PSU Portal Strategy

[canuckhal]

I'm not going to link the article, but Giger writes that Franklin has not brought in enough transfers.

His analysis is that the 2022 team has many holes (LB, OL, DL) and a lot of the recruits will not be contributing this year.

Hard to argue with that, but he neglects that there is a 85 scholarship limit and PSU is still up against it.

A question I have is it better to go after 6-10 transfers every year with a small high school recruiting class or focus on high school recruits with a few transfers? Seems Franklin has decided the latter, but is this the right approach in the new landscape?

 

[Tom McAndrew]

I saw the article yesterday, and didn't think it was worthy of being added to the February thread (where I post most relevant articles). In fact, i thought the article was idiotic.

 

[mrmk5110]

Should've stopped reading it when it said Giger.

 

[EricStratton-RushChairman]

I saw the article yesterday, and didn't think it was worthy of being added to the February thread (where I post most relevant articles). In fact, i thought the article was idiotic.

Tom hasn't lost anything from his fastball

 

[LB99]

Giger is a weasel.

 

[Connorpozlee]

I'm not going to link the article, but Giger writes that Franklin has not brought in enough transfers.

His analysis is that the 2022 team has many holes (LB, OL, DL) and a lot of the recruits will not be contributing this year.

Hard to argue with that, but he neglects that there is a 85 scholarship limit and PSU is still up against it.

A question I have is it better to go after 6-10 transfers every year with a small high school recruiting class or focus on high school recruits with a few transfers? Seems Franklin has decided the latter, but is this the right approach in the new landscape?

Haven’t read the article, but I think it’s a fair point. Is it better to buy 6 lottery tickets and hope you win the lottery while knowing you will likely lose or invest in 6 low risk investments?

 

[canuckhal]

I saw the article yesterday, and didn't think it was worthy of being added to the February thread (where I post most relevant articles). In fact, i thought the article was idiotic.

Edited thread title as mention of Giger is a flame thrower here. I'm more interested in a discussion of Franklin's approach to the portal. Giger's article was listed in the daily links on the site and the article raised the discussion point. I have no desire to defend Giger and pointed out why his analysis is faulty.

 

[LB99]

He may have a point, but to another posters point, you can’t just bring in loads of transfers without it compromising the team somewhere else. The OL, DL, and LB would be logical positions to target, but if they only upgrade the OL, I think we’ll be good with it. The DL has multiple layers of options. Hopefully, several will pan out. LB is thin, but there are a few options there, as well, just not much experience. I thought the LBs grossly underperformed last year. Maybe some new, young players will improve the unit?

 

[Tom McAndrew]

Edited thread title as mention of Giger is a flame thrower here

I know that Geiger has not been held in high esteem on this board for many years. That said, I don't believe I've ever put him down based on his name/reputation. I have disagreed with his perspective, analysis, point-of-view, etc. at times, and limit my comments to the contents of his articles.

His analysis is that the 2022 team has many holes (LB, OL, DL) and a lot of the recruits will not be contributing this year.

Hard to argue with that, but he neglects that there is a 85 scholarship limit and PSU is still up against it.

A question I have is it better to go after 6-10 transfers every year with a small high school recruiting class or focus on high school recruits with a few transfers? Seems Franklin has decided the latter, but is this the right approach in the new landscape?

The fundamental problem with his argument is that he's making conclusions in the middle of the process. Players are continuing to enter the portal, and it is expected that many more will do so during or after spring practice. If Cory waited until the summer to write this article, he'd have a stronger argument, as the portal process for this offseason would be nearly completed.

Another issue I have with his argument is that it presumes that guys that entered the portal are ready to step into the starting lineup, or provide effective support as a key backup. Some of those that entered the portal this offseason could challenge for playing time at PSU. But only looking at that part of the equation could cause serious problems for PSU's team. While there are some situations where a good player is simply blocked by a better player ahead of him on the depth chart (e.g., Will Levis last year), many others have a variety of issues that contributed to them not getting more playing time, regardless of their natural talent. PSU is usually aware of a prospect's talent, but they try to do their due diligence before offering guys in the portal. Geiger's argument, if I recall correctly, doesn't seem to acknowledge that.

