Just a random thought...it's interesting to consider how profound an impact the transfer portal now has on the QB position...especially if you're a top program that can attract top talent, your guy on the bench is probably going to look for a chance to start elsewhere, so the talent deficit between a QB1 and the guy who is eventually QB2 is going to grow. Obviously this is a concern for any position on the field, but none more impactful than QB. Was just thinking about how this really changes everything from recruiting strategy to how you get reps to your backups and what your Plan B looks like if your starter goes down. The new normal.
Portal impact on QB position
- Thread starter Sheffielder
- Start date
It is interesting. It's not even a situation anymore where you wait your turn until the senior guy graduates, as we have freshman QBs winning Heismans these days. If you're not the man after your first year at some of these places, you're likely gone. That will be interesting to watch.
Penn State ran into that problem in spades this year and it arguably cost them the Iowa game. When Clifford got hurt there was literally nobody else on the roster left but a clearly unprepared true Fr, everybody else had left.
I think this is just going to have to became a strategic aspect of the game...it will be interesting to see how it evolves. For example, do we start seeing "slash" players who are starters or in the two-deep for other positions (and realistically, how practical is that?) - or do OCs develop specific, limited "emergency" packages for their QB2s knowing their limitations? Or do coaches get sick of it and create specific rules for QB transfers?
I saw a tweet from a Coach at East St Louis I believe and it basically said that the transfer portal is destroying High School recruiting. I can see that being especially true at the QB situation where you can get an experienced guy from the portal instead of someone where you may need to develop. Also a pretty good article on that topic.
Honestly, I think QB development is the smart play for a college program, rather than recruiting two "ready-made" QBs who think the world of their skills and won't wait.
It is part of the reason I am hopeful for Lausch. I think he got viewed as a baseball player so the offers didn’t come in. He didn’t do a full camp circuit so “he isn’t committed to football” and the offers don’t roll in because there are other ways to get a QB. He’s not going to leave for instant playing time so he can develop and play here.
Ohio State is bleeding QBs into the portal.
I get it, if you are a draftable (?) QB, you want to get your 3 years in and be done, not redshirt and then sit on the bench for a year or 3
If not for the fact the schools fire you before the developed product can win games for you.
Imagine if Cardale had done this? Almost definitely would have cost Ohio State their last national championship.
We might see more athlete-type QBs who can play a slash and run the wildcat or the option in the red zone being recruited. Maybe, if you get an arm one year, the next year you focus on a running QB..
I think you'll just a premium on
1. 4 and 5 star Fr and RS Fr. Those guys will more likely be willing to sit for a year or two, but not more. Your backup is going to be young at top programs.
2. Just paying guys a lot, including maybe even paying backup QBs to come in, ie, OSU has their star in Straub, has a true FR who is willing to sit for one year, and brings in a grad transfer G5 kid who has already played a lot of football and is willing to sit on the bench for $150k as a veteran backup. Really, I think this is one option for the elite teams, who are going to be the one most impacted by this since they're the ones recruiting and sitting a never ending chain of 5 star QBs.
3. 2-3 star guys who will be somewhat more willing to sit around at P5 programs. There won't be the big money at smaller programs, so if you're not a mega stud who can start anywhere in the P5, it may still make sense to hang out where you're at and make a decision before your last two years of eligibility or so. Being a development guy at a middling P5 school will likely be better paying than starting in the FCS. This is more likely the class of your middle tier schools like NU sit.
The fourth option is just teams don't have backups and suck when their starters get hurt... which, let's be honest, everybody but the elite teams suffer from anyway.
This last point is interesting. Would love to see the year-over-year metrics on a program like NU after a "down" year and how much it impacts STH sales, donations, licensing/royalties, etc. In my head I'm thinking it's probably a blip for NU, but a more significant hit to "marquee" programs. The ROI might be there to spend whatever it takes through whatever means to ensure the cupboard is well stocked, and NIL makes that more possible than it was five years ago.
Probably depends on fan culture. In Minnesota, the fans all stop paying attention if the Gophers lose, like a game. Many years of losing has the fan base on hibernation mode. At places like Tennesee, losing seems to make the boosters go nuts and willing open up their checkbooks yet again in mostly vain hopes of taking down Alabama.
In the short to medium term, creativity, willingness to spend cash, and aggression in embracing the new system are what I think will give schools an advantage from NIL. Just look at Jacksonville State...