Rate PJ and staffs transfer portal performance!

Transfer poll grade:

  • A: killing it!

    Votes: 26 23.6%

  • B: Rowing along nicely!

    Votes: 70 63.6%

  • C: meh. He could do better.

    Votes: 9 8.2%

  • D: This is a travesty!

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • F: Total failure

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Incomplete: Won’t know til kickoff

    Votes: 4 3.6%
  • Total voters
    110
Donate To GopherHole
Otis

Otis

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
5,806
Reaction score
2,969
Points
113
Simple poll to gauge our fan base.
I think he is doing very well!
 

Is there a comprehensive list in one of the threads of who we lost and who we gained?
 

matt said:
Is there a comprehensive list in one of the threads of who we lost and who we gained?
Click to expand...
In the thread I started for the 2022 roster there is a list of who is in and who is out for this year due to the portal. But obviously with all those guys we won't really know how all the players are going to perform until this fall.

To this point I think we have benefitted way more from the portal than we have been hurt by it. Brown is the only high profile loss I can think of prior to this season and he has yet to make an impact at MSU. On the flip side we have brought in a bunch of guys that have all made a big impact for us (Williamson, St. Juste, Gibbens, MDT, Pinckney, Trickett, Wright.....).

Will be interesting to see how the 2022 group shakes out. We have lost far more players to the portal than we have gained in this group but I think the net result is going to be in our favor when it is all said and done.

There are some guys leaving that most of us would love to have been able to keep but this is the new reality of college football.
 

I went with B.

it would be A if we got a more sure fire starter at DT and DE.

I like Filiaga lot and the two CB’s. Carroll is solid and Jeffries and Surgers are a little meh.
 

On the whole, the portal is good for programs in our tier.

The big question is how we are doing each year compared to peer programs.
 


Governor Sibley said:
On the whole, the portal is good for programs in our tier.

The big question is how we are doing each year compared to peer programs.
Click to expand...
That would be something that would be really interesting to know but i don't know how you would even start to go about gathering that kind of info.
 

I went with C, just grading on this year. Really hard to gauge until they hit the field though.
 

MNVCGUY said:
That would be something that would be really interesting to know but i don't know how you would even start to go about gathering that kind of info.
Click to expand...

Every division rival will be patching their rosters with portal transfers as well.

The net affect of the portal is greater parity in programs in the 15-40 ranking range.

I think we saw that already this year.
 





More than anything, the new pickup from Michigan shows PJ and staff are always working behind the scenes to retool the roster, trying to make it better. Then to see how some of the players have turned out. Gibbens and Pickney, it's a good process of identifying needs and talent. Feel good about how they're going about it.
 

I don't blame him because I'm not sure there is much he could have done differently, but two of the three most exciting offensive FR transferred out. I can't argue the the portal was kind to us this year. I hope I'm wrong.
 




Some guy said:
We lost 2 guys who were going to be out starting quarterback next year so probably F
Click to expand...
If either of them had thought they had even a chance to start next year or later they would still be here. The portal agreed as revealed in where each of them will play next year.
 

I am going to vote I have no bleeping idea. You cannot tell much from highlight videos and TV copies of video. That's it. I will say this I like the schools they have in common. That and with past success with Abiline Christian, I say keep those transfers rolling in. Thank you, Jack Gibbens. Big Fan of Bishop being All Conference, the little bit I have seen I like that guy.
 

