The Bobcat Nation

Now that the NCAA has made it easier to transfer. Will they re-think how the APR is calculated?

ilovethecats wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:30 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:25 am

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:20 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:23 pm

25% of the names in the portal are from Division 1 football programs. Next year that could double meaning about half of Division 1 rosters will be influx

He did say something to that effect. If he did state it the way you put it here though, he is wrong. Just because 25% of the portal are D1 doesn't mean that 25% of D1 are on the portal.

For example, if there are 4 guys total on the portal, and one of them is D1 - then you can accurately state that 25% of players on the portal are D1. Doubling that would in no way mean that half of D1 rosters will be changing. This is a subtle but important distinction.

I didn't put it correctly. He said a relatively large number of kids have entered the portal and 25% of them are from D1 programs. Basically, if 12,000 names are on the portal, 3,000 of them are from D1 programs...per the portal.

And he and coaches around the country expect that number could even double by next season.

Numbers were just an example...just to clarify.

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:25 am

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:20 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:23 pm

25% of the names in the portal are from Division 1 football programs. Next year that could double meaning about half of Division 1 rosters will be influx

He did say something to that effect. If he did state it the way you put it here though, he is wrong. Just because 25% of the portal are D1 doesn't mean that 25% of D1 are on the portal.

For example, if there are 4 guys total on the portal, and one of them is D1 - then you can accurately state that 25% of players on the portal are D1. Doubling that would in no way mean that half of D1 rosters will be changing. This is a subtle but important distinction.

I didn't put it correctly. He said a relatively large number of kids have entered the portal and 25% of them are from D1 programs. Basically, if 12,000 names are on the portal, 3,000 of them are from D1 programs...per the portal.

Yeah I think that’s right, and he did draw the conclusion that about half of D1 rosters will be in flux.

The problem is, assuming there are 12,000 names on the portal and 3,000 of them are D1, that is still only about 14% of D1 players (85 guys times 125 fcs and 130 fbs schools is over 21,000 D1 players, 3,000 would be about 14% of that) being on the portal (while 25% of names on the portal are D1). It’s just taking the wrong basis for the percentage and drawing a conclusion based on the other basis.

It’s just not correct, the only way it would be is if the total number on the portal is almost exactly the same as the number of D1 football players.

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:42 am

ilovethecats wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:30 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:25 am

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:20 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:23 pm

25% of the names in the portal are from Division 1 football programs. Next year that could double meaning about half of Division 1 rosters will be influx

He did say something to that effect. If he did state it the way you put it here though, he is wrong. Just because 25% of the portal are D1 doesn't mean that 25% of D1 are on the portal.

For example, if there are 4 guys total on the portal, and one of them is D1 - then you can accurately state that 25% of players on the portal are D1. Doubling that would in no way mean that half of D1 rosters will be changing. This is a subtle but important distinction.

I didn't put it correctly. He said a relatively large number of kids have entered the portal and 25% of them are from D1 programs. Basically, if 12,000 names are on the portal, 3,000 of them are from D1 programs...per the portal.

And he and coaches around the country expect that number could even double by next season.

Numbers were just an example...just to clarify.

Sorry, responded before I saw this. I understood that the numbers were just as an example, and it actually bears out the same way my example of 4 total players being on the portal. Mine is just more extreme for the sake of clarity. Regardless, one could say 25% of D1 athletes are on the portal, and next year there could be 50%, but either way, it cannot be said that because 25% of the guys on the portal are D1, that half the rosters will be in flux next year. It’s a math error, but it invalidates the conclusion.

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:21 pm

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:42 am

ilovethecats wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:30 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:25 am

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:20 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:23 pm

25% of the names in the portal are from Division 1 football programs. Next year that could double meaning about half of Division 1 rosters will be influx

He did say something to that effect. If he did state it the way you put it here though, he is wrong. Just because 25% of the portal are D1 doesn't mean that 25% of D1 are on the portal.

For example, if there are 4 guys total on the portal, and one of them is D1 - then you can accurately state that 25% of players on the portal are D1. Doubling that would in no way mean that half of D1 rosters will be changing. This is a subtle but important distinction.

I didn't put it correctly. He said a relatively large number of kids have entered the portal and 25% of them are from D1 programs. Basically, if 12,000 names are on the portal, 3,000 of them are from D1 programs...per the portal.

And he and coaches around the country expect that number could even double by next season.

Numbers were just an example...just to clarify.

