Started By
Message
CFB Returning Production Reg and Portal Players Included
Posted on 2/18/25 at 10:34 am
Posted on 2/18/25 at 10:34 am
Now of course all portals have learn systems at new school but this shows last years returning snaps plus portal snaps.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. 
7
Posted on 2/18/25 at 11:02 am to OU Guy
Looks like Oklahoma wins the natty…..
Posted on 2/18/25 at 11:12 am to OU Guy
If you got the person from the portal it's not returning production.
All that effort and the guy fails at the basic concept.
All that effort and the guy fails at the basic concept.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:08 pm to 3down10
quote:
If you got the person from the portal it's not returning production.
THIS!
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:22 pm to 3down10
quote:
If you got the person from the portal it's not returning production.
All that effort and the guy fails at the basic concept.
I think he did make a distinction between the 2.
What matters is how one values portal additions. I don’t think you can just toss their production away. Portals are actually like FA’s in NFL just on a bigger scale.
For example, OU picked up QB Materr and to discount his prior production would be dumb.
Would you rate incoming freshmen higher than a portal player - just for perspective? With a portal you have known production and incoming class is unproven. The freshman might be a big contributor in 2-3 years but portal can provide contributions in year 1.
I find it silly people just brush off portal additions and they need to adapt to the times. Portals are unlimited college free agency. Having prior production means they are teachable. You can see their weaknesses and improve them - since most are moving up to better coaching staffs. Or tweak already great production again with better coaching.
I think this chart is valuable. Teams/coaches still have to incorporate them into team and quite a few will fail. But a good chunk will succeed.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:23 pm to Zgeo
quote:
Looks like Oklahoma wins the natty….
Print the shirts?
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:29 pm to OU Guy
quote:
OU picked up QB Materr and to discount his prior production would be dumb.
He's a great QB. I got to watch him in person a couple of times this year. With that being said, discounting his production is exactly how they should have handled it. He played a Mountain West schedule, and is now going to play an SEC schedule. That's apple and oranges, thus his production should absolutely be discounted.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:35 pm to OU Guy
quote:
Having prior production means they are teachable.
That's not always the case. Some players transfer and had great numbers from their former school and ended up not even seeing the field. Face it....the portal is a dice roll.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:35 pm to TexasOnTop
When did football get basketball graphs?
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:44 pm to 3down10
quote:
All that effort and the guy fails at the basic concept
At least he's good at making unreadable graphics
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:55 pm to TexasOnTop
quote:
He's a great QB. I got to watch him in person a couple of times this year. With that being said, discounting his production is exactly how they should have handled it. He played a Mountain West schedule, and is now going to play an SEC schedule. That's apple and oranges, thus his production should absolutely be discounted.
There is no perfect way to do an analysis like this without either having big flaws in it or doing wayyyy too much work for what its worth.
Even if you compare the net total production returning and compare it to transfer rankings that ignores positional value, and even if you could account for positional value you can't really account for how well someone will translate from one conference to the next. Mateer might light up the SEC, or he could be a botton half starter.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 12:56 pm to OU Guy
All that chart tells me is to put a little funny money on Clemson making the playoff again, which I pretty much already knew because returning decent QB + Good DL is a solid formula for predicting success
Posted on 2/18/25 at 1:07 pm to TexasOnTop
quote:
He's a great QB. I got to watch him in person a couple of times this year. With that being said, discounting his production is exactly how they should have handled it. He played a Mountain West schedule, and is now going to play an SEC schedule. That's apple and oranges, thus his production should absolutely be discounted.
Your leading receiver (Golden) transferred in from Houston prior to 24 season. He actually increased production in SEC.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 1:16 pm to VolSquatch
All that chart tells me is to put a little funny money on Clemson making the playoff again, which I pretty much already knew because returning decent QB + Good DL is a solid formula for predicting success
They do have the ever popular returning qb hc oc combo the media seems to like and they have some young stud receivers but I wasn’t impressed with the Clemson dline(weak at DE, couldn’t set an edge, lacked competitive depth). The D in general waa poor at tackling.
They do have the ever popular returning qb hc oc combo the media seems to like and they have some young stud receivers but I wasn’t impressed with the Clemson dline(weak at DE, couldn’t set an edge, lacked competitive depth). The D in general waa poor at tackling.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 1:17 pm to OU Guy
quote:
Your leading receiver (Golden) transferred in from Houston prior to 24 season. He actually increased production in SEC.
Yes, and it was a shock to everyone. Bond took a step back in production as well. It's a guessing game, thus trying to account for transfer production based on previous results is flawed.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 1:18 pm to VolSquatch
I think Clemson is a semi final team this year if their O Line can hold their weight.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 1:26 pm to TexasOnTop
quote:
Yes, and it was a shock to everyone. Bond took a step back in production as well. It's a guessing game, thus trying to account for transfer production based on previous results is flawed.
He never ranked their 2025 success he only listed prior production. Its simply a chart showing the production of players. You and others are trying to say its a ranking when its not.
Having experienced players is likely better than not. Even if they don’t play much, they add value in practices and film room. And understand the dynamics of the season vs a true freshman.
You can now look at every team and find so many transfer success stories. And failures too. But every team has seen contributions from transfers.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 1:29 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
All that chart tells me is to put a little funny money on Clemson making the playoff again, which I pretty much already knew because they play in the ACC
fixed it for you
This post was edited on 2/18/25 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 2/18/25 at 2:44 pm to OU Guy
I mean you answered it yourself. Look at how long your answer was to justify the graph so it can make your team look better. But truth is, it’s barely February. We still have Spring transfer window open. Teams will keep changing.
Posted on 2/18/25 at 3:26 pm to Zgeo
quote:
Looks like Oklahoma wins the natty…..
Or the players that "produced" a 2-6 SEC record are back to produce more of the same?
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News