Gophers in the portal

SonjayLarrick

Active member
Joined
Aug 9, 2021
Messages
254
Reaction score
157
Points
43
Clark could’ve had two years after Morgan leaves correct? Maybe he thought Athan passed him. Used to be pretty common for QBs to wait til they were juniors or seniors to get a shot to start. Now many want to start early so they can skip their junior and senior years.
Used to be is the key phrase. It used to be guys didn't have a choice. Now they do. The rules have changed so the expectations have changed. Looks like Clark was willing to wait until his junior (3rd) year but Morgan getting a free year changed the plans.
 

tjgopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,888
Reaction score
612
Points
113
No, they are pretty quiet

Athan was the scout team quarterback all fall. Same thing Tanner was when he was a true freshman. I would assume Knuth will be the scout team guy in 2022. It'll be fun to see how the two develop.
 

btowngopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
5,355
Reaction score
1,733
Points
113
Used to be is the key phrase. It used to be guys didn't have a choice. Now they do. The rules have changed so the expectations have changed. Looks like Clark was willing to wait until his junior (3rd) year but Morgan getting a free year changed the plans.
They think they have a choice, but if you aren’t a blue chipper you need to bide your time at the FBS level. Clark also got a free year, but oh well. I’m fine with them leaving. You must not be it seems?
 

SonjayLarrick

Active member
Joined
Aug 9, 2021
Messages
254
Reaction score
157
Points
43
They think they have a choice, but if you aren’t a blue chipper you need to bide your time at the FBS level. Clark also got a free year, but oh well. I’m fine with them leaving. You must not be it seems?
I'll say it again, the game has changed and it will continue to evolve. I'm perfectly fine with all the transfers. You, on the other hand seem to be the one contradicting yourself. You're fine if they leave but only if they are blue chippers. You state players need to bide their time but is staying for 3 and 4 years not biding enough time in your book?

I'm probably in the minority but I'm a fan of the portal.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
6,263
Points
113
I'll say it again, the game has changed and it will continue to evolve. I'm perfectly fine with all the transfers. You, on the other hand seem to be the one contradicting yourself. You're fine if they leave but only if they are blue chippers. You state players need to bide their time but is staying for 3 and 4 years not biding enough time in your book?

I'm probably in the minority but I'm a fan of the portal.
I think he is just noting the reality that a lot of the players seem to be making their situations worse.

To me, it reminds me a lot of when the NBA first started letting HSers and now FR enter the draft. I was for it and there were tons of examples of players who were super ready. There were also a ton of examples of people making a move way before they should have. It's human nature that the grass is always greener and to be impatient and I think there will be some hard lessons to learn for some of these guys who hit the portal. I think Burns finds a spot (so I'm not talking specifically about him).
 


btowngopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
5,355
Reaction score
1,733
Points
113
I'll say it again, the game has changed and it will continue to evolve. I'm perfectly fine with all the transfers. You, on the other hand seem to be the one contradicting yourself. You're fine if they leave but only if they are blue chippers. You state players need to bide their time but is staying for 3 and 4 years not biding enough time in your book?

I'm probably in the minority but I'm a fan of the portal.
I’m fine with the transfers too. I just don’t agree that they have a choice now to improve their situation. What they have is a choice to take a huge gamble that possibly improves their situation.
 

Pete smith

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
1,158
Reaction score
290
Points
83
Hey GH administrators, how about a poll on whether you/we favor the transfer portal?
 

SonjayLarrick

Active member
Joined
Aug 9, 2021
Messages
254
Reaction score
157
Points
43
I’m fine with the transfers too. I just don’t agree that they have a choice now to improve their situation. What they have is a choice to take a huge gamble that possibly improves their situation.
Wouldn't it depend on how they (the players and their families) perceive their situation on whether it improves or not? Have you ever made big decisions in your life that didn't come with risks?
 
