Interesting times in college football, especially when it comes to how coaches are building their rosters. One thing that I have always liked about college football vs the NFL is the different approaches used in college where the NFL, everyone basically does the same thing. The differences are very notable in how rosters are currently being built.
The Old Way
One end of the spectrum is Clemson. Swinney has not taken a transfer this year. ARTICLE That is not a new thing, Swinney only took one transfer in 2023 and one in 2022. Players are not afraid to transfer out though as Clemson has lost 35 players to the portal over the last 3 years. An odd thing to what Swinney is doing is that his recruiting classes have not been large to make it up with only 22 in 2024, 26 in 2023 and 21 in 2022.
Taking a look at the Clemson Scholarship Distribution. LINK It’s pretty standard to what folks are use to over the last 20 years. 83 players, mostly underclassmen. 13 SR, 13 JR, 23 SO, 13 RS FR, 21 FR. About what you would expect for most teams, 5 to 40 years ago. But times have changed.
The New Way
The other end of the spectrum is obviously Sanders at Colorado. Sanders brought in 53 transfers last season and an additional 40 players this year. While Sanders has brought In a lot of transfers the outbound transfers are staggering, 71 players transferred out last season and an additional 41 this year for a total of 112 transfers out under Sanders in 2 years. That’s a lot of talent and depth that has left. That’s a lot of churn in general. Sanders has also added 19 HS recruits last season and 8 this season. Many stay for a year or less as more than 60% of the players brought in last season have already left.
Taking a look at the Colorado scholarship distribution. LINK It’s very different than Clemson’s, or what a college football roster use to look like. 80 players after the walk on RB Offerdahl got a scholarship. A little short, but nothing alarming. The real difference is when it’s broken down by years. 27 SR, 21 JR, 11 SO, 11 RS FR, 10 FR. That’s backwards from what we are used to seeing. 48 upperclassmen to 32 underclassmen. They should be long on experience and not have much to develop. Looking at their expected depth chart. LINK Only 2 expected players started their careers at Colorado, true Freshman LT Seaton and SR WLB Woods. This isn’t a group of players that has grown and developed together, but a bunch of rented free agents that many will only be at Colorado for a semester. Maybe the older and more experienced roster can overcome having not played together for multiple years. Some may tire of threads about Sanders, but what he is doing with the roster is new, maybe innovative or maybe lazy, but nonetheless very interesting to college football fans.
In the Middle
Obviously just about everyone else is in the middle as Swinney and Sanders are outliers. Successful teams that have used the transfer portal a lot are Ole Miss and Florida State. Kiffin appears to have 10 of his 22 starters as transfers. LINK Both teams have been successful and been very active in the transfer portal. Ole Miss has taken 20 transfers this year and 23 last season. Kiffin has lost 25 transfers this year and 32 last season. So 43 inbound and 57 outbound. When you include the 20 HS recruits this year and the 17 last year, there has been a lot of churn at Ole Miss. Looking at the scholarship distribution, well I couldn't find one so I counted classes off their roster. 34 SR, 26 JR, 22 SO, 13 RS 14 FR, LINK Pretty upperclassmen heavy with 60 upperclassmen and 49 underclassmen. Some may be walkon/practice players, so take it with a grain of salt. It's noticeably heavier on the experienced side than future development but not quite as much as Colorado.
Norvell at Florida State is a bit tamer at 8 of 22 transfer starters. Norvell brought in 12 transfers last season and lost 22 and brought in 17 this season and lost 22 again. This is approaching more the norm than Ole Miss and Colorado. Norvell's distribution is 60% underclassmen. LINK 18 HS recruits last season and 23 this year round out the FSU roster.
While Norvell and Kiffin rely a lot on transfers as shown in the starters, the bulk of the team is still built through HS recruiting, but Kiffin is closing in on being 50% transfers and 50% HS recruits. I can definitely see the lure of the portal as a roster building tool. Pick up mature, sometimes proven players that can play this season instead of going through Freshman mistakes, getting caught up to the speed of the game and in some cases maturing and building up the body the right way. Building through HS recruits can take years to pay off, but it last longer builds more chemistry amongst players and should be sustainable longer. Look at the rise and fall of NCAA basketball powers as basketball rosters are even more tumultuous. Sustained excellence is often brought by the backups assuming the starter positions after a year or years learning, growing and developing.
Nebraska
Rhule has so far built Nebraska closer to the traditional way. Last year saw 12 transfer in, 28 transfer out and 28 HS recruits. This season was 6 transfer in, 9 transfer out and 30 HS commits. For a scholarship breakdown that looks like LINK 98 total, 17 SR, 16 JR, 17 SO, 49 FR, so 33 upperclassmen and 66 underclassmen and 5 or 6 transfers starting. This seems to be a healthy mix. What i like about Rhule is he is playing to the strengths and culture of Nebraska. Using NIL as more of a retention tool than a Portal recruiting tool. Emphasizing development and growth both individually and together. Growing the team vs buying the team. It plays to what the fanbase generally wants to see and is something that should be sustainable long term. But will it work? I think so, I sure hope so. Nebraska isn't going to win enough bidding wars to build a great team out of the portal, but I'm hoping that there is enough NIL to keep elite players happy. Combine that with a cohesive family like culture and keep developed stars here, versus buying them from the portal. The portal is a great resource, especially for filling holes that will always show up, I think ignoring it like Swinney is a mistake.
Be interesting to see how the different strategies will work in the end. I don't see Sanders' or Kiffin's working long term, just not enough players left over to form a base of a team and I don't see Swinney winning a title only losing players to the portal never gaining anyone. Even with great player it takes time to make a great team, I think that is most evidently shown with the blueblood basketball programs that rely on one and done players. They have a hard time being consistently good as the pieces don't always fit even if they are great individually. I think Rhule's approach could work, I think it is sustainable and I think it fits at Nebraska culturally.
