I see a lot of our four star commits and players leaving PSU and mostly three star (ratings earned in the Big 12) coming in to play at PSU. What is the take on how we fare as a team in the BIG next year with the way the portal is playing out?
Are we losing the portal contest?
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
First post. 
OBVIOUSLY.
, “we” will suck balls next season.
OBVIOUSLY.
, “we” will suck balls next season.We won't know until we see the results in the fall. Don't focus on the stars.
That team of 4 stars just struggled to go 7-6.
Last edited:
Psssst, there isn't a trophy for that contest. Does On3 use AI to promote stupid posts now for hits?
A proven 3 star college player is better than a bench warming diva 4 star- Cig (paraphrased)
I think focusing on the stars is better than holding out hope Campbell is the next Cignetti.
The good news is that we did pick up some 4* talent in positions of need:
QB Becht, TE Brahmer, WR Sowell, LBs Bresnia & Bacon, and DB Neal. That might be good enough for PSU to finish 9-3 which isn't horrible. I wish the OL & DL was stronger.
The bad news is that Campbell/Smith/Kraft weren't able to convince top existing talent to remain at PSU.
Grunk, Coleman, Reynolds, Campbell, Mack, Washington, Gilliam, Fisher, Harris, etc. not to mention losing most of the 2026 class. It's pretty clear that a lot of existing players didn't want to be at PSU. The rest of the portal transfers are mostly low/mid 3* kids which doesn't bode well for the future. I think Campbell is going to have to win some big games before he'll be able to start attracting top rated talent again.
Of course you get some that perform above their rankings. Are you saying that players like Parsons, Carter, DDS, etc were flukes or that OSU isn't in a stronger position with players like Jeremiah Smith and Caleb Downs?
It's cute you still think it's about convincing the VERY TOP talent instead of outbidding for it. It's almost as if you're stuck in a different era still.
Last edited:
Pretty simple - the star system is not the end all be all. Prime example, Indiana this year, how many stars are those kids? Finally, Indiana beat 5 star teams like Ohio State, Alabama & Oregon this year.
When you're dealing with transfers, who gives a damn about what their meaningless star rating was coming out of high school when they probably accumulated a bunch of inflated stats against overmatched competition? What you should give a damn about is how those transfers have performed against legitimate college competition. I trust that the coaching staff wouldn't be bringing in these transfers if they didn't feel they could contribute against Big 10 competition.
Have you read all the other posts on the site or are you trolling.
To think you were perfect 0-0 posts. Now this. Dang.
To think you were perfect 0-0 posts. Now this. Dang.
DDS had all the talent in the world and played a great bowl game but the last two seasons he took a ton of snaps off. I’d rather have a 3 star (i.e. McPherson) who has a high motor and plays every single down than a 5 star who only tries when he thinks he can improve his stats.
Some 5 stars would be great, but stars just measure talent not effort or attitude.
When it comes to the portal stars mean nothing; we lost two former five star OLs to much, much lesser schools. Others were recruited by a different coach and maybe want to play for him, others are chasing money. I think we're doing better than expected given no one has seen Campbell do anything at PSU. OSU is losing players too. It is what it is.
Paul seemed to have a long NFL career, so I guess the 3 star thing worked out for him. You can Google it.
The original OP was worried / trolling about losing 4 stars and bringing in lesser talent. In today's college football, portal evaluation, $$ & development is much more important than some high school star assignment. Sadly, it is what it is anymore.
For every Micah Parsons there is a Shane Simmons. And I think at one point our WR room was 9 4* players deep and you saw what that got us; same on the OL. Yes, bigger stars are more desirable when looking at HS players, but once someone has college tape, that's what matters. Sort of like a degree from Harvard will get you in better doors than a degree from Kentucky, but once you have work experience, that's what matters.
Campbell has recruited some really intriguing, short and long term additions to the team thus far. Will only get better once we see his PSU team on the field IMO.
PSU 2005: 11-1 and Final #3 ranking. Paul P.: 2005 and 2006 Bednarik Award winner and 2005 Butkus Award winner.
Recruiting is now like building your team with minor league prospects. As a Reds fan (and I know there are many Pirates fan in here who know this as well) I’ve seen how that can go. For every one you hit on there are a few that don’t amount to anything and a couple that amount to something less than what you had hoped for. But this ridiculous NIL era allows you to get proven players. Maybe the guys you add don’t have the potential to be All-American at their position, but they can fill a position of need with proven ability. It’s a really weird time to be a college football fan. Or I guess I should say a fan of a college football team.