Last edited:

btowngopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
5,355
Reaction score
1,733
Points
113
Wouldn't it depend on how they (the players and their families) perceive their situation on whether it improves or not? Have you ever made big decisions in your life that didn't come with risks?
Sure, we are in agreement on all that. The new transfer rules do give the players more options, I'm just saying that it's not easy for players to improve their situation simply by entering the portal. They only get to choose from the options that end up presenting themselves after the fact. Unfortunately for most of the players that leave the gophers, those options are typically going to be fewer than what they had coming out of high school. Sometimes their won't be any options as seen by all the players that don't sign elsewhere, which is like 2/3rds of the portal entries if I remember the numbers correctly. I'm not for or against the portal and the free transfer year. I'm just pointing out the risk, and it's kind of scary when you see guys enter and you can predict at a pretty good rate which ones will get offers and which ones won't.
 



btowngopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
5,355
Reaction score
1,733
Points
113
I will say I am a bit worried about the number of players transferring out. It could really hurt depth and make the team very susceptible to injuries derailing certain position groups. It might not show this coming year, but my gut reaction is that this isn't sustainable to have 3 or 4 players transferring out for every player transferring in.
 

FullBanana

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2019
Messages
795
Reaction score
909
Points
93
I will say I am a bit worried about the number of players transferring out. It could really hurt depth and make the team very susceptible to injuries derailing certain position groups. It might not show this coming year, but my gut reaction is that this isn't sustainable to have 3 or 4 players transferring out for every player transferring in.
I have a feeling the next few years are going to be like this and then it will recede to a norm. I think the extra covid year is having a big impact on the number of transfers we are seeing not just at Minnesota, but all around the country.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
1,677
Reaction score
1,806
Points
113
I will say I am a bit worried about the number of players transferring out. It could really hurt depth and make the team very susceptible to injuries derailing certain position groups. It might not show this coming year, but my gut reaction is that this isn't sustainable to have 3 or 4 players transferring out for every player transferring in.
I think the volume of current transfers for the Gophers (and many other teams) relates to how many extended eligibility super seniors we went with in 2021, and how many super juniors, sophomores etc (with extended eligibility) we still have and may want to keep for the extra year. Extended eligibility serves the team’s purposes but kind of blows up plans for the depth players who are being told to wait longer than normal (or possibly being subtly nudged to move on as the 85 player limit is now back in force). There will be a couple more years of COVID super seniors affecting the ranks behind them, but classes entering in 2021 and later won’t get a free COVID year extension of eligibility, so the transfer portal should settle down some in a few years. But the next couple of years could be wild. Enjoy the ride.
 

SixBySix

Well-known member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
567
Reaction score
593
Points
93
(or possibly being subtly nudged to move on as the 85 player limit is now back in force).
This is a very good point--we need to lose an extra 15 net scholarships compared to a normal year, right?
 



MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
12,342
Reaction score
6,831
Points
113
I think the volume of current transfers for the Gophers (and many other teams) relates to how many extended eligibility super seniors we went with in 2021, and how many super juniors, sophomores etc (with extended eligibility) we still have and may want to keep for the extra year. Extended eligibility serves the team’s purposes but kind of blows up plans for the depth players who are being told to wait longer than normal (or possibly being subtly nudged to move on as the 85 player limit is now back in force). There will be a couple more years of COVID super seniors affecting the ranks behind them, but classes entering in 2021 and later won’t get a free COVID year extension of eligibility, so the transfer portal should settle down some in a few years. But the next couple of years could be wild. Enjoy the ride.
Yeah, was going to say something similar. Roster last year was artificially inflated in a lot of places. We needed guys to transfer out in order to bring in the players we did and to have 85 on scholarship.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
1,677
Reaction score
1,806
Points
113
This is a very good point--we need to lose an extra 15 net scholarships compared to a normal year, right?
I don’t know how many scholarships we were over the 85 number in 2021. Don’t think it was as high as 15. But could easily have been 7 or 8 because of the number of guys we had that were playing a sixth year. We purposely went “more experienced” than some teams in 2021, because our demographics happened to put us in that position. So, in order to get a decent-sized 2022 recruiting class and bring in some quality transfers (and we have gotten some), the math requires that some of the under-utilized depth had to move on. And some players like Ky and Brady Boyd left for opportunistic reasons—there was no nudging, I am sure. So, the numbers transferring out this year are high, but a decent amount of the activity was actually needed to let the coaches keep re-sculpting our roster while sizing down to 85 scholarships.
 