QBs - lost 2 added none, this is a net gain if the plans were start AK next year.
RBs - lost Wiley and Ky, tough to argue this isn't a decent sized negative. Freeing up the Wiley scholarship is a positive at least.
OL - lost Dunlap and Mapakaitolo, added Carroll and Filiaga. This is a nice positive as Dunlap and Filiaga might be a wash, but Carroll has way more of a pedigree and is much more ready to contribute than Mapakaitolo.
WR - lost Boyd, Nnamdi, and McGill and added no one. Nnamdi appears to have been a bust, McGill was a young project, and Boyd was the second coming of Adam Thielen according to a large group of our fans. This is a small loss as Boyd was likely a depth piece, and someone will need to step up.
TE- lost Henderson added no one - not ideal to lose him even if he was the third TE.
DE- lost Anderson added Surgers - personally would rather have the younger Anderson. So I think this is a loss until Surgers proves otherwise.
DT- added Jefferies lost Cheney - this is a decent sized negative until Jefferies proves otherwise. I'd rather have the younger Cheney. Both were four star players.
LB - lost Burns and Gordon brought in no one- this feels like a small negative as both were still young and could have provided depth if nothing else. Quite a bit of depth here though so not a major negative.
DB - Brought in Stapp and Bishop, lost none - HUGE positive.

So to me, no huge losses as far as affecting entire position groups. 1 huge gain at DB and a solid gain at OL. But to me it also seems like many small losses across most of the board that could turn into bigger ones depending on injuries and if other guys fail to step up.
 

Linebacker is really interesting. They return a lot of guys at the position group and Aune and Lindenberg return from injury. We be a good battle for playing. 1 Senior in the who group.

Sori-Marin
Oliver
Willis
Aune
Lindenberg
LeCaptain
Williams
Keyes
Mau
Finnessy
Bercich
Wileman
Baranowski
Gerlach
 

btowngopher said:
DT- added Jefferies lost Cheney - this is a decent sized negative until Jefferies proves otherwise. I'd rather have the younger Cheney. Both were four star players.
Click to expand...
Nitpick, but neither Cheney or Jeffries were 4 star recruits.

Agree on rather having Cheney, though.
 

USAF said:
Nitpick, but neither Cheney or Jeffries were 4 star recruits.

Agree on rather having Cheney, though.
Click to expand...
Oops, you're right. Both were high three stars with major programs offering.
 

Dakota2 said:
If either of them had thought they had even a chance to start next year or later they would still be here. The portal agreed as revealed in where each of them will play next year.
Click to expand...
It was sarcasm
 

btowngopher said:
QBs - lost 2 added none, this is a net gain if the plans were start AK next year.
RBs - lost Wiley and Ky, tough to argue this isn't a decent sized negative. Freeing up the Wiley scholarship is a positive at least.
OL - lost Dunlap and Mapakaitolo, added Carroll and Filiaga. This is a nice positive as Dunlap and Filiaga might be a wash, but Carroll has way more of a pedigree and is much more ready to contribute than Mapakaitolo.
WR - lost Boyd, Nnamdi, and McGill and added no one. Nnamdi appears to have been a bust, McGill was a young project, and Boyd was the second coming of Adam Thielen according to a large group of our fans. This is a small loss as Boyd was likely a depth piece, and someone will need to step up.
TE- lost Henderson added no one - not ideal to lose him even if he was the third TE.
DE- lost Anderson added Surgers - personally would rather have the younger Anderson. So I think this is a loss until Surgers proves otherwise.
DT- added Jefferies lost Cheney - this is a decent sized negative until Jefferies proves otherwise. I'd rather have the younger Cheney. Both were four star players.
LB - lost Burns and Gordon brought in no one- this feels like a small negative as both were still young and could have provided depth if nothing else. Quite a bit of depth here though so not a major negative.
DB - Brought in Stapp and Bishop, lost none - HUGE positive.

So to me, no huge losses as far as affecting entire position groups. 1 huge gain at DB and a solid gain at OL. But to me it also seems like many small losses across most of the board that could turn into bigger ones depending on injuries and if other guys fail to step up.
Click to expand...
Interesting breakdown, although I don't know if looking at transfers out vs in at a particular position is the best way to view it since oftentimes they aren't connected to each other. For example we are losing QB, RB, WR, TE, and LBs to the portal but we aren't all that actively looking to bring guys in at those positions. So the loses at those spots tend to be softened by the guys we currently have on the roster already.

In fact DL is the only spot on the team where I think we are actively looking for transfers in part because of the guys transferring out. We would have been in the market for DB and OL help regardless of the guys transferring from those groups due to graduation and the need to add some experienced depth.