CJF mentioned in a press conference (either at the Bowl game, or on signing day, I think), that many portal players seem to have their next destination determined before they even enter the portal. It's illegal for another college's staff to contact a player on another team's roster before they enter the portal. It should surprise no one that the NCAA seems to be incapable of enforcing this rule. Even if the rule isn't violated, there are many situations where a player enters the portal and has a previous relationship with an assistant or head coach at another program due to their initial recruitment, or said coach having moved to a different program, and there isn't a lot that PSU, or any other program can do, to land those prospects. But if I recall correctly, Geiger doesn't address that part of the portal process.

I had other issues with Geiger's article, but I'll stop there.

 

[BobPSU92]

Franklin laughs at strategery.

 

[VaDave4PSU]

You can't recruit 23-25 HS kids and 10-12 portal players in the same year every year.

You also can't have these 2 things going on, then whine that JF is processing players.

We're playing an expensive game that Saban has the biggest grip on while a handful of others are one notch below. Everybody else is 2+ down the line.

 

[LundyPSU]

We can not like Giger and believe PSU needs more roster additions. Especially, at LB and DL.

 

[canuckhal]

I know that Geiger has not been held in high esteem on this board for many years. That said, I don't believe I've ever put him down based on his name/reputation. I have disagreed with his perspective, analysis, point-of-view, etc. at times, and limit my comments to the contents of his articles.



The fundamental problem with his argument is that he's making conclusions in the middle of the process. Players are continuing to enter the portal, and it is expected that many more will do so during or after spring practice. If Cory waited until the summer to write this article, he'd have a stronger argument, as the portal process for this offseason would be nearly completed.

Another issue I have with his argument is that it presumes that guys that entered the portal are ready to step into the starting lineup, or provide effective support as a key backup. Some of those that entered the portal this offseason could challenge for playing time at PSU. But only looking at that part of the equation could cause serious problems for PSU's team. While there are some situations where a good player is simply blocked by a better player ahead of him on the depth chart (e.g., Will Levis last year), many others have a variety of issues that contributed to them not getting more playing time, regardless of their natural talent. PSU is usually aware of a prospect's talent, but they try to do their due diligence before offering guys in the portal. Geiger's argument, if I recall correctly, doesn't seem to acknowledge that.

CJF mentioned in a press conference (either at the Bowl game, or on signing day, I think), that many portal players seem to have their next destination determined before they even enter the portal. It's illegal for another college's staff to contact a player on another team's roster before they enter the portal. It should surprise no one that the NCAA seems to be incapable of enforcing this rule. Even if the rule isn't violated, there are many situations where a player enters the portal and has a previous relationship with an assistant or head coach at another program due to their initial recruitment, or said coach having moved to a different program, and there isn't a lot that PSU, or any other program can do, to land those prospects. But if I recall correctly, Geiger doesn't address that part of the portal process.

I had other issues with Geiger's article, but I'll stop there.

This thread has split into three: Giger, Giger's rationale/article, and the question I actually posed for discussion. Which path likely leads to greater success: to take a full/near full class of high school kids and few transfers or fewer high school kids and more transfers if the goal is winning the B10 and a national championship?

Certainly it appears Franklin is the former, while others such as MSU are the latter.

 

[VaDave4PSU]

This thread has split into three: Giger, Giger's rationale/article, and the question I actually posed for discussion. Which path likely leads to greater success: to take a full/near full class of high school kids and few transfers or fewer high school kids and more transfers if the goal is winning the B10 and a national championship?

Certainly it appears Franklin is the former, while others such as MSU are the latter.

If Tucker can string together 11, 11, 9, and 11 win seasons over the next 3 years (he already has the first 11), then I think it's up for discussion.