Last edited:

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
6,263
Points
113
This is a very good point--we need to lose an extra 15 net scholarships compared to a normal year, right?
Yeah, some of those difficult conversations were probably more like a brunch this year.
 

Dave H

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
233
Reaction score
267
Points
63
I'll say it again, the game has changed and it will continue to evolve. I'm perfectly fine with all the transfers. You, on the other hand seem to be the one contradicting yourself. You're fine if they leave but only if they are blue chippers. You state players need to bide their time but is staying for 3 and 4 years not biding enough time in your book?

I'm probably in the minority but I'm a fan of the portal.

I don't think it is about being "fine" with it I think it is more whether it makes sense or not. While we don't have official numbers it would appear a very large percentage of players who transfer don't find a new spot. That is a helluva risk to take over some playing time.

I have zero issue with the portal, I just think a lot of players act illogically if they are leaving over snap counts unless they are juniors or seniors. Maybe at Bama or OSU because they always bring in players equal or better than you but at a school like Minnesota? Chances are if you work hard you will always have a shot.

So for example it makes sense for Clark and Annexstad to leave based on playing time because likely they were not going to be starters this year or next. If they want to play time to move on and likely move down. On the other hand it would not make much sense for Athan to leave because he is likely next in line and probably won't find a spot that will give him the same opportunity right away.

The one free pass has given every player a mulligan but what they need to remember is not every mulligan leads to a better shot.
 

Dave H

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
233
Reaction score
267
Points
63
Sure, we are in agreement on all that. The new transfer rules do give the players more options, I'm just saying that it's not easy for players to improve their situation simply by entering the portal. They only get to choose from the options that end up presenting themselves after the fact. Unfortunately for most of the players that leave the gophers, those options are typically going to be fewer than what they had coming out of high school. Sometimes their won't be any options as seen by all the players that don't sign elsewhere, which is like 2/3rds of the portal entries if I remember the numbers correctly. I'm not for or against the portal and the free transfer year. I'm just pointing out the risk, and it's kind of scary when you see guys enter and you can predict at a pretty good rate which ones will get offers and which ones won't.
Bingo.
 

Dave H

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
233
Reaction score
267
Points
63
I will say I am a bit worried about the number of players transferring out. It could really hurt depth and make the team very susceptible to injuries derailing certain position groups. It might not show this coming year, but my gut reaction is that this isn't sustainable to have 3 or 4 players transferring out for every player transferring in.
I would agree if it was just us but it isnt. Plus I think a lot (not all obviously) of the transfers for a lot of these schools are the players who are buried anyways. Half the players we talk about I have never heard of and I follow the team.

Some of this will die down as scholarships go back to the normal count.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
1,677
Reaction score
1,806
Points
113
Yeah, was going to say something similar. Roster last year was artificially inflated in a lot of places. We needed guys to transfer out in order to bring in the players we did and to have 85 on scholarship.
Yes, I believe it is a natural consequence of our happening to be a very senior, experienced team in 2021. Some other teams were in our position, but we had a lot of guys playing an extra year. Many other teams weren’t in this position. Kind of just happened to be where you were in the recruiting “success” cycle. We still have some guys from our 2017 class playing a sixth year in 2022. Which might be why ZA, Clark, Boyd and Ky pulled the rip cord. It will all sort out in a few years.
 


MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
12,342
Reaction score
6,831
Points
113
There has been a fair amount of talk about the high number of guys that have put their name in the portal so thought it would be interesting to list them out and really look at the potential future impact on the team caused by their transfer. I broke them down into tiers based on my take on their impact for 2022 and beyond.