This is a big part of why I see the portal as a net gain for us, because most of the guys we are losing are leaving from positions where the depth is good even without them. Or in the case of the OL we are losing a developmental guy and another who seemed like he had a foot out the door for 2 experienced guys with strong pedigrees.

Remains to be seen what happens with the guys we are losing from this group and the guys we are bringing in. But to date the portal has been very very good to us and we have found a lot of impact guys without really losing a whole lot.
 

btowngopher said:
WR - lost Boyd, Nnamdi, and McGill and added no one. Nnamdi appears to have been a bust, McGill was a young project, and Boyd was the second coming of Adam Thielen according to a large group of our fans. This is a small loss as Boyd was likely a depth piece, and someone will need to step up.
Click to expand...
The strawiest of strawman. The argument has been Boyd was clearly a competent receiver who was able to start and get reps over the majority of our receivers and thus his disappearance can't be inconsequential. You can make the claim that he was likely only a depth piece moving forward-- but we won't be able to know if he would have flourish like an Autman Bell or would have Terrell Smithed his way to the bench.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Interesting breakdown, although I don't know if looking at transfers out vs in at a particular position is the best way to view it since oftentimes they aren't connected to each other. For example we are losing QB, RB, WR, TE, and LBs to the portal but we aren't all that actively looking to bring guys in at those positions. So the loses at those spots tend to be softened by the guys we currently have on the roster already.

In fact DL is the only spot on the team where I think we are actively looking for transfers in part because of the guys transferring out. We would have been in the market for DB and OL help regardless of the guys transferring from those groups due to graduation and the need to add some experienced depth.

This is a big part of why I see the portal as a net gain for us, because most of the guys we are losing are leaving from positions where the depth is good even without them. Or in the case of the OL we are losing a developmental guy and another who seemed like he had a foot out the door for 2 experienced guys with strong pedigrees.

Remains to be seen what happens with the guys we are losing from this group and the guys we are bringing in. But to date the portal has been very very good to us and we have found a lot of impact guys without really losing a whole lot.
Click to expand...
They may not be looking to add at certain positions, but guys transferring out still impact the position group, at least from a current depth standpoint. The staff may still be comfortable with the depth despite transfers. I took a more immediate impact approach as the long term effects become very difficult to assess.
 

noamfromm said:
The strawiest of strawman. The argument has been Boyd was clearly a competent receiver who was able to start and get reps over the majority of our receivers and thus his disappearance can't be inconsequential. You can make the claim that he was likely only a depth piece moving forward-- but we won't be able to know if he would have flourish like an Autman Bell or would have Terrell Smithed his way to the bench.
Click to expand...
He was our 5th WR. KC has never really involved the guys beyond WR3 a whole lot. There's 3 other WRs that played ahead of him that have the same amount of eligibility left. In the immediate future he is probably a depth piece. I never said he never would have become something more, just like the wrs he played ahead of could've passed him down the road. I called it a small negative and said another young wr will need to step up. The fact that you rushed to his defense shows how over the top the love for him is on this board.
 

B
Get a possible stud wide receiver and it becomes an A.
 

Considering we have bolstered our offensice line, whihc in my opinion is the position group that we lost the most guys at, this is pretty elite
 

PJ has lost a lot more than he has gained. Hopefully there is still time to make up the difference.
 

Stuff said:
PJ has lost a lot more than he has gained. Hopefully there is still time to make up the difference.
Click to expand...

Lost to the portal or graduation/NFL?

Have to believe the young guys will step up.
 

Stuff said:
PJ has lost a lot more than he has gained. Hopefully there is still time to make up the difference.
Click to expand...
The number of players transferring out is higher than the number transferring in but if you are thinking those numbers are going to be equal you are going to be disappointed because we won't have any close to the same number of transfers coming in as we have going out.
 

I went with C. Because I think we got who were suppose to be able to get given our current performance. Thats a good thing, PJ raised the bar.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom