2023 Portal Recruiting (Opens December 5th)

In case anyone is wondering. ..
Below are the designated dates for the portal window to be open. This thread will most likely go mostly dormant until later in Spring.

Id like to have Ovie in particular and maybe Omeire back, but happy Blue stayed and great thing to get Catalon and A.D. in the fold and end this round on a high note. FWIW. In general, it seems most of our outgoing portalees have landed at smaller schools the last few years with a few exceptions. Make of that what you wish, but Id say the deeper we get and the better the competitions for PT, the more we will see players landing higher. Ovie and Card landed well this year....we have seen success for JQJ and Rising at Utah. A WR to Tennesse I cant name now?.. Any others??
As for incoming, we have seen mixed results from players like the oline dude (Johnson?) from Rice (filled a need..stopgap) Tucker Dorsey (jury out), Watts (a homerun get), Keilan (good get), Worthy (mixed but probably good we've had him), Neyor(high hopes), Hall and Billingsley(busts), and more.
Others??
:hookem:

In the 2022-23 school year, the football portal is open Dec. 5-Jan. 18 and April 15-30.
 
Last edited:
RainH2burntO said:
In case anyone is wondering. ..
Below are the designated dates for the portal window to be open. This thread will most likely go mostly dormant until later in Spring.

Id like to have Ovie in particular and maybe Omeire back, but happy Blue stayed and great thing to get Catalon and A.D. in the fold and end this round on a high note. FWIW. In general, it seems most of our outgoing portalees have landed at smaller schools the last few years with a few exceptions. Make of that what you wish, but Id say the deeper we get and the better the competitions for PT, the more we will see players landing higher. Ovie and Card landed well this year....we have seen success for JQJ and Rising at Utah. A WR to Tennesse I cant name now?.. Any others??
As for incoming, we have seen mixed results from players like the oline dude (Johnson?) from Rice (filled a need..stopgap) Tucker Dorsey (jury out), Watts (a homerun get), Keilan (good get), Worthy (mixed but probably good we've had him), Neyor(high hopes), Hall and Billingsley(busts), and more.
Others??
:hookem:

In the 2022-23 school year, the football portal is open Dec. 5-Jan. 18 and April 15-30.
Click to expand...
Calvin Anderson was the Rice OT transfer in 2018 that was a good get for us.
Correct me if I am wrong but Worthy was a Michigan recruit that was released from his letter of intent, thus his joining Texas a true freshman recruit, not transfer or portal.
I do think the few portals we got this cycle reflect a more thought out process to get players who can start from day one, not to just become backups for example like, LB Devin Richardson (portaled from NM state, now portaled out to Wash.St.) and others that are gone now.
I also think this means we have numerous quality underclassmen that will play this year and thus flushed out some that needed playing opportunities elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
bishophorn said:
Calvin Anderson was the Rice OT transfer in 2017 that was a good get for us.
Correct me if I am wrong but Worthy was a Michigan recruit that was released from his letter of intent, thus his joining Texas a true freshman recruit, not transfer or portal.
I do think the few portals we got this cycle reflect a more thought out process to get players who can start from day one, not to just become backups for example like, LB Devin Richardson (portaled from NM state, now portaled out to Wash.St.) and others that are gone now.
I also think this means we have numerous quality underclassmen that will play this year and thus flushed out some that needed playing opportunities elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Good post^^^^^
Thanks
 