Right now, with one outlier season under his belt, no, not enough data.

Particularly when you have Bama, OSU, UGA working similarly to what we are trying to do.

Show me the model for 10-12 transfers getting into the playoff.

 

[Bison13]

I don't know how any reporter can make a conclusion about the portal right now when there are still guys entering it on a daily basis. One of West Virginia starting linebackers just went into the portal yesterday there will be more guys entering in the next two months after Spring ball as well. The portal is never over for finding talent...

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

I saw the article yesterday, and didn't think it was worthy of being added to the February thread (where I post most relevant articles). In fact, i thought the article was idiotic.

Ginger? Idiotic? Say it ain’t so!!

 

[step.eng69]

Tom hasn't lost anything from his fastball

Take it from experience.....
They will develope into low, hanging fast balls as he ages

 

[blion72]

If Tucker can string together 11, 11, 9, and 11 win seasons over the next 3 years (he already has the first 11), then I think it's up for discussion.

Right now, with one outlier season under his belt, no, not enough data.

Particularly when you have Bama, OSU, UGA working similarly to what we are trying to do.

Show me the model for 10-12 transfers getting into the playoff.

it is possible that an array of strategies could work, depending on the team and its situation. It is like the NFL - the "free agent" strategy vs "build from the draft" strategy. I think most NFL teams use both to varying degrees. every team has holes at different times, and is seeking to fill those by different methods. the key thing is to have the capability in place to execute what you want to do - recruits (i.e. build from the draft) vs portal (free agents). as long at JF's team can manage the mix each year, we should be okay. MSU which seems to be the poster child for the free agent strategy, so not sure what their organization looks like.

it has already been pointed out that we have a roster size limit (85), so if we are close, then if you go free agent, then you are "releasing" players on the current roster. We don't have a practice squad, unless we are going to offer them to stay without scholarships. If we are going free agent for a LB, it says the current 2/3 year players are not as good, and somebody probably needs to go. For a team recruiting at a high level, it is quite possible that the backups are much better than what is in the portal. Will Bama, tOSU, UGA, etc be major players in the portal?

 

[Sunsox]

My first thought after reading was: what a worthless, lazy piece of writing. You would think an article about missing out on portal players would actually name some players that PSU missed out on, or even players still available that they should be pursuing, but I guess doing some research is too difficult.

 

[marshall23]

I'm not going to link the article, but Giger writes that Franklin has not brought in enough transfers.

His analysis is that the 2022 team has many holes (LB, OL, DL) and a lot of the recruits will not be contributing this year.

Hard to argue with that, but he neglects that there is a 85 scholarship limit and PSU is still up against it.

A question I have is it better to go after 6-10 transfers every year with a small high school recruiting class or focus on high school recruits with a few transfers? Seems Franklin has decided the latter, but is this the right approach in the new landscape?

Corey Giger knows nothing about football. He's is and always has been a wanna be.

 

[donaldfair71]

While there are some situations where a good player is simply blocked by a better player ahead of him on the depth chart (e.g., Will Levis last year), many others have a variety of issues that contributed to them not getting more playing time, regardless of their natural talent. PSU is usually aware of a prospect's talent, but they try to do their due diligence before offering guys in the portal. Geiger's argument, if I recall correctly, doesn't seem to acknowledge that.

I hate to beat the dead horse here, but if it is concluded that Levis was blocked by a better player (Clifford), we have some serious questions that need answered from the staff regarding either player development or player evaluation of these 2 QBS.

 

[PSUJam]

You also can't have these 2 things going on, then whine that JF is processing players.

Exactly. If CJF processed a bunch more players to take on transfers, Giger's story would be "look at all the recruiting misses this staff had the past few years" or "something is amiss with all these PSU players looking to transfer". He's a hack.

 

[VaDave4PSU]

I hate to beat the dead horse here, but if it is concluded that Levis was blocked by a better player (Clifford), we have some serious questions that need answered from the staff regarding either player development or player evaluation of these 2 QBS.

