Transfer Portal: Who's Coming and Going (2022 Roster)

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,545
I'll take a stab at answering that based on my experiences as a HS teacher. First, girls mature earlier than guys. Secondly, there are not millions and millions of dollars available to professional women's athletes for the most part so while I have taught several girls who have gone to receive athletic scholarships (at the full gamut of schools), I think deep down they have always understood that they needed other (academic) skills on top of basketball, golf, soccer, softball, etc. That paradigm might be changing now with the NIL but that has been my experience to date anyways.
I think this is correct. It is money that has 'ruined' college men's sports, specifically, basketball and football.

We should all start rooting for our lacrosse team.
 

Sheboygan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
911
Location
Oostburg Wis. ( It's DUTCH !)
The main unknown is how the coaching staff will do. The defensive coaching staff is mostly turned over, and the offensive staff is heavily turned over. Were they the X-factor? If so, did we bring in the right coaches and replace the right coaches? We’ll find out.
This will determine whether CGC is retained, and if he is NOT feeling the pressure, he is delusional. He seemed to think that he would recruit enough HS talent to compete at the top of the ACC. So far, that has been a disaster- with very few exceptions-, IMO. He hasn't moved the needle in 3 years, and the question is how much improvement will be needed to continue with CGC as the HC. I can't recall any coach having 12 wins in 4 years being retained.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,925
Last year, we were 30th in the Team Talent Composite Index (https://collegefootballdata.com/exporter/talent?year=2021). That’s about where we’ve been throughout all of Collins’ tenure, and it’s a good stat for him.

If you just looked at that stat, you’d think we were a fringe top-25 team the last three years.
Exactly, which indicates that our major malfunction has been coaching, and not player talent. We'll see an improvement this year because of the infusion of coaches who have a clue.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,296
Bummed to hear about Joseph. He was one of the 3 or 4 transfers I was most looking forward to.
I feel like we made upgrades to the coaching staff - especially on offense, but my major concern is the OL and DL and right now we don't have anyone for either unit coming in that is likely to make either position better than last year.

We will really need the remaining transfers from last year as well as the young guys in the program to step up big time.
 

JacketFan137

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,209
I think this is correct. It is money that has 'ruined' college men's sports, specifically, basketball and football.

We should all start rooting for our lacrosse team.
golf and baseball have been nationally competitive too at times. tech athletics as a whole has been pretty good and our womens teams have been great from what i can tell. probably easier to field a competitive team even with the academics in those other sports
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,528
You're a good fan, Sheboygan.

Just one caveat - it all depends on the Offensive Line.
And the defensive line...
And the linebackers...
And the secondary...

Although, if the OL really gelled but the defense didn't come around, we might end up looking like UVA did last year.
 

CEB

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
907
Last year, we were 30th in the Team Talent Composite Index (https://collegefootballdata.com/exporter/talent?year=2021). That’s about where we’ve been throughout all of Collins’ tenure, and it’s a good stat for him.

If you just looked at that stat, you’d think we were a fringe top-25 team the last three years.

2022 numbers aren’t in yet, but I think after transfers finish up, it’ll be about the same.

Those numbers don’t tell the entire story. Since Collins started, we’ve had offensive and defensive linemen transfers. At first, I thought they were to fill in until we got a pipeline of high school recruits older and stronger and trained on our defensive scheme. Then, it looked like they’d be a quick fix until we had our recruiting and development in place. Now, it looks like a way of life.

We’re doing a lot of the same thing all over the field now, including at running back.

So, if the supposed talent level is the same, why should we expect a different year this season?

The main unknown is how the coaching staff will do. The defensive coaching staff is mostly turned over, and the offensive staff is heavily turned over. Were they the X-factor? If so, did we bring in the right coaches and replace the right coaches? We’ll find out.

Has player continuity been our problem? We keep bringing in transfers. Sometimes they start and are really impressive, sometimes they’re OK, and sometimes we rarely see them on the field. Often, they’re gone after a year or two. But, the transfer portal is the “new normal”, and we’re going to see more of this. Right now, I wouldn’t count on the kind of player continuity we saw in the 1990’s.