dukesteer said:
Not saying that I agree or disagree, but this fellow studies the portal like no other.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRpEy4MD/
Click to expand...
Not sure who is right or wrong, but he may should have studied harder.
I just read this yesterday from a regular Texas writer on fanside and it resonates as true based on my perspective of our incoming and outgoing with all things considered and Sarks stated approach to the portal. Dont think we have too much crazier outgoing movement than many other schools. A true grade isn't accurately reflected by the source/figure he used ...a net loss of talent(much like what happens sometimes with recruiting rankings and measuring #s vs quality and needs filled). The lower ranking however you slice it is due to lower# of signings....and we are not finished yet. The ranking he used also doesn't seem to properly account for needs met and depth chart and would penalize for, say, losing two 3rd stringers at deep positions but gaining 1 starter in a position of need. Desperate teams are trying to get anybodies they can and those who are better positioned and building more selectively and methodically are patiently picking and choosing.
I think we should be pretty pleased with our position. It matches exactly what Sark said he would do and why and the timeline that was successfully utilized last season is still intact with a late Spring window upcoming.
I think that 117 ranking is bogus.
Here is the other guy's take:
"According to the 247Sports Team Composite Transfer Rankings, Texas’ 2023 transfer class ranks at No. 32 in the nation and in the middle of the pack in the Big 12. But considering how Texas only has four portal commits in the 2023 class at the moment, ranking in the middle of the pack in the Big 12 isn’t all that bad. Texas has the fewest portal commits of any Big 12 team as of Jan. 21."
Basically what he is saying is quality and needs met vs quantity and we aint done yet. There are only so many spots if you are filling your roster and building year to year properly even fewer and you better be targeted w your approach and manage the roster carefully. There are many factors in play and Sark it seems understands it well.
 
Last edited:
RainH2burntO said:
Not sure who is right or wrong, but he may should have studied harder.
I just read this yesterday from a regular Texas writer on fanside and it resonates as true based on my perspective of our incoming and outgoing with all things considered and Sarks stated approach to the portal. Dont think we have too much crazier outgoing movement than many other schools. A true grade isn't accurately reflected by the source/figure he used ...a net loss of talent(much like what happens sometimes with recruiting rankings and measuring #s vs quality and needs filled). The lower ranking however you slice it is due to lower# of signings....and we are not finished yet. The ranking he used also doesn't seem to properly account for needs met and depth chart and would penalize for, say, losing two 3rd stringers at deep positions but gaining 1 starter in a position of need. Desperate teams are trying to get anybodies they can and those who are better positioned and building more selectively and methodically are patiently picking and choosing.
I think we should be pretty pleased with our position. It matches exactly what Sark said he would do and why and the timeline that was successfully utilized last season is still intact with a late Spring window upcoming.
I think that 117 ranking is bogus.
Here is the other guy's take:
"According to the 247Sports Team Composite Transfer Rankings, Texas’ 2023 transfer class ranks at No. 32 in the nation and in the middle of the pack in the Big 12. But considering how Texas only has four portal commits in the 2023 class at the moment, ranking in the middle of the pack in the Big 12 isn’t all that bad. Texas has the fewest portal commits of any Big 12 team as of Jan. 21."
Basically what he is saying is quality and needs met vs quantity and we aint done yet. There are only so many spots if you are filling your roster and building year to year properly even fewer and you better be targeted w your approach and manage the roster carefully. There are many factors in play and Sark it seems understands it well.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I should have mentioned that he assesses portal performance “exclusive of recruiting.” In other words, he does not take into consideration how a school has done from a recruiting standpoint in his “portal” rankings. Given that, it’s not surprising that teams like Alabama and Clemson (and many others) are ranked very low in his assessment of their portal performance.

I have pushed back on his assessments. He does make a point that I find interesting. Like some of us, he believes that recruit rankings are extremely unreliable. Contrast that to the ability (the portal provides) to assess how a player has performed for a couple of years in a D1 or D2 program. His belief is that how a player is doing in college is a much better measure of their ability than to predict how a recruit will transition. It then follows that if “established players” at the college level are available, the probability of their being more predictable and reliable contributors is higher than is the case with recruits. While this is his opinion and not necessarily mine, it does merit consideration.
 
dukesteer said:
Perhaps I should have mentioned that he assesses portal performance “exclusive of recruiting.” In other words, he does not take into consideration how a school has done from a recruiting standpoint in his “portal” rankings. Given that, it’s not surprising that teams like Alabama and Clemson (and many others) are ranked very low in his assessment of their portal performance.

