate
Yes Bama had top classes but they have guys leave every year and more when Saban left. Already a 4 and 5 star in the portal this year
We were laughing at Oregon just last year for recruiting 4 and 5 stars who leave. Who's laughing now?
You have to recruit but if you recruit top players you'll lose a percentage to the portal. So you have to hit the portal too. And you have to stack classed which leads to more guys leaving
That 6 foot 8 freshman tackle from Oregon who hit the portal saw them recruit 3 more top tackles
The formula is that there is no formula
Yes Bama had top classes but they have guys leave every year and more when Saban left. Already a 4 and 5 star in the portal this year
We were laughing at Oregon just last year for recruiting 4 and 5 stars who leave. Who's laughing now?
You have to recruit but if you recruit top players you'll lose a percentage to the portal. So you have to hit the portal too. And you have to stack classed which leads to more guys leaving
That 6 foot 8 freshman tackle from Oregon who hit the portal saw them recruit 3 more top tackles
The formula is that there is no formula
HFNY
Well-known poster
Though the 6'8" OT is from Alabama so he could be homesick and / or he got paid a nice bag to go to Eugene and then realized it sucks.
I think what he’s saying is guysm form 24/7 and Rivals etc aren’t as turned on by grown men
I think way too much here is being read into about one recruit that was a suspect 4 star. I don't laugh about their 4/5*s who leave. I'd take those over 3 and guys who would have been 1-2*s in the old system we got in the Jimmy and DeBoer years, who also leave.
I've said before the problem with the portal is it makes it even harder to compete with programs with solid footing because now they really don't even have to develop players much. A percentage of the big recruits who for a long time now have mostly been bag auctions will pan out regardless but now the ones that don't matter way less because you can just buy proven players in the portal. I'm not completely saying that's a game without skill though as USC appears to be awful at buying the right portal guys unless it just turns out they're getting the guys on the B level of the portal auction compared to the A level.
I've said before the problem with the portal is it makes it even harder to compete with programs with solid footing because now they really don't even have to develop players much. A percentage of the big recruits who for a long time now have mostly been bag auctions will pan out regardless but now the ones that don't matter way less because you can just buy proven players in the portal. I'm not completely saying that's a game without skill though as USC appears to be awful at buying the right portal guys unless it just turns out they're getting the guys on the B level of the portal auction compared to the A level.
Obviously, there are outliers like 2023 Michigan and Washington and I hate the TBS cult as much as the next guy. But there's still a pretty strong correlation.
Current CFP Rankings // 2024 TBS Composite Talent Ranking (247)
1. Oregon (12-0) #6
2. Texas (11-1) #4
3. Penn State (11-1) #11
4. Notre Dame (11-1) #9
5. Georgia (10-2) #3
6. Ohio State (10-2) #2
Current CFP Rankings // 2024 TBS Composite Talent Ranking (247)
1. Oregon (12-0) #6
2. Texas (11-1) #4
3. Penn State (11-1) #11
4. Notre Dame (11-1) #9
5. Georgia (10-2) #3
6. Ohio State (10-2) #2
Last edited:
The 24 class isn't a big part of 24 but of course there's always been a correlation
But the portal is only a few years old and I don't think it's impact is addressed
The portal has more effect this year than recruits. Oregon didn't recruit Dillon Gabriel
Or Mohammed lol
The portal played a large role for UW last year. Michigan's recruiting isn't for stars its for big boys up front.
I'm saying you need to prepare for change and be ahead of it. The SEC won recruiting rankings and national championships. It is clearly not as dominant because of the portal
But the portal is only a few years old and I don't think it's impact is addressed
The portal has more effect this year than recruits. Oregon didn't recruit Dillon Gabriel
Or Mohammed lol
The portal played a large role for UW last year. Michigan's recruiting isn't for stars its for big boys up front.
I'm saying you need to prepare for change and be ahead of it. The SEC won recruiting rankings and national championships. It is clearly not as dominant because of the portal
The composite rankings aren't the 24 class, per se.
It's 4 / 5 stars (coming out of HS) in progress. If you get a 4 or 5 star in the portal they still count.
HFNY
Well-known poster
Good points. IIRC, Oregon bought something like 14 of their 22 starters in the portal. Their starting 3 WRs came through the portal, 3 out of their 4 starting DL, most of their secondary (including Jabbar Muhammad).
He was told to leave. Revenue sharing starts next year. Everyone will get something to play at UW.
