I heard Phil Steele report the average number per school carrying transfers was somewhere in the teens (I don’t remember the exact number, but it wasn’t in the 20’s). If that is correct, then 27 (and probably over 30 by spring) would be on the high side. Sure Ohio went to it more this year as mentioned and explained above. The reason I counted up the numbers was based on some comments on this board about how Ohio needed to hit the portal more, which got me wondering how many were already brought in. I was very surprised to see almost 30. While it’s not the number that Colorado brought in (the poster school for the portal), it’s still high volume (one-third of the roster). And with a higher volume coming in, it often leads to a higher volume going out. Some people need to keep in mind, when you use the portal to bring guys in, they aren’t coming to stand on the sidelines. They want to play and often end up in front of recruited freshmen who came here on a recruiting pitch. When transfers are brought in and inserted in front of guys who have been here 2-3 years, you can’t fault those kids for leaving and looking for an opportunity elsewhere. That’s part of the risk of dipping hard into the portal. When a coach sits down in the living room with a high school recruit and his family with a vision and sells them on it, it’s often met with a bitter resistance when they’ve been on campus 2-3 years are in line to finally get that playing time or spot behind the guy they were groomed by, and then a guy comes in from another school for a rental year gets the spot. This isn’t part of that sales pitch. You can see the friction this may and often does cause. It’s not much different when things like this happen in the workplace. People often don’t respond to it well. We hear all the time that “this is college football now” when talking about the portal, but they often don’t look at some of the unintended consequences like this when discussing it. And this is what high school coaches and recruits have been grappling with for the last several years. It’s why you’re going to see another wave of portal entries in the next portal window nation wide. This is the wrinkle of the portal some people don’t want to acknowledge, but it’s just as much a part of college football now as the portal is itself. The portal can be helpful, but also harmful, depending how it’s used. Yes it’s a huge part of college athletics now. But it can also be a slippery slope to navigate as well.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but I do have a couple of questions. First, are the Phil Steele numbers from this year, or last? I suspect last, in which case they are out of date. Second, are the numbers from all FBS, or just G5? I suspect that the numbers are low at the very top of P5, and increase as you move lower.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the whole recruiting system is still screwed up from Covid. There are players playing who would normally be gone, which leaves less scholarships to give to Freshmen. Even with the portal causing players to move from place to place, the players still will have a scholarship somewhere, and in the end, that leaves less for Freshmen. It won't be until about 2026 that everything is back to normal.

I personally think that Ohio is taking a reasonable approach here. They took about 6 more Freshmen than the players they lost to eligibility being expired, and they will end up taking about 6 less players from the portal than they lose to it. They currently stand at -7, so I'm expecting only maybe 1 more addition from the portal, plus additions in the Spring to replace any late portal departures. If Ohio ends up losing 12-14 players a year to the portal, which is average for the MAC, and ends up taking perhaps 8-9 players a year back from the portal, some of which have multiple years, Ohio will probably have in the low 20s for transfers on the roster, and I think that will be a normal number.

Hope Coach Albin looks at "Bam Bam" Norman,a senior RB/LB who is one of the fastest RBs in Ohio and took Springfield Wildcats to the D1 state finals the last 3 Years. He is durable playing both ways and is a good student.I sent an email to Coach Albin asking him to look at his highlights from the playoffs. No response yet. One of his coaches suggested I reach out to OU.

Looking at the portal ins and outs, it seems clear that the portal will weaken Ohio considerably this year. They lost starters at 6 positions (7 if you count LS), QB, RB, WR, LG, LB, and TE. From the portal, I expect they will gain starters from about 2 positions, though it may be more. At the least, I expect them to have a starter at Safety and LG from the portal (plus LS, if you count that). There are other positions where transfers could also start, however, including QB, WR, LB, and CB. We shall see, come Fall.

Note that the drop off doesn't have to be substantial. It will be much like a rebuilding year.

Keep in mind that most of the starters we're losing are from the offensive side of the ball. We had 87th ranked scoring offense in D1 football last year. I understand Rourke is very talented and that we lost some good players but I wouldn't assume our offense will be worse next year.

We have some talented young skill position players and a few QB's with potential. If our defense can stay halfway decent, I'd expect Ohio to be a bowl team competing near the top of the conference again. Don't expect another 10-win season though. That seems unrealistic with who we're losing.