I have pushed back on his assessments. He does make a point that I find interesting. Like some of us, he believes that recruit rankings are extremely unreliable. Contrast that to the ability (the portal provides) to assess how a player has performed for a couple of years in a D1 or D2 program. His belief is that how a player is doing in college is a much better measure of their ability than to predict how a recruit will transition. It then follows that if “established players” at the college level are available, the probability of their being more predictable and reliable contributors is higher than is the case with recruits. While this is his opinion and not necessarily mine, it does merit consideration.
Click to expand...
Good stuff..
My analytical and curious mind finds this all very interesting. We will gain a better understanding over the next few years as trends and outcomes/results become known. Id like to look at final outcomes and rankings of sort come May and see where big name schools, smaller schools, consistently winning schools, and smaller schools stand. (Though real outcomes will be measured on the field and not known for a few years).
My primary observation for now is that a lot of these kids overestimate their value and again that there will be a disparity between programs with less deep rosters and many needs and those with proven talent, deeper rosters, and fewer needs. May see a near/blunted inverse of recruiting rankings in some cases.
Important to bear in mind that egos, expectations, and motivation will play huge roles here...but not as big of roles as program needs and depth charts. Still, coaches have to navigate now a whole ..not all together new...but expanded set of considerations...When you go after a portal guy does it disenfranchise a guy already on your roster and he leaves? What kind of "guarantees" are coaches asked to make? My guess is only the best of coaches/minds will handle this well over the long haul and many who look impressive now will see some things blow up in their faces later. My perception is that Sark...even though we arent a big time winning leader right now...is taking an approach closer to those coaches/programs, and I think that is a good thing.
I still worry he may be...like Jerry Jones...too liking/loyal of some guys and not do the hard things. That is a fatal flaw IF true.
 
Your Wrong said:
I find that to be the case with many who post on message boards. I, on the other hand, feel as though my value is vastly undervalued. But not so much as to have a podcast.
Click to expand...
I was voted by HornFans Award Gala held annually at the Galveston Guidos restaurant as the most improved poster in 2019 & 2020.
In ‘21, I won the Most Humble Poster Award, but then Dion took it back when I walked up to accept.

No joke, I worked with a salesman that won the Most Improved Salesman three years in a row for Cummins Inc.
 
Last edited:
Horn6721 said:
Wow
Alabama's Nick Saban rejected 2 players who were searching for $1.3 million combined in NIL money: report
It's believed the current player is a starting offensive
lineman
Alabama's Nick Saban rejected 2 players who were searching for $1.3 million combined in NIL money: report
Click to expand...
This is called leadership. We have none at the NCAA. Only when the fraternity of high profile head coaches like Saban send this type of message consistently will the NIL fiasco come under control.

You won’t see you lowlifes like Lincoln or Jimbo stepping up. To Sark’s credit, he did emphasize in a press conference that if a player is looking to see how much he can make at Texas as opposed to wanting to be in the program, perhaps our school is not the right fit for him. Or him for us.

To me, preservation of the game and its integrity trumps all other considerations, including the right of players to seek compensation for their services.

I’m not opposed to NIL. Simply, there needs to be a framework within which schools operate. Without it, we have chaos… which is what we have now.
 
The NCAA should hire professionals to manage and run NIL. I suggest Barry & Jackie, the coaches who were smart enough to "unionize" their players, thus eliminating bickering.
 
NIL is here to stay.
Hope the NCAA can figure out a way so it doesnt keep running amuck and completely destroying college athletics. It is close now.
 
The NIL issue is getting out of hand. Now (like in the issue Saban had above) recruits are demanding big bucks just to accept a scholarship offer. Say, for example, those guys never are starters, or perhaps are "busts" and never see the playing field. They walk out with a crap ton of money. And if they are good, will they want to have that amount (or more) paid to them every year!

The NIL should not be "up front" money, but paid only if a business wants to use them in advertisements. At that point they get paid. But, some of us folks thought this had the opportunity to turn into the wild, wild, west, and it has. The way it's going, college athletes will be taking a pay cut when they go pro. This is crazy!
 
Joe,

People think I'm making a joke, but Barry started it and Jackie refined it at A&M. "Unionize" the players compensation. That's why I want to put them in charge of NIL. They have done it for decades. All the NCAA has done over that same period is fuckup everything they've touched.
 
SabreHorn said:
Joe,

People think I'm making a joke, but Barry started it and Jackie refined it at A&M. "Unionize" the players compensation. That's why I want to put them in charge of NIL. They have done it for decades. All the NCAA has done over that same period is fuckup everything they've touched.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that the NCAA makes a mess of things and has for years. It is basically a sleeping blind lion with no teeth and claws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top