“We’ve got a real problem that’s brewing…”

So, they’re really gonna do it.

It’s a move to help out coaches who aren’t aces at roster management first, and high school recruits second.  But you know and I know who’s really going to benefit from this.  So does Todd Berry.

“We’ve been working on this since June, and it has gone round and round, the subject matter is really important to our coaches right now because, quite honestly, with the one-time transfer and with NIL, all of your players are basically potentially in the portal and not just the ones that are looking for more playing time,” Berry said. “The problem that our coaches were facing was the fact that if I sign 25 players in the December and February signing dates, then that leaves me with no initials to be able to handle the five offensive linemen that I might lose in the summer of next year. So, everybody was feeling like they had to hold a significant number of scholarships back with the idea that I’ve got to hold them back, because I don’t know exactly what I’m going to lose next summer.”

The committee has wanted to find ways to discourage coaches from purging their rosters by just suggesting they will have as many initial counters as they want, no matter how many players transfer. But also wanted to give programs the opportunity to stay at or near the 85-scholarship limit if they do lose a significant number of players to the transfer portal.

Coaches like Saban and Smart have been rubbing their hands thinking about the possibilities once a rule like this goes into effect.  Alabama and Georgia signing 32 players in a class is about as “let the rich get richer” move as college football could allow.  If a player doesn’t show out, I assume he will be encouraged to seek greener pastures.  And if he can’t take the hint…

“Even if they’re dismissed”.  It’s an aggressive roster manager’s wet dream.

Oh, yeah — it’s only a one-year, patchwork proposal.

Meaning, they’ll be right back at the same drawing board in a year’s time.  I mean, what could go wrong?


Filed under The NCAA, Transfers Are For Coaches.

11 responses to ““We’ve got a real problem that’s brewing…”

  1. Transfer Portal. The name is what gets me.

    Is there someone out there who tracks the number of kids who’ve “gotten stuck” in the Portal? Meaning, they entered it but no teams picked them up? I thought I heard that was a problem but I haven’t seen hard data anywhere.

    I’m interested to see if this new rule leads to more or fewer of these “stuck” kids.


    • Biggen

      There were over 2000 in the portal last year until it “reset” in August. I’d venture a guess and say the vast majority aren’t picked up by schools.


  2. Granthams Replacement

    Funny how the old rule of having to wait a year kept the process in check vs full blown free agency.


  3. Biggen

    As the Senator mentioned, this is a wet dream to those coaches who know how to recruit. Hell of a time to be alive.

    Liked by 3 people

    • ericstrattonrushchairmandamngladtomeetyou

      This is exactly how Saban turned Bama around in 2007. He ran oft a bunch of existing players he didn’t think would work out under his system then “oversigned” a class with about 32-36 new signees. The next year he field a team with mostly new and improved players. I don’t know if he is up to the task but this is how Josh Heupel could turn Tennessee around quickly. Same for Sark at Texas.


  4. Tony BarnFart

    Throw in a whole different pool of players (high school), 7 per team, that could clog up your potential landing spots and the possibility of getting stuck in the transfer portal just got Real-Real.

    I guess I’m just confused on rules. After reading the article, I understand that a spring or summer addition from the transfer portal counts in the current 25 man class signing limit. Why even do that ? That leads to the preposterous world of rosters well under the 85 limit and players stuck in the transfer portal. Why not just count transfers against the hard 85 limit ?


  5. Dylan Dreyer's Booty

    Something about the way this is being structured reminds me of the rule against perpetuity, but in reverse.

    Liked by 1 person

    • miltondawg

      Did they say that the rule was for one year or for 21 years after the death of the last current descendant of Queen Elizabeth II?


  6. Dawg in Austin

    This should really help first and second year coaches as well that want to turn over more of their rosters.