Even with all this, I still believe Penn State will be better off with Campbell as the head coach than they would be with the dead horse.
1. Fisher was hardly ever healthy; Harris was benched for looking like a turnstile, Washington fell down or missed assignments more often than he made plays, Reynolds could still not block in year two and started to drop balls, Coleman wanted much more money even though he was awful in run support, Campbell and Gilliam are players I would like to have stay but Campbell was overvaluing himself financially and Gilliam would have to compete with the new look DT preferred by Lynn. I wish them all the best, but the replacements are upgrades to me,
2, Portal players are not low/mid 3*, All but 5 are over 84, with the majority between 87 and 90. There is little daylight in terms of potential between these recruits and what Penn State lost. So, drop with the lazy narrative that how Campbell identifies, develops, and signs talent spell gloom and doom for PSU football. With the schedule what it is the floor is 8 and 4; if things gel fast you are looking at 9 and 3 and better.
I believe that the 2026 team will radically outperform the 25 squad with a 56% blue chip ratio. They will play better as a team and will be far more disciplined. They will know what their role is, will play hard from whistle to whistle and not get deflated like prom queens when they get punched in the mouth, Hopefully they will also be able to stop the run rather than allow teams not to throw a single forward pass and march up and down the field.
My questions lie with staffing. I am not sure about Mouser being able to perform at this level, though Campbell being a seasoned play caller will offset a lot. The RB coach for me is a huge question mark and not sure of his appeal. On the defense only the edge rusher coach is a bit underwhelming. Overall, its a good group
Last edited:
Not trolling, just looking fo other opinions. I’m not naive, I just don’t live in this portal... Mr. Heisman.
Of course they did.
They also won 34 games over the prior 3 years (while the "three stars" at ISU won 22 in the Big 12)
If that were the case - and it is certainly a big factor - PSU, with all the $ they have to spend, should be at a large advantage to clean up with those guys. Right?
Indiana's starters had the lowest average star rating of any P4 Playoff Team.... - how are they doing?
My guess is that Ole Miss' star rating was far below UGA's, yet they beat them and made the Final 4.
1. What were the resources available to to the respective staffs? Surely if school x has 30m to spend on a roster and the other has limited resources the ability to compare one to the other is reduced.
2. What is the recruit density and access between the two schools
Short version. Given the respective discrepancies in resources, financial support, recruit access, it is easy to argue that ISU's 22 wins are far more impressive than the 34 of PSU under Franklin.
I'ts gonna be a different type of team for sure and I am excited about that while giving Franklin his flowers for being successful with his own type of roster/players. This team is going to have serious size, gonna take shots down the field. I think these young coaches are highly competitive and will demand discipline and accountability. These transfers from ISU seem to have played a ton of ball and are mature players, yes limited success last year in the Big 12 is a concern I guess. If like me you think a lot of these teams are pretty equal, I'm talking the top 5-6 teams in the big 10(with the exception of Indiana who is playing at a different level), the question is do these guys make the one play at the right time we seemingly never could have against the big boys during Franklin's tenure....I'd like to think this new staff and roster will be equipped to do so. With our schedule next year, I see 9 wins as the most likely scenario with 8 being good enough in year one and 10 being a real launchpad to this new staff moving into 2027.
Ole Miss 40% blue chip ratio
Indiana 8% blue chip ratio
Miami 55% blue chip ratio
Oregon 67%
Indiana versus Miami national championship. What club will you take; the one with e 8% or the 55% blue chip ratio? To those thinking that Indiana is unique; they are not unique, They are just the new model of roster construction after NIL. There are no singularities in the universe. Cignetti was first, many will follow.
Georgia 784% (lost)
Alabama 73% belt to *** by Indiana
Ohio State 73% dominated by Miami
LSU 71% no playoffs
Texas 65 no playoffs a
People need to stop star gazing. Look at the tape and the actual numbers and why they are assigned. Why is it an 88 versus a 92? Why was an 88 assigned versus a 90+ and what relevance does it have for on field production.
Last edited:
Which guys and which schools are they outbidding them for? It's not if that were the case, that is the case and what is going on. You can dump all of your money into 3-4 guys, make a splash, not have depth in more spots and then also create a nice cancer in the locker room too. You can try and make every guy happy on your roster and overpay for depth roles. Unlike you Dunning Kruger I understand it's not just black and white, I'm not the end all expert nor do I pretend to be. There is much more to it than I will even pretend to know, but I do know that certain schools do pay more and have shown it.