***Official portal tracker thread***
- Thread starter demoncore1031
- Start date
Those 14 high school players and 4 juco transfers don't deserve spots? What makes someone who is already on a a roster more deserving of a roster spot than someone who isn't on a roster?
That’s not what Shadow is saying. He’s showing it’s not a zero-sum game, that for every portal entree there is not another spot available because of incoming freshmen and JUCOs
I meant a zero sum game for student athletes as a whole. Not for any individual. For every student athlete who misses out on an FBS opportunity due to the portal, some other student athlete gets an FBS opportunity. If we want to lament the athletes who lose a spot, why don't we celebrate those who get a shot?
I wasn't saying anyone here was doing this. It's mostly talking heads on the radio who never point out that aspect.
Kind of. We're in the middle of the rosters being trimmed to 105 right now too however. Teams were allowed to designated specific guys as exemptions to avoid players directly being cut due to roster limits.
Right now though, once those guys who were designated exemptions are gone, that roster spot is gone. Those guys primarily were walk-ons, but if they transfer down a level in order to play then that's a spot that doesn't get to be back filled.
So if you had 120 guys on the roster last year, 15 had to be exempt guys to comply. If 5 of them transferred or graduated, now you have 10 exempt guys and your max is 115 guys. So in general FBS roster spots are going down and exempt players transferring out of a program would directly remove a roster spot from being available to anyone.
Sure, because of the roster limit changes, not due to the transfer portal. Bad transfer portal decisions might cost individual players an opportunity, but every bad decision gives another athlete a chance they wouldn't have otherwise had. This a zero sum situation.
All you have to do is find out the experts on each site and where they went to school. And say “experts” sarcastically.
This is true. But there are high school players now having to go to a lower level than they would have previously because of the transfer portal and other kids getting 6th and 7th years of eligibility (which is probably the bigger problem of the two).
That may not seem like a big deal, but that could mean a kid doesn’t get a scholarship or only a partial scholarship compared to in the past they would have had a full ride. L
This is a bigger deal as you move down to the Olympic sports moreso than football/basketball.
But again, if there is a kid that doesn't get a scholarship or only a partial scholarship, that just means that another kid does get a full scholarship that didn't in the past. The number of scholarships being offered per sport has not be reduced.
Unless the transfer portal is causing schools to shut down Olympic sports, it is NOT reducing the number of people who get scholarships to play college sports.
To be fair, I skipped past your eligibility thing, but thats affecting dozens of people, not hundreds. And that still means those 6th and 7th year players are still getting a scholarship.
These last few pages are a “zero-sum” discussion
Carson Brown to Hawaii.
Honestly good for him. Not gonna pull millions in the portal. Why not go play some ball in some nice weather. They sling the ball around out there. Wish him the best.
Honestly good for him. Not gonna pull millions in the portal. Why not go play some ball in some nice weather. They sling the ball around out there. Wish him the best.
Did Campbell and staff have specify up to 15 (120-105) specific players exempted?
Or were all 35 non-scholarship players (120-85) from the 2024 roster and still on 2025 Cyclone roster potentially exempted from 105 roster limit?
Probably matters less now for ISU with the coaching change. Unless CJR & staff are still looking hard at PWO's.
Hasn't it always been allowed to NAIL cheerleaders?It is allowed to NIL cheerleaders? WOW!
So Rogers says the roster is complete now