When I look at pro teams, I’ll compare a New England with Detroit under Matt Millen. Millen drafted a lot of skill players. Belichick always drafts at least one OL a year fairly high in the draft. Millen got his QB beaten up pretty bad for years. Likewise, we haven’t built a core functioning front 7 on defense or OL on offense. Our talent index looks better than it really is because we haven’t developed that part of our game.

If we fix our weaknesses in one year, it’ll be a miracle.

However, I wouldn’t worry too much about the portal. We’re doing fine. We’re not winning the portal — Alabama, USC, Ole Miss and others are doing that — but we’re holding our own. Yes, we lost some great players through the portal, but we’ve brought in a lot of good players too, and on average we’re slightly ahead. That’s not enough to make us win — for us, the difference is in other areas.
I agree with a WHOOOOLE lot of this.

With regard to the portal and our approach, I said in another thread (or maybe this one a while back) that we hired a coach based on his beliefs and abilities to recruit.... but it was just before the entire recruiting process was turned on its ear. I think initially the portal was a stopgap / quick fix for missing pieces and body types. I don’t think it was a long term plan. I think we wanted to recruit, retain and develop but realized that the near future would be ugly until that development happened. Fast forward 3-4 years and we haven't cobbled together a decent season, struggled with injuries, and also lost a few of the pieces we hoped to develop.... we have no choice but to be back in the portal. I am speculating, admittedly... I don’t know if this is a change in philosophy or if we’re there out of necessity. I do know the recruiting game changed just when we felt like we were ready to capitalize on the old system.
That said - we still have the QB that CGC wants to build around. We have some solid contributors returning a year older, a year bigger and stronger, and hopefully the portal is allowing us to fill some holes.
If we can give Sims time to set his feet and keep his jersey clean, our offense could be unrecognizable in a good way. That will help the D tremendously even if we don’t make strides on that side of the ball... but any signs of improvement there will be a huge bonus.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,925
And the defensive line...
And the linebackers...
And the secondary...

Although, if the OL really gelled but the defense didn't come around, we might end up looking like UVA did last year.
Prolly true, but in my view the OL is most crucial because with a decent one you can function but if it's bad, you're in big trouble no matter what else goes right.

If we look like UVA did last year, we'll go 6-6.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,093
I have a serious questions. If all this is true, how have the women's programs at GT been able to recruit and keep such outstanding athletes? These women are no less interested in winning and the classes at Tech are just as hard for them.
I took a stab at this above but had another thought to add (great question, btw). Just a theory but here goes...the girls play because they love their sport and the competition. I taught a girl this year who is going on a soccer scholarship to a perennially top ranked women's program and another who is going to a smaller school for tennis. The first plays club soccer and varsity soccer. I have seen both compete on a few occasions. Their games attract a handful (dozens) of fans at most. I think these athletes play in anonymity for the most part which is healthy. Their identities do not revolve around their sport. In fact, both hardly talk about it unless asked. Again, I think this is healthy.

Conversely I taught at a small rural school for a few years. The kind of town that shuts down on Friday night so everyone can show up for the game. The football players, especially the year they won the state championship, were something of minor celebrities in that town at the age of 15 - 18. Being a football player became a big part of their identity. On game days, the female athletes can shut out the distractions and do their work. It is not as easy for the male athletes. Is it the maturity factor? Or is it the lack of visibility that causes this? I am not sure I know the answer to that question. But in the end I think it is healthier to not self-identify as only an athlete as the females seem to do much better than the boys.
 

orientalnc

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
7,918
Location
Oriental, NC
I took a stab at this above but had another thought to add (great question, btw). Just a theory but here goes...the girls play because they love their sport and the competition. I taught a girl this year who is going on a soccer scholarship to a perennially top ranked women's program and another who is going to a smaller school for tennis. The first plays club soccer and varsity soccer. I have seen both compete on a few occasions. Their games attract a handful (dozens) of fans at most. I think these athletes play in anonymity for the most part which is healthy. Their identities do not revolve around their sport. In fact, both hardly talk about it unless asked. Again, I think this is healthy.

