Penn State is among top 15 recruiting classes each year with majority of the players 4/5*. why should we assume that the portal is better than what already exists on the roster? many of the portal players have not produced much in the way of results - even if carrying good ratings from high school. looking at some of the WRs in the portal who can stretch the field you have to ask are they any better than Omari who has proven big play ability? so far Penn State seems to be selective in the portal. clearly if you are going to be depending on your recruits (the players you have}, then you need to be recruiting players who can be effective players sooner rather than later in their career.
Portal vs Players you have = why is the portal always better?
- Thread starter blion72
- Start date
Kids are now a year older or more so you can see what development has been and you can be more specific in finding needs. High school recruiting is a lot of just getting the best athlete in that position.
totally agree. I was referring to the guys that have been in a program 2-3 years who may offer as much or more than what you can get in the portal. We are looking for DTs, but we have some on the roster who have been on the team. Kaleb Artis is in his 3rd years and a big body DT. He may be better than options in the portal.
Just as one example: Jess Mruzik and CJ both transferred to Penn State from other huge schools (Michigan and Nebraska, respectively). Penn State WVB doesn’t win the Natty without both of them.
It’s not any different than the NFL. Why is trading for players or signing FAs better than sticking with the players you have?
Answer: Because there’s a great deal of fluidity in sports. Players develop over time and become different— sometimes better, sometimes worse. Julian Fleming was a 5⭐️ recruit out of high school, but he’d struggle to get any playing time at all with even a middling program at this point.
sometimes a player just isn’t thriving under a particular system, and the hope is that another program, a different system will be able to put them in a position to succeed.
There are many variables, but everything is driving toward a common goal: improvement. Recognizing inefficiencies and weaknesses and trying to improve in those areas.
It’s not that the portal is guaranteeing a solution, it’s that you’re trying different things to see if B is better than A.
It’s not any different than the NFL. Why is trading for players or signing FAs better than sticking with the players you have?
Answer: Because there’s a great deal of fluidity in sports. Players develop over time and become different— sometimes better, sometimes worse. Julian Fleming was a 5⭐️ recruit out of high school, but he’d struggle to get any playing time at all with even a middling program at this point.
sometimes a player just isn’t thriving under a particular system, and the hope is that another program, a different system will be able to put them in a position to succeed.
There are many variables, but everything is driving toward a common goal: improvement. Recognizing inefficiencies and weaknesses and trying to improve in those areas.
It’s not that the portal is guaranteeing a solution, it’s that you’re trying different things to see if B is better than A.
a lot of boys go through a final growth spurt between 18-21 and if you can pick them up after that with 1-2 years eligibility, picking up a now young man and no longer teenager body in terms of muscle/ physical and cognitive development. No longer have to invest in the development phase as it were, have some other team pick up the tab for the final maturation phase and then pick up "finished product".
You laugh, but a few years ago when my youngest became a freshman in HS, we got an e-mail from the HS detailing what was acceptable vs unacceptable NIL according to the district for the athletes. I was shocked. Obviously, that’s NIL for the athletes while in HS, not a college paying them NIL while in HS. I understand your comment was a TIC joke, but it isn’t that far from reality sadly.
I think for the blue blood teams it's a second bite at the apple for kids you may have overlooked or who for some reason choose a lesser school.
Ebikete (sp?) and Chop come to mind. They flashed some talent at Temple and Maryland and likely wanted to end their college careers at a school with better position coaching, facilities, fan base, etc.
I think those guys are two examples of players who WERE better than in our inhouse talent.
I live by the idea that the coaches know a heck of a lot more than we do about this subject. Unlike us fanboys sitting at home, their livelihoods literally depend upon putting the best possible team on the field.
It was not a joke… I know it’s out there and going to happen. “college” football my a..!