This type of information is essentially useless now because of the transfer portal. Five years ago a stat like this or information on starters and lettermen lost/returning carried weight. Now, it means almost nothing. You can lose every bit of production nowadays and simply go out and literally replace that lost production with guys who were productive elsewhere that you brought in as replacements. Sure there is an element of familiarity and continuity that is impacted, but so is the element of replacing what you lost with an even better replacement.

Hard to build a program this way, but it's the hand college football - especially at this level - has been dealt.

Hopefully we can spin some small positives in this hellscape. Stability within the building from Albin, Scott, Brian, Spense. New blood from big programs who have seen how things can / should be run.

I think that finding FCS and DII gems will be important as well.

The thing is, that you have to keep in mind exactly what "returning production" is. There are a variety of possible situations that can lead to different ways to interpret it:
1. Team was good, has lots of returning production - This team will probably be good, at least as good as the prior year
2. Team was bad, has lots of returning production - This team will probably be as good as the prior year, maybe better, but they may still be bad.
3. Team was bad, has low returning production - Team probably will probably not be good as the players behind the prior year starters are probably not good
4. Team was good, has low returning production - This has the least predictive value. Team quality is unknown. The players will be all new. They might be nearly as good as the prior year starters, or there might be a big drop off.

Applying this to the current situation, Miami and Ohio were fairly close last year. Miami was the winner, but if they had played 10 times, Ohio might have won four. Miami was good and has a tremendous amount of returning production, so they will no doubt be good again. Ohio was good, but has low returning production, so they are an unknown. They could have a big drop off, or, it's possible that at some positions, the backups were nearly as good as the starters, and that, as they become starters, they will improve, and be just as good or better. Certainly, if you had to make a pick at this time, you'd have to go with Miami, but we'll have to see how it goes. I'm not writing off the 2024 Bobcats. I happen to think they will be pretty good. I have faith in the Ohio staff to get them prepared, and the fact that they will likely be picked to finish 4th or 5th in the MAC should fire them up to outperform expectations.

The one thing I do predict is that if the Bobcats do win 8-10 games this fall, few here on BA will be complaining about the coaches earning an automatic extension. ;)

I could see Ohio losing to Miami in Oxford but getting revenge in Detroit.

Now that the first round of the portal is over, and national Signing Day has come and gone, it's worth pointing out that Ohio's coaches obviously expected to lose a lot of players into the portal. The number of Freshmen signed in December was significantly higher than the number of players who used up their eligibility. By my count, Ohio lost 19 players to the portal, but only took one Juco and 10 players from the portal (and that assumes that Tyrus arrives in the Fall), a net loss of 8 experienced players, made up for by signing 8 additional Freshmen, Freshmen that were signed before the portal opened. Ohio sent the message that they will continue to focus on recruiting Freshmen, and developing them.