EsophagealFeces
Well-known poster
It’s harder for Fetters to rank portal guys because he only gets hard for teen bois.
I’m laughing that you’re laughing.
creepycoug
Well-known poster
Yes. That's the joke.gif
creepycoug
Well-known poster
Word. The other thing that gets overlooked is that every system presents opportunities to express different skills.
Consider, when it was 100% TBS, then it was X% recruiting and Y% development. Washington fans love this idea now because it reminds them of Don James and because of recency bias with Petersen. But it's not a given that Washington will always have coaches who are good developers; Washington has had coaches, may currently have a coach, and may in the future have coaches who aren't great at development. Sark? Fisch? Lake? Others?
Now, the game is different. Now, it's X% recruiting, Y% portal, Z% integration and XX% development. Integration is important. Is your system so fucking complicated that you need either a PhD in football or more than a season under your belt to completely internalize the playbook so that it's second nature? There used to be an almost rule of thumb in the Pac 10 … teams with senior QBs did well, and teams with underclassmen QBs did not. The role was so critical and it took a while for a kid to develop a mastery of the playbook, develop an ability to make reads and deal with the speed of the game. The senior guys tended to be better. There's no time for that now. So, a program will be relatively more successful if when they get their guys in there they can assimilate them quickly, because there is no fucking time. Are you just generally good at bringing in new people and getting them integrated quickly? Or are you slow at that? If the latter, you're going to struggle.
It's just going to reward a slightly different bundle of skills. The same thing happens in the workplace. What Jimmy was good at before all of a sudden doesn't fucking matter anymore. Jimmy better get good at something else real fast.
Adapt or die. Some of my favorite Huskie QBs of all time would struggle to be recruited today. We? - the old we? - used to come here and extole the virtues of a system that puts the QB under center and insisted as axiomatic that kids who played in a spread instead of a pro set could not play in the NFL. Then when that went out the window, we said yeah, but kids who play exclusively in the shotgun can't play in the NFL. Then when it became clear they could, we said RPO kids can't play in the NFL. Then running QBs. It's always something. The game just changes. Everything does. This is the new game. You don't get 4 years. You have limited clean slates. You have to have a system that works in the current system.
Consider, when it was 100% TBS, then it was X% recruiting and Y% development. Washington fans love this idea now because it reminds them of Don James and because of recency bias with Petersen. But it's not a given that Washington will always have coaches who are good developers; Washington has had coaches, may currently have a coach, and may in the future have coaches who aren't great at development. Sark? Fisch? Lake? Others?
Now, the game is different. Now, it's X% recruiting, Y% portal, Z% integration and XX% development. Integration is important. Is your system so fucking complicated that you need either a PhD in football or more than a season under your belt to completely internalize the playbook so that it's second nature? There used to be an almost rule of thumb in the Pac 10 … teams with senior QBs did well, and teams with underclassmen QBs did not. The role was so critical and it took a while for a kid to develop a mastery of the playbook, develop an ability to make reads and deal with the speed of the game. The senior guys tended to be better. There's no time for that now. So, a program will be relatively more successful if when they get their guys in there they can assimilate them quickly, because there is no fucking time. Are you just generally good at bringing in new people and getting them integrated quickly? Or are you slow at that? If the latter, you're going to struggle.
It's just going to reward a slightly different bundle of skills. The same thing happens in the workplace. What Jimmy was good at before all of a sudden doesn't fucking matter anymore. Jimmy better get good at something else real fast.
Adapt or die. Some of my favorite Huskie QBs of all time would struggle to be recruited today. We? - the old we? - used to come here and extole the virtues of a system that puts the QB under center and insisted as axiomatic that kids who played in a spread instead of a pro set could not play in the NFL. Then when that went out the window, we said yeah, but kids who play exclusively in the shotgun can't play in the NFL. Then when it became clear they could, we said RPO kids can't play in the NFL. Then running QBs. It's always something. The game just changes. Everything does. This is the new game. You don't get 4 years. You have limited clean slates. You have to have a system that works in the current system.
Last edited:
HFNY
Well-known poster
I'd venture to guess Oatis would command $800k for the SE but would want $1.25 million to head far away to Seattle but am certainly no NIL expert.
I wasn’t laughing. I was the only fucker talking about whoregon stacking talent and eventually it was going to be a problem. Everyone telling me to fuck off. First and right and not happy about it.
Last sentence is your best point in that post.
Last edited:
if we’re bashing getting hard for teen bois then I’m out.
I thought the entire post was tremendous. Many people are saying that.