Tough Loses:
Ky Thomas - We have other options so RB position should be fine but he looked solid
MJ Anderson - To me a potential bigger short term loss due to unknowns at DE position

Contributers:
Curtis Dunlap - Would have provided OL depth if nothing else
Brady Boyd - Saw the field as a true freshman but was not active in the passing game
Zack Annexstad - Capable backup QB

Little to no impact on 2022:
Jaqwandis Burns - Maybe could have contributed
Rashad Cheney - Could have provided some depth along the DL
Cam Wiley - non-factor at RB for us, needed a position change
Jacob Clark - that one pass he threw looked good I guess
James Gordon - seemed stuck behind a number of other guys at LB
Dylan McGill - no clue if he would have panned out
Austin Henderson - no real impact
Saia Mapakaitolo - developmental OL player
Michael Lantz - non factor
Nhamdi Adim-Madumere - non factor
Ty Barron - non factor

To me, Anderson is the only real loss that has a direct impact on 2022 in that he looked to be in line for a lot of playing time at DE. Short term impact of the rest of the departures really isn't that high (even Thomas as long as we don't get crushed by RB injuries). Maybe some future depth or guys that could have developed into good players eventually.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
1,677
Reaction score
1,806
Points
113
There has been a fair amount of talk about the high number of guys that have put their name in the portal so thought it would be interesting to list them out and really look at the potential future impact on the team caused by their transfer. I broke them down into tiers based on my take on their impact for 2022 and beyond.

Tough Loses:
Ky Thomas - We have other options so RB position should be fine but he looked solid
MJ Anderson - To me a potential bigger short term loss due to unknowns at DE position

Contributers:
Curtis Dunlap - Would have provided OL depth if nothing else
Brady Boyd - Saw the field as a true freshman but was not active in the passing game
Zack Annexstad - Capable backup QB

Little to no impact on 2022:
Jaqwandis Burns - Maybe could have contributed
Rashad Cheney - Could have provided some depth along the DL
Cam Wiley - non-factor at RB for us, needed a position change
Jacob Clark - that one pass he threw looked good I guess
James Gordon - seemed stuck behind a number of other guys at LB
Dylan McGill - no clue if he would have panned out
Austin Henderson - no real impact
Saia Mapakaitolo - developmental OL player
Michael Lantz - non factor
Nhamdi Adim-Madumere - non factor
Ty Barron - non factor

To me, Anderson is the only real loss that has a direct impact on 2022 in that he looked to be in line for a lot of playing time at DE. Short term impact of the rest of the departures really isn't that high (even Thomas as long as we don't get crushed by RB injuries). Maybe some future depth or guys that could have developed into good players eventually.
Pretty much agree, except that I suspect Dunlap would have seen a lot of playing time—more valuable than depth—with both starting tackles and guards moving in. But in Dunlap’s case I think there were emotional factors as well as just playing time.
 

GopherPete

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
433
Reaction score
488
Points
63
There has been a fair amount of talk about the high number of guys that have put their name in the portal so thought it would be interesting to list them out and really look at the potential future impact on the team caused by their transfer. I broke them down into tiers based on my take on their impact for 2022 and beyond.

Tough Loses:
Ky Thomas - We have other options so RB position should be fine but he looked solid
MJ Anderson - To me a potential bigger short term loss due to unknowns at DE position

Contributers:
Curtis Dunlap - Would have provided OL depth if nothing else
Brady Boyd - Saw the field as a true freshman but was not active in the passing game
Zack Annexstad - Capable backup QB

Little to no impact on 2022:
Jaqwandis Burns - Maybe could have contributed
Rashad Cheney - Could have provided some depth along the DL
Cam Wiley - non-factor at RB for us, needed a position change
Jacob Clark - that one pass he threw looked good I guess
James Gordon - seemed stuck behind a number of other guys at LB
Dylan McGill - no clue if he would have panned out
Austin Henderson - no real impact
Saia Mapakaitolo - developmental OL player
Michael Lantz - non factor
Nhamdi Adim-Madumere - non factor
Ty Barron - non factor

To me, Anderson is the only real loss that has a direct impact on 2022 in that he looked to be in line for a lot of playing time at DE. Short term impact of the rest of the departures really isn't that high (even Thomas as long as we don't get crushed by RB injuries). Maybe some future depth or guys that could have developed into good players eventually.
If you're stating unknowns at the DE position, you almost certainly have to admit the RB position is full of unknowns as well. We return 1 healthy back, that to me qualifies for unknown.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
12,342
Reaction score
6,831
Points
113
If you're stating unknowns at the DE position, you almost certainly have to admit the RB position is full of unknowns as well. We return 1 healthy back, that to me qualifies for unknown.
The fact that we aren't hearing about RB offers going out in the portal makes me think they feel pretty good about the depth we are going to have at the RB position next year.