Sorry, responded before I saw this. I understood that the numbers were just as an example, and it actually bears out the same way my example of 4 total players being on the portal. Mine is just more extreme for the sake of clarity. Regardless, one could say 25% of D1 athletes are on the portal, and next year there could be 50%, but either way, it cannot be said that because 25% of the guys on the portal are D1, that half the rosters will be in flux next year. It’s a math error, but it invalidates the conclusion.

I was never saying 25% of the total number of D1 athletes are in the portal. I stated, out of the total number of names in the portal, 25% are from D1 programs.

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:36 pm

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:21 pm

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:42 am

ilovethecats wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:30 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:25 am

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:20 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:23 pm

25% of the names in the portal are from Division 1 football programs. Next year that could double meaning about half of Division 1 rosters will be influx

He did say something to that effect. If he did state it the way you put it here though, he is wrong. Just because 25% of the portal are D1 doesn't mean that 25% of D1 are on the portal.

For example, if there are 4 guys total on the portal, and one of them is D1 - then you can accurately state that 25% of players on the portal are D1. Doubling that would in no way mean that half of D1 rosters will be changing. This is a subtle but important distinction.

I didn't put it correctly. He said a relatively large number of kids have entered the portal and 25% of them are from D1 programs. Basically, if 12,000 names are on the portal, 3,000 of them are from D1 programs...per the portal.

And he and coaches around the country expect that number could even double by next season.

Numbers were just an example...just to clarify.

Sorry, responded before I saw this. I understood that the numbers were just as an example, and it actually bears out the same way my example of 4 total players being on the portal. Mine is just more extreme for the sake of clarity. Regardless, one could say 25% of D1 athletes are on the portal, and next year there could be 50%, but either way, it cannot be said that because 25% of the guys on the portal are D1, that half the rosters will be in flux next year. It’s a math error, but it invalidates the conclusion.

I was never saying 25% of the total number of D1 athletes are in the portal. I stated, out of the total number of names in the portal, 25% are from D1 programs.

This is the implication if half of the average D1 roster is in flux, which you may have been taking back from your original post, but I’m pretty sure that was what Choate was concluding.

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:58 pm

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:36 pm

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:21 pm

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:42 am

ilovethecats wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:30 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:25 am

DriscollCat wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:20 am

VimSince03 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:23 pm

25% of the names in the portal are from Division 1 football programs. Next year that could double meaning about half of Division 1 rosters will be influx

He did say something to that effect. If he did state it the way you put it here though, he is wrong. Just because 25% of the portal are D1 doesn't mean that 25% of D1 are on the portal.

For example, if there are 4 guys total on the portal, and one of them is D1 - then you can accurately state that 25% of players on the portal are D1. Doubling that would in no way mean that half of D1 rosters will be changing. This is a subtle but important distinction.

I didn't put it correctly. He said a relatively large number of kids have entered the portal and 25% of them are from D1 programs. Basically, if 12,000 names are on the portal, 3,000 of them are from D1 programs...per the portal.

And he and coaches around the country expect that number could even double by next season.

Numbers were just an example...just to clarify.

Sorry, responded before I saw this. I understood that the numbers were just as an example, and it actually bears out the same way my example of 4 total players being on the portal. Mine is just more extreme for the sake of clarity. Regardless, one could say 25% of D1 athletes are on the portal, and next year there could be 50%, but either way, it cannot be said that because 25% of the guys on the portal are D1, that half the rosters will be in flux next year. It’s a math error, but it invalidates the conclusion.

I was never saying 25% of the total number of D1 athletes are in the portal. I stated, out of the total number of names in the portal, 25% are from D1 programs.

This is the implication if half of the average D1 roster is in flux, which you may have been taking back from your original post, but I’m pretty sure that was what Choate was concluding.

I'm not walking back anything. Might have stated it poorly but what I was trying to relay was the Choate was told 25% of the student-athletes in the portal are D1 athletes. I also understand what you are stating. Obviously saying 25% of all D1 football players are in the portal is likely not correct. Only 25% of those players in the portal are D1 football players.

Between FBS and FCS, there are around 240-250 D1 football teams, with around 100 players per team = 25,000 D1 football players. Obviously there are not 25% of all D1 players in the portal.

91catAlum wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:34 pm

Between FBS and FCS, there are around 240-250 D1 football teams, with around 100 players per team = 25,000 D1 football players. Obviously there are not 25% of all D1 players in the portal.

I agree.