Clifford would have put up better stats and won more games at UK last year than Levis.

About as substantial as what you wrote, but I feel like we've been down this path before.

 

[WVilleLion]

After spring ball there will be a lot more players declaring for the portal across the country. Geiger acts like the chance to add has passed.

 

[donaldfair71]

Clifford would have put up better stats and won more games at UK last year than Levis.

About as substantial as what you wrote, but I feel like we've been down this path before.

So the NFL guys who evaluate talent are incorrect? They seem to think that Levis is a much better player.

 

[PSUJam]

So the NFL guys who evaluate talent are incorrect? They seem to think that Levis is a much better player.

The NFL guys also thought Spencer Rattler would be a top QB pick in this year's draft.

 

[donaldfair71]

The NFL guys also thought Spencer Rattler would be a top QB pick in this year's draft.

Hey, I hear you, PSUJam and the board at BWI knows better than NFL guys. Understood.

 

[PSUJam]

Hey, I hear you, PSUJam and the board at BWI knows better than NFL guys. Understood.

Link to article or video of "NFL guys" saying Levis is a much better player? Also, if Levis is that good wouldn't it have benefited him to declare for this year's draft that includes a weak QB class? Why did is he staying at UK for another year?

 

[VaDave4PSU]

So the NFL guys who evaluate talent are incorrect? They seem to think that Levis is a much better player.

Who? Where?

He's got a stronger arm but zero touch. Better short yardage runner. Robinson is off to the NFL. UK doesn't have any WR comparable. Coen back to the Rams. His 4th OC now.

They both have their flaws. I don't think either are NFL QBs yet.

 

[donaldfair71]

Link to article or video of "NFL guys" saying Levis is a much better player? Also, if Levis is that good wouldn't it have benefited him to declare for this year's draft that includes a weak QB class? Why did is he staying at UK for another year?

Absolutely would have benefited, and I don't think that he's necessarily this can't miss guy, don't get me wrong. But he's a better player than Clifford. Whether that difference was present in State College or that just happened at Kentucky is the debate to be having. The other debate, who is better now, is settled for everyone but the PSU echo chambers.

 

[donaldfair71]

Who? Where?

He's got a stronger arm but zero touch. Better short yardage runner. Robinson is off to the NFL. UK doesn't have any WR comparable. Coen back to the Rams. His 4th OC now.

They both have their flaws. I don't think either are NFL QBs yet.

Now these points are fair and are based on present merit.

The best point you make is that he lost is OC and that is going to hurt him (let alone his primary WR). That really can impact, and I am more than happy to say that the system helped him. He also had an OT that's like a 1st/2nd round talent.

But that just goes to my point, then, that the same things that were in place to foster his development at UK are lacking in State College (or were when he was here). That needs to be squarely pointed at the staff.

 

[LionJim]

Link to article or video of "NFL guys" saying Levis is a much better player?

Absolutely would have benefited, and I don't think that he's necessarily this can't miss guy, don't get me wrong. But he's a better player than Clifford. Whether that difference was present in State College or that just happened at Kentucky is the debate to be having. The other debate, who is better now, is settled for everyone but the PSU echo chambers.

Do you have a link to an article which says that NFL scouts think that Levis is a much better player? When I read your post my immediate reaction was the same as @PSUJam 's, where did you read this?

 

[donaldfair71]

Do you have a link to an article which says that NFL scouts think that Levis is a much better player? When I read your post my immediate reaction was the same as @PSUJam 's, where did you read this?