I'm a critical optimist, I picked us to win 10 games last season, but every week I was critical. I don't think we're gonna be as good as we have been, that would be difficult - BUT the offense was horrible. So there is such drastic room for improvement, I think we might surprise some folks. Which is hard to do when you win 10 games.

The defense will be hard to replicate. Defense was HISTORIC. Our best ever? Defense won 10 games. We won't be holding teams to under 250 yards each week, maybe ever again.

The offense struggled all year. So from that aspect, I think we have a lot of work we can do offensively - everyone seemed too afraid to ask why the offense was so bad this year, so maybe they drank their own kool-aid a bit? I dont know, but two years ago playing fast and loose we saw how good we can be and I think next season will hopefully be similar to that - far less rigid, more open playbook, playing more fast and loose. I have a lot of faith in Navarro, and I love his legs. Will be interesting to see how/where Gundy fits in with Winters being a big strong guy who has been in the program for two full springs.

RHJ is as good as advertised. Get him 25 touches per game by any means necessary. If he has a big year - we have a big year. The key will be having a capable back-up or two so we can have someone run between the tackles and get those short yards, to keep RHJ from getting battered too much.

Ohio's offense seems to work much, much better when the QB is a threat to run the ball. The fact that Navarro is a threat to keep the ball on options puts opposing safeties in an uncomfortable position. Should they charge up for run support, or drop back in coverage? We saw that on the TD pass to Hunt in the bowl, where Navarro faked a run, then the safeties charged up, leaving Hunt uncovered. Rourke was clearly a much better passer, but Navarro adds a different dimension.

We had the 87th ranked offense last year and lost six players to P5 conferences. I can't see that leading to improvement unless a couple of new players turn into significant upgrades. Were Cross/Foster/Kaczmarek holding the team back? As much as some people think that Rourke was not the right fit for the offensive plan, he was second-team All-MAC. The only possible upgrade I see right now is Hunt. You could include Jones returning, but the team is losing Wiglusz, so it is a bit of a wash. Parker may be better suited to the offense, but the likelihood of him being first or second-team all-conference is probably not high.

I’d rather be the underdog.

We seem to play better when faced with adversity.

We lost seven or eight guys to the P5 - just on offense - and added an OL from Idaho. I hardly think we're crushing it in the portal.

LC- I would not be surprised if the Bobcats added a portal and or JC RB sometime later this spring.

Bobcats also offered JUCO RB Tyrei Washington from City College of San Francisco (same college as newly signed WR Max Rodarte) but he ended up signing with Temple.

https://twitter.com/Tyrei10/status/1735105454550786152

Activity in the portal seems to have slowed to a crawl. In the last week or so, one Akron player found a new home, while Ohio, EMU, and Kent each added a player, plus Torrie Cox decided to return to Ohio. Considering that there are 87 MAC players who are still in the portal, it seems unlikely that all of them will be able to find a new home. From Ohio, players still deciding on their next team are: Tristan Cox, Allison, Kitrell, Quinn, Rhone, Burton, B. Johnson, Holloway, and Wilburn.

The other thing I have noticed is that early on, there was lot activity of players moving up, especially players who were expected to be targeted with NIL money. As we get later into the process, it seems that there are no longer many players moving up, and most of the activity is players moving down. The whole process continues to remind me of a game of musical chairs. As a result, I expect to see a surge of activity of players moving sideways or down. Some players no doubt hoped to move up, but haven't gotten an offer, and they may decide to accept some offer they do have, even if it is sideways or down.

Tracking total changes via the portal for MAC teams:
EMU 11 Out, 14 In, Net +3
Ball St 10 Out, 8 In, Net -2
Toledo 8 Out, 5 In, Net -3
BG 12 Out, 8 In, Net -4
Buff 12 Out, 8 In, Net -4
Kent 16 Out, 12 In, Net -4
Miami 8 Out, 3 In, Net -5
Ohio 18 Out, 12 In, Net -6
CMU 11 Out, 5 In , Net -6
NIU 14 Out, 7 In, Net -7
Akron 20 Out, 10 In, Net -10
WMU 20 Out, 8 In, Net -12