Also, if Thomas's transfer is at all related to playing time, that would indicate he expects a crowded backfield next year.
 

Ragnor

Active member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
253
Reaction score
112
Points
43
There has been a fair amount of talk about the high number of guys that have put their name in the portal so thought it would be interesting to list them out and really look at the potential future impact on the team caused by their transfer. I broke them down into tiers based on my take on their impact for 2022 and beyond.

Tough Loses:
Ky Thomas - We have other options so RB position should be fine but he looked solid
MJ Anderson - To me a potential bigger short term loss due to unknowns at DE position

Contributers:
Curtis Dunlap - Would have provided OL depth if nothing else
Brady Boyd - Saw the field as a true freshman but was not active in the passing game
Zack Annexstad - Capable backup QB

Little to no impact on 2022:
Jaqwandis Burns - Maybe could have contributed
Rashad Cheney - Could have provided some depth along the DL
Cam Wiley - non-factor at RB for us, needed a position change
Jacob Clark - that one pass he threw looked good I guess
James Gordon - seemed stuck behind a number of other guys at LB
Dylan McGill - no clue if he would have panned out
Austin Henderson - no real impact
Saia Mapakaitolo - developmental OL player
Michael Lantz - non factor
Nhamdi Adim-Madumere - non factor
Ty Barron - non factor

To me, Anderson is the only real loss that has a direct impact on 2022 in that he looked to be in line for a lot of playing time at DE. Short term impact of the rest of the departures really isn't that high (even Thomas as long as we don't get crushed by RB injuries). Maybe some future depth or guys that could have developed into good players eventually.
Nice Break down and I would agree, although I would say the loss of MJ Anderson is neutralized with the addition of Surgers. Why I say this was shared in this post by Bob_Loblaw: https://gopherhole.com/boards/threa...t-lorenza-surgers-commits.104991/post-2390313
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
12,342
Reaction score
6,831
Points
113
Nice Break down and I would agree, although I would say the loss of MJ Anderson is neutralized with the addition of Surgers. Why I say this was shared in this post by Bob_Loblaw: https://gopherhole.com/boards/threa...t-lorenza-surgers-commits.104991/post-2390313
Surgers softens the blow a little but depth at DE is still very unproven so would have been even better to have both of them in the mix. DL is a position where some of the younger players will have a chance to emerge next year. We have brought in some pretty highly touted D-Line players in recent years and some of them are already built like college players. Now we just have to find out if they can play.
 

GopherPete

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
433
Reaction score
488
Points
63
The fact that we aren't hearing about RB offers going out in the portal makes me think they feel pretty good about the depth we are going to have at the RB position next year.

Also, if Thomas's transfer is at all related to playing time, that would indicate he expects a crowded backfield next year.
That's fine if that is how you (or the coaches) look at it. You might be right, and we might be just fine next season at RB. But at this point in time it is hard to judge what level of production we will get from 3 of our top 5 backs.
 

WriterGoph

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
5,158
Reaction score
4,589
Points
113
That's fine if that is how you (or the coaches) look at it. You might be right, and we might be just fine next season at RB. But at this point in time it is hard to judge what level of production we will get from 3 of our top 5 backs.

I would think the way this will play out is that by the time spring ball rolls around, the coaches should have an even better idea of how Mo is progressing with his rehab and if Trey is gonna be able to play. If signs are not good on either, there will be plenty of portal movement surrounding spring ball as well. So PJ can always find another RB for depth at that time.

Plus, with the potential returning production we have, coming to Minnesota as a RB from the outside looking in can't be an easy sell right now for the coaches. "We may have a Big Ten RBOY back, plus the guy who was leading the conference in rushing in 2021 before he was injured. Oh AND we have another freshman that ran for over 600 yards. Oh yeah, there's that good recruit from Texas too."

I think after what happened with Ky, the coaches will want to tread very carefully with rocking the boat in the RB room any further. If we took another P5-level contributor at RB right now, it would be hard to blame Bucky for looking at greener pastures.
 





Top Bottom