NFL Draft: 2023 Positional Rankings Big Board

Every college football player for the 2023 NFL Draft rankings and draft profiles with complete scouting reports for each NFL Draft prospect.

www.si.com

2023 7-Round NFL Mock Draft 4.0 (Rounds 1-3) - NFL Draft Countdown

Mock Draft of the 2023 class including players like Bryce Young, CJ Stroud, and Will Anderson among others. Updated Dec. 27th.

www.draftcountdown.com

 

[donaldfair71]

NFL Draft: 2023 Positional Rankings Big Board

Every college football player for the 2023 NFL Draft rankings and draft profiles with complete scouting reports for each NFL Draft prospect.

www.si.com

2023 7-Round NFL Mock Draft 4.0 (Rounds 1-3) - NFL Draft Countdown

Mock Draft of the 2023 class including players like Bryce Young, CJ Stroud, and Will Anderson among others. Updated Dec. 27th.

www.draftcountdown.com

To be clear, though, I think anyone watching through anything but Blue and White glasses can see that he was a much better player last year. Not even close.

It wasn't as much about Levis being this stud. It was about him being decently good at producing offense in their system and Clifford, outside of a quarter and a half in Iowa City, being pretty much unplayable.

 

[VaDave4PSU]

But that just goes to my point, then, that the same things that were in place to foster his development at UK are lacking in State College (or were when he was here). That needs to be squarely pointed at the staff

The biggest things that fostered his development were:

1) a very good running game. He wasn't forced to carry the team in every single game. Truth be told, a little bit of defense and they likely beat Tennessee, but Will had his chances to pull that game out as well.

2) SEC East schedule. Take away Georgia and you have a frumpy division. Florida was down and everybody else was middling at best.

Putting Georgia back in, Levis was heavily protected in that game. They were highly content to lose that game slowly. Their best drive of the day relied on screen passes and penalties to kick a FG.

At no point did Coen put the game in Levis' hands. He's certainly watched his PSU film. He didn't want any strip sacks because of his less than average pocket awareness nor any rocket driven balls to defenders.

Much like the Florida game, if the defense could hold up, and special teams create some points, you don't put Will into high pressure situations. The difference: Georgia had a good offense, Florida did not.

I'm not sure what you hold against Clifford prior to the Iowa game. His second half vs Wisky and play vs Auburn were requisite to winning those games or we suffered 2 consecutive losing seasons.

 

[donaldfair71]

The biggest things that fostered his development were:

1) a very good running game. He wasn't forced to carry the team in every single game. Truth be told, a little bit of defense and they likely beat Tennessee, but Will had his chances to pull that game out as well.

2) SEC East schedule. Take away Georgia and you have a frumpy division. Florida was down and everybody else was middling at best.

Putting Georgia back in, Levis was heavily protected in that game. They were highly content to lose that game slowly. Their best drive of the day relied on screen passes and penalties to kick a FG.

At no point did Coen put the game in Levis' hands. He's certainly watched his PSU film. He didn't want any strip sacks because of his less than average pocket awareness nor any rocket driven balls to defenders.

Much like the Florida game, if the defense could hold up, and special teams create some points, you don't put Will into high pressure situations. The difference: Georgia had a good offense, Florida did not.

I'm not sure what you hold against Clifford prior to the Iowa game. His second half vs Wisky and play vs Auburn were requisite to winning those games or we suffered 2 consecutive losing seasons.

I don't hold anything against Clifford other than expecting a 3 year starter to be effective every game, or at least consistently effective against the teams he should be.

For every half he played well, or game he came through (he did look good against Ohio State save for, again, that backbreaking fumble that only goes down as a fumble but you just can't have happen), he had the Illinois game, the Maryland game save one throw, the Rutgers first few drives. It just wasn't there often enough, and what we got out of him last year is what one would expect from a first year starter or backup forced in.

But at a bigger level, and this goes back to my original post in the thread, it's less about Clifford/Levis and more about the staff. If they played Clifford hurt against Illinois or Michigan, and they don't have a competent plan behind him, it's on them not him. If they didn't have one because they thought he was good enough as is, again, that's on them and not him. Ohio State churned out 500 yards of offense against Michigan, Georgia 500 yards, Sparty 400 yards. By the middle of the second quarter, we looked like a junior high team playing the varsity that day. Couldn't move the ball more than a first down or two to save our own lives (and we even ran the ball somewhat well) from the 2nd Quarter on.

