2024 Football Portal

[danny daniel]

When do the late portal players and freshmen report to the campus? It must be soon. I count about 19 +/- a couple.

 

[GTpdm]

When do the late portal players and freshmen report to the campus? It must be soon. I count about 19 +/- a couple.

It would probably be for the Late Short Summer Session. That’s when all the new freshmen matriculate for Summer admission.

First day of classes for the LSSS is Monday, June 24. Students would be reporting to campus on the 21st or so.

 

[danny daniel]

It would probably be for the Late Short Summer Session. That’s when all the new freshmen matriculate for Summer admission.

First day of classes for the LSSS is Monday, June 24. Students would be reporting to campus on the 21st or so.

Thanks

 

[awbuzz]

32 out(!!!) and 18 in...

Georgia Tech Football Has 4th Bigget Net Rating Gain Amongst Transfer Classes In the ACC

Georgia Tech has had a busy offseason of adding talent to their roster. The Yellow Jackets have looked at upgrading a few key spots on offense, but most of the

www.si.com

 

[305jacket]

Out of those 32 out, realistically only 5 or 6 (all at DL and DB) would have been difference makers. The rest had to go to clear space to bring in more talent.
I will look for Key to improve our depth for the next couple years, we will need it.

Hopefully the incoming transfers can be impact players, the fresh blood on defense with a new coaching staff may be what we needed.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

32 out(!!!) and 18 in...

Georgia Tech Football Has 4th Bigget Net Rating Gain Amongst Transfer Classes In the ACC

Georgia Tech has had a busy offseason of adding talent to their roster. The Yellow Jackets have looked at upgrading a few key spots on offense, but most of the

www.si.com

So, according to the article, the transfer portal was an overall upgrade for Tech. I got to thinking about the roster churn and a couple of things occurred to me.

First, when CDS came in to coach basketball he tried to hang onto some quality athletes but, overall, we churned out of the program enough players that we had practically a whole new team. Most now agree that, with the transfers in, it was an overall upgrade.

Second, I finally watched the White and Gold game. It took me this long to get around to it because these exhibitions are almost meaningless. But what struck me was how much speed there was with the freshman and underclassmen. Small, light, and fast can work or not work depending on other factors. It looked like CBK has created enough stability in the program, including adding strategic transfers, that these younger, faster guys can have time to develop. Year two is going to be fun to watch.

 

[TooTall]

32 departing in the portal and 14 in from the portal. Leaves 18 for hs signees. Numbers seem about right.

 

[apatriot1776]

32 departing in the portal and 14 in from the portal. Leaves 18 for hs signees. Numbers seem about right.

This will be a big class. That’s 18 free spots (minus a couple scholarships that went to walk-ons) on top of the, by my count, 20 or so graduating seniors and whoever leaves via transfer portal. I think this class we’ll end up taking 30 kids.

Next year we hopefully will have serious top-25 and playoff-contention potential with the much easier schedule, but this class will really determine the direction of the program in 2026 and beyond.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

32 departing in the portal and 14 in from the portal. Leaves 18 for hs signees. Numbers seem about right.

What about players finished with their eligibility?

 

[TooTall]

What about players finished with their eligibility?

https://247sports.com/Team/Georgia-Tech-Yellow-Jackets-9/Roster/ There were 7 players listed as seniors but I know 1 (Yondjouen) is returning so there's 6 possible. But with portal departures, portal entrants and hs players, we are close to even. Remember that this portal period doesn't end until late August I believe. We are fine on numbers and can still add a few over the next several weeks.

 

[swampsting]

So the SI dude quotes the 247sports guy's results.
Nice work if you can get it.
But he didn't mention that at the bottom of that 247 story the original writer tabulated the average transfer rating for ACC schools. And we wound up near the bottom.
So while there is a net gain, and one of the biggest in the ACC, according to the 247 guy - and Lord knows this is some of the most subjective stuff ever - we also are at the tail end of the ACC in average transfer rating.

ACC football's biggest winners and losers in 2024 transfer portal

A pair of Florida schools continue to dominate the transfer portal conversation as Clemson enjoys the island life this summer

247sports.com

 

[57jacket]

This has got to be the MOST subjective evaluation ever. The numbers in versus out must skew any analtical results like crazy. If the net numbers in versus and out are part of the evaluations, it's just worthless.

 

[danny daniel]

The portal was a little exciting in the beginning, like getting free stuff. But I am now beginning to see how too much free stuff can hurt your depth and experience. We 'fixed" the DL for 2024 with the portal but in 2025 we lose those portal players and Biggers and Scott, leaving only Lockett as the lone major experienced player. We are actually worse off with the DL going into 2025 than we were in 2024. How much of the playing time goes to the senior portals affects the development of the younger players like Jones, Adams, and Marshall. We have to replace the portals in the DL next year again plus replace Biggers and Scott.