The Old Way
One end of the spectrum is Clemson. Swinney has not taken a transfer this year. ARTICLE That is not a new thing, Swinney only took one transfer in 2023 and one in 2022. Players are not afraid to transfer out though as Clemson has lost 35 players to the portal over the last 3 years. An odd thing to what Swinney is doing is that his recruiting classes have not been large to make it up with only 22 in 2024, 26 in 2023 and 21 in 2022.
Taking a look at the Clemson Scholarship Distribution. LINK It’s pretty standard to what folks are use to over the last 20 years. 83 players, mostly underclassmen. 13 SR, 13 JR, 23 SO, 13 RS FR, 21 FR. About what you would expect for most teams, 5 to 40 years ago. But times have changed.
The New Way
The other end of the spectrum is obviously Sanders at Colorado. Sanders brought in 53 transfers last season and an additional 40 players this year. While Sanders has brought In a lot of transfers the outbound transfers are staggering, 71 players transferred out last season and an additional 41 this year for a total of 112 transfers out under Sanders in 2 years. That’s a lot of talent and depth that has left. That’s a lot of churn in general. Sanders has also added 19 HS recruits last season and 8 this season. Many stay for a year or less as more than 60% of the players brought in last season have already left.
Taking a look at the Colorado scholarship distribution. LINK It’s very different than Clemson’s, or what a college football roster use to look like. 80 players after the walk on RB Offerdahl got a scholarship. A little short, but nothing alarming. The real difference is when it’s broken down by years. 27 SR, 21 JR, 11 SO, 11 RS FR, 10 FR. That’s backwards from what we are used to seeing. 48 upperclassmen to 32 underclassmen. They should be long on experience and not have much to develop. Looking at their expected depth chart. LINK Only 2 expected players started their careers at Colorado, true Freshman LT Seaton and SR WLB Woods. This isn’t a group of players that has grown and developed together, but a bunch of rented free agents that many will only be at Colorado for a semester. Maybe the older and more experienced roster can overcome having not played together for multiple years. Some may tire of threads about Sanders, but what he is doing with the roster is new, maybe innovative or maybe lazy, but nonetheless very interesting to college football fans.
In the Middle
Obviously just about everyone else is in the middle as Swinney and Sanders are outliers. Successful teams that have used the transfer portal a lot are Ole Miss and Florida State. Kiffin appears to have 10 of his 22 starters as transfers. LINK Both teams have been successful and been very active in the transfer portal. Ole Miss has taken 20 transfers this year and 23 last season. Kiffin has lost 25 transfers this year and 32 last season. So 43 inbound and 57 outbound. When you include the 20 HS recruits this year and the 17 last year, there has been a lot of churn at Ole Miss. Looking at the scholarship distribution, well I couldn't find one so I counted classes off their roster. 34 SR, 26 JR, 22 SO, 13 RS 14 FR, LINK Pretty upperclassmen heavy with 60 upperclassmen and 49 underclassmen. Some may be walkon/practice players, so take it with a grain of salt. It's noticeably heavier on the experienced side than future development but not quite as much as Colorado.
Norvell at Florida State is a bit tamer at 8 of 22 transfer starters. Norvell brought in 12 transfers last season and lost 22 and brought in 17 this season and lost 22 again. This is approaching more the norm than Ole Miss and Colorado. Norvell's distribution is 60% underclassmen. LINK 18 HS recruits last season and 23 this year round out the FSU roster.
While Norvell and Kiffin rely a lot on transfers as shown in the starters, the bulk of the team is still built through HS recruiting, but Kiffin is closing in on being 50% transfers and 50% HS recruits. I can definitely see the lure of the portal as a roster building tool. Pick up mature, sometimes proven players that can play this season instead of going through Freshman mistakes, getting caught up to the speed of the game and in some cases maturing and building up the body the right way. Building through HS recruits can take years to pay off, but it last longer builds more chemistry amongst players and should be sustainable longer. Look at the rise and fall of NCAA basketball powers as basketball rosters are even more tumultuous. Sustained excellence is often brought by the backups assuming the starter positions after a year or years learning, growing and developing.
Nebraska
Rhule has so far built Nebraska closer to the traditional way. Last year saw 12 transfer in, 28 transfer out and 28 HS recruits. This season was 6 transfer in, 9 transfer out and 30 HS commits. For a scholarship breakdown that looks like LINK 98 total, 17 SR, 16 JR, 17 SO, 49 FR, so 33 upperclassmen and 66 underclassmen and 5 or 6 transfers starting. This seems to be a healthy mix. What i like about Rhule is he is playing to the strengths and culture of Nebraska. Using NIL as more of a retention tool than a Portal recruiting tool. Emphasizing development and growth both individually and together. Growing the team vs buying the team. It plays to what the fanbase generally wants to see and is something that should be sustainable long term. But will it work? I think so, I sure hope so. Nebraska isn't going to win enough bidding wars to build a great team out of the portal, but I'm hoping that there is enough NIL to keep elite players happy. Combine that with a cohesive family like culture and keep developed stars here, versus buying them from the portal. The portal is a great resource, especially for filling holes that will always show up, I think ignoring it like Swinney is a mistake.
Be interesting to see how the different strategies will work in the end. I don't see Sanders' or Kiffin's working long term, just not enough players left over to form a base of a team and I don't see Swinney winning a title only losing players to the portal never gaining anyone. Even with great player it takes time to make a great team, I think that is most evidently shown with the blueblood basketball programs that rely on one and done players. They have a hard time being consistently good as the pieces don't always fit even if they are great individually. I think Rhule's approach could work, I think it is sustainable and I think it fits at Nebraska culturally.