Just as you take away credit from Levis by saying these defenses weren't great, the play of the defenses that effectively rendered Clifford unplayable were not the 85 bears. When they played other well-constructed and viable offenses, they were eviscerated just the same (yes, even Michigan, almost 1100 yards the last 2 games is what they conceded).

It's not about Clifford at all. It's more about why we're not looking inward and asking why we have looked so unbelievably bad on offense (and don't give me a drive here and there), while someone not good enough is doing pretty well elsewhere.

 

[Shadow99]

Now these points are fair and are based on present merit.

The best point you make is that he lost is OC and that is going to hurt him (let alone his primary WR). That really can impact, and I am more than happy to say that the system helped him. He also had an OT that's like a 1st/2nd round talent.

But that just goes to my point, then, that the same things that were in place to foster his development at UK are lacking in State College (or were when he was here). That needs to be squarely pointed at the staff.

Actually, imho VaDave4PSU's best point was that Levis has a strong arm but, similar to countless other strong-arm QB's, he seems to lack "touch".

 

[Bvillebaron]

I don't know how any reporter can make a conclusion about the portal right now when there are still guys entering it on a daily basis. One of West Virginia starting linebackers just went into the portal yesterday there will be more guys entering in the next two months after Spring ball as well. The portal is never over for finding talent...

Absolutely correct. Always in a rush to criticize, Giger conveniently (deliberately?) ignores the fact that there will be a number of players entering the portal after their respective spring practices are concluded.

 

[VaDave4PSU]

It's more about why we're not looking inward and asking why we have looked so unbelievably bad on offense (and don't give me a drive here and there), while someone not good enough is doing pretty well elsewhere.

G	Cmp	Att	Pct	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	TD	Int

13

261

428

61.0

3107

7.3

7.4

21

8

13

233

353

66.0

2826

8.0

7.7

24

13

These are the passing stats of our 2 QBs we have been discussing. I'd like to know how one of these is unbelievably bad while the other is considered doing pretty well.

Clifford also missed over half of the Iowa game as well as 3 quarters vs Rutgers.

Levis threw 10 of his TDs vs Chattanooga, LA Monroe, and New Mexico State. Clifford threw 5 of his vs Villanova and Ball State.

Actually, imho VaDave4PSU's best point was that Levis has a strong arm but, similar to countless other strong-arm QB's, he seems to lack "touch".

I think our staff ought to be praised. Will was a plan b (maybe c) after Fields didn't come. They identified this kid. UK had a better offense in '21 and either QB would have done well there.

Our QB puts up similarly good numbers against overall better teams with two less cupcake stat padders and its considered bad? It's gotta be an internal bias and the perpetual "backup / portal qb is better" syndrome.

 

[donaldfair71]

G	Cmp	Att	Pct	Yds	Y/A	AY/A	TD	Int

13

261

428

61.0

3107

7.3

7.4

21

8

13

233

353

66.0

2826

8.0

7.7

24

13

These are the passing stats of our 2 QBs we have been discussing. I'd like to know how one of these is unbelievably bad while the other is considered doing pretty well.

Clifford also missed over half of the Iowa game as well as 3 quarters vs Rutgers.

Levis threw 10 of his TDs vs Chattanooga, LA Monroe, and New Mexico State. Clifford threw 5 of his vs Villanova and Ball State.


I think our staff ought to be praised. Will was a plan b (maybe c) after Fields didn't come. They identified this kid. UK had a better offense in '21 and either QB would have done well there.

Our QB puts up similarly good numbers against overall better teams with two less cupcake stat padders and its considered bad? It's gotta be an internal bias and the perpetual "backup / portal qb is better" syndrome.

Top prospects to watch for the 2023 NFL draft

Draft Wire editor Luke Easterling gives you a never-too-early look at the top prospects eligible for the 2023 NFL draft

draftwire.usatoday.com