Too many senior portal players hurts your long term depth and development of young players. On the other hand a senior portal in 2023 like our RG filled a need at a position where we were loaded with young talent not quite ready to fill that role. Like everything else the portal should be used in moderation and best used for younger portal players which is also has some risk. Maybe Dabo is more right than wrong.

 

[takethepoints]

This has got to be the MOST subjective evaluation ever. The numbers in versus out must skew any analtical results like crazy. If the net numbers in versus and out are part of the evaluations, it's just worthless.

Yes.

I've long said here that the best of the many subjective ways to evaluate high school players is the "star system" and that we'd be best advised to ignore the numbers associated with the stars. That way you can compare teams by their average stars instead of their "ranking" based on an accumulation of numbers and the (makes no sense, but there it is) number of recruits. The results of doing this are also extremely subjective, but at least this method recognizes the inherent uncertainty in the process.

Now, as to comparing portal transfers, the 247 method is also pretty useless. Check 'em out: the transfers never rank less than their high school ratings, even if they';ve been denied the field for years by the coaches at their other schools. Further, the 247 rankings are the same numbers + total players stuff you see for the usual high school player comparisons. All pretty worthless, imho.

So how should we rate transfers? I don't think there's a good way to do that. The coaches are alway looking for pieces to the puzzle and taking what they think are the best options available, given the team's needs. That's about all you can say about it. Tech doesn't take in many transfers? Well, O is about set; all the skill positions have pretty good rooms and the OL is 2 deep at almost every position. The D needs players at DB and DE, but we seem to have gotten a good selection of transfers in those spots. So Tech ranks toward the bottom in the portal? Let's just see when the team takes the field, shall we?

 

[stinger78]

The star system has limitations. It is good to spot the 5* "men among boys" players... the ones who can't miss, likely future NFL players. It is also pretty good at identifying the 4* "best of the rest" players... the ones who will likely make very good college players - though some of those (maybe 20%) will not pan out so well.

It's the vast sea of 3* players that the "star system" cannot predict. Those can vary from future NFL stars like BayBay, to solid college players like Roddy, to special teams warriors, to washout transfers.

 

[slugboy]

So the SI dude quotes the 247sports guy's results.
Nice work if you can get it.
But he didn't mention that at the bottom of that 247 story the original writer tabulated the average transfer rating for ACC schools. And we wound up near the bottom.
So while there is a net gain, and one of the biggest in the ACC, according to the 247 guy - and Lord knows this is some of the most subjective stuff ever - we also are at the tail end of the ACC in average transfer rating.

ACC football's biggest winners and losers in 2024 transfer portal

A pair of Florida schools continue to dominate the transfer portal conversation as Clemson enjoys the island life this summer

247sports.com

I think 90% of SI is writing about paywall content

 

[Techster]

The grade on transfers, just like normal HS signings, won't be complete until 2-3 years down the road.

Anyone remember when Haynes King transferred in? Not much was made of it. If he has the same success next year (although GT fans are hoping more improvement...which is scary), he'll easily go down as one of the best transfers into to GT ever.

 

[roadkill]

Yes.

I've long said here that the best of the many subjective ways to evaluate high school players is the "star system" and that we'd be best advised to ignore the numbers associated with the stars. That way you can compare teams by their average stars instead of their "ranking" based on an accumulation of numbers and the (makes no sense, but there it is) number of recruits. The results of doing this are also extremely subjective, but at least this method recognizes the inherent uncertainty in the process.

Now, as to comparing portal transfers, the 247 method is also pretty useless. Check 'em out: the transfers never rank less than their high school ratings, even if they';ve been denied the field for years by the coaches at their other schools. Further, the 247 rankings are the same numbers + total players stuff you see for the usual high school player comparisons. All pretty worthless, imho.

So how should we rate transfers? I don't think there's a good way to do that. The coaches are alway looking for pieces to the puzzle and taking what they think are the best options available, given the team's needs. That's about all you can say about it. Tech doesn't take in many transfers? Well, O is about set; all the skill positions have pretty good rooms and the OL is 2 deep at almost every position. The D needs players at DB and DE, but we seem to have gotten a good selection of transfers in those spots. So Tech ranks toward the bottom in the portal? Let's just see when the team takes the field, shall we?

I agree with everything you said except the bolded part, where the opposite is often true. Case in point: https://247sports.com/player/haynes-king-46049892/college-246038/

 

[4shotB]

he'll easily go down as one of the best transfers into to GT ever.

Off the top of my head, Dewberry, Dorsey Levins and Tashard Choice are at the top of the list. Who am I missing?

 

[Techster]

Off the top of my head, Dewberry, Dorsey Levins and Tashard Choice are at the top of the list. Who am I missing?

Those were also at the top of my memory. Anthony Allen, though he had to spend a year behind Dwyer...he would definitely come in 2nd tier behind the guys you mentioned.