Conversely I taught at a small rural school for a few years. The kind of town that shuts down on Friday night so everyone can show up for the game. The football players, especially the year they won the state championship, were something of minor celebrities in that town at the age of 15 - 18. Being a football player became a big part of their identity. On game days, the female athletes can shut out the distractions and do their work. It is not as easy for the male athletes. Is it the maturity factor? Or is it the lack of visibility that causes this? I am not sure I know the answer to that question. But in the end I think it is healthier to not self-identify as only an athlete as the females seem to do much better than the boys.
My wife taught in the DeKalb school system for 22 years and had a number of D1 athletes in her classes. It is interesting to listen to her talk about the girls on her track team (she was the girls coach) all studying on trips to games and asking her about their math problems. I played varsity basketball in HS and never thought about my classes when in my "gameday" state of mind. I think this just affirms your POV and I am pretty much in agreement. But, how many male athletes are getting NIL deals that are worth more than a few lunches at the Varsity?
 

JacketFan137

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,209
My wife taught in the DeKalb school system for 22 years and had a number of D1 athletes in her classes. It is interesting to listen to her talk about the girls on her track team (she was the girls coach) all studying on trips to games and asking her about their math problems. I played varsity basketball in HS and never thought about my classes when in my "gameday" state of mind. I think this just affirms your POV and I am pretty much in agreement. But, how many male athletes are getting NIL deals that are worth more than a few lunches at the Varsity?
it depends on the school probably. some have bigger group ones than others.

i would imagine women get less but some
may get big ones. paige bueckers for uconn would be one of the highest paid wnba players for example
 

Buzzbomb

Mello Yellow-Jacket
Messages
10,606
it depends on the school probably. some have bigger group ones than others.

i would imagine women get less but some
may get big ones. paige bueckers for uconn would be one of the highest paid wnba players for example
They have slots the first three years in the WNBA. Most have to be in the league into the next contract to draw that $125-150k salary per the 4 month/32 game season.
 

augustabuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,391
Last year, we were 30th in the Team Talent Composite Index (https://collegefootballdata.com/exporter/talent?year=2021). That’s about where we’ve been throughout all of Collins’ tenure, and it’s a good stat for him.

If you just looked at that stat, you’d think we were a fringe top-25 team the last three years.

2022 numbers aren’t in yet, but I think after transfers finish up, it’ll be about the same.

Those numbers don’t tell the entire story. Since Collins started, we’ve had offensive and defensive linemen transfers. At first, I thought they were to fill in until we got a pipeline of high school recruits older and stronger and trained on our defensive scheme. Then, it looked like they’d be a quick fix until we had our recruiting and development in place. Now, it looks like a way of life.

We’re doing a lot of the same thing all over the field now, including at running back.

So, if the supposed talent level is the same, why should we expect a different year this season?

The main unknown is how the coaching staff will do. The defensive coaching staff is mostly turned over, and the offensive staff is heavily turned over. Were they the X-factor? If so, did we bring in the right coaches and replace the right coaches? We’ll find out.

Has player continuity been our problem? We keep bringing in transfers. Sometimes they start and are really impressive, sometimes they’re OK, and sometimes we rarely see them on the field. Often, they’re gone after a year or two. But, the transfer portal is the “new normal”, and we’re going to see more of this. Right now, I wouldn’t count on the kind of player continuity we saw in the 1990’s.

When I look at pro teams, I’ll compare a New England with Detroit under Matt Millen. Millen drafted a lot of skill players. Belichick always drafts at least one OL a year fairly high in the draft. Millen got his QB beaten up pretty bad for years. Likewise, we haven’t built a core functioning front 7 on defense or OL on offense. Our talent index looks better than it really is because we haven’t developed that part of our game.

If we fix our weaknesses in one year, it’ll be a miracle.

However, I wouldn’t worry too much about the portal. We’re doing fine. We’re not winning the portal — Alabama, USC, Ole Miss and others are doing that — but we’re holding our own. Yes, we lost some great players through the portal, but we’ve brought in a lot of good players too, and on average we’re slightly ahead. That’s not enough to make us win — for us, the difference is in other areas.
Last I looked (maybe 2 weeks), 247 had this years class of HS and Transfers ranked 40th, neither bad nor great.
 
Top