2025 Griz Hail Mary

[HookedOnGriz]

Some strange decisions by Bobby in the Portal - a lot of stretches and unprovens. The Portal could be a place to take a gamble on a current year player, but not when you desperately need to replace almost your entire D. These are 2025 stats for the Portal additions:

RB- Phillips – Decommitted
RB- Paine – hasn’t played since 2023 due to torn ACL

OL- Weigel - Decommitted
OL/C- Way - Decommitted
OL- D'ambra – 5 games @ San Diego
OL- Vandiver – Walk-on at South Carolina – never played and blew his ACL last spring
OL- Drummond – 2nd string at UNLV

TE- Birdno – 5 catches @ St. Thomas
TE- Brooks – 1 catch @ Cal-Poly

WR/RB- Boykins – Decommitted – Louisville – big loss – 10.86 in HS
WR- Ransom-Goelz – 6 catches in 6 games before season-ending injury @ Rice – could be a great one judging by HS and Frosh year
WR- Lyons – redshirted – great HS career in Cal

DL- Sandiford - Decommitted
DE/LB- Tovey – 11 tackles @ Utah Tech
DE- King – 2nd Team All-American @ Central Washington
DL- Hanks – Thompson Falls native – hasn’t played college - medically retired in fall camp 2025 but making a comeback

LB/DE- Elliot - Decommitted
LB- Williams – 4 games with 6 tackles @SDSU
LB- Eklund – 7 games with 7 tackles @ Bowling Green
LB- Mose – easily the best of the class – starter with 40 tackles @ Georgetown

CB- Mackey - Decommitted
CB- Stroud – 5 games with 2 tackles @ North Texas
DB- Dunn – 3 years, 15 games, 9 tackles @ Arizona
DB- Johnson – probably highest potential – top 80 in Texas HS – hasn’t played in 2 years @ Arizona State

S- Jackson - Decommitted
S-Paine – 14 Special Teams tackles @ South Dakota
S- Fall – 3 games, no tackles @ ASU
S-Haines – 1 year of special teams only in 3 years @ Wazzu and @ San Diego State
S -Orlandi – 1st Team Conference @ Carroll

I'm sure they are all great dudes but if I'm replacing all of those losses, I'm starting to have some stress about fielding Championship caliber talent.

Who are all these “decommitted” transfers you list who were never committed to the Griz to begin with. Those were simply guys with Griz offers who went elsewhere. Boykins ans Weigl actually verbally committed to Griz and changed their mind but they’re the only ones.

[tetoncat]

Not at all convinced the problem is the portal. The top programs in CFB are utilizing the portal at high rates. The majority of both Indiana and Miami's starts came from transfer guys. The only CFP programs who haven't adopted a major portal utilization philosophy were UGA and Alabama. At the FCS level, many of Illinois State's key guys were transfers and FBS drops. Tarleton, UM, SDSU, UND, USD, UCD, Ill St, and many more have heavily utilized the portal to make key additions. MSU, NDSU, UGA, and Alabama employ a unique philosophy in the new CFB landscape.

I think the true, clear problem lies in the compatibility of our schematics with bringing a lot of portal guys. The 3-3-5 is all fine and good, but you truly NEED a nose tackle who requires double teams in order for your backers to run free and cause the chaos that is the objective. We've had probably 2 NT's in Bobby's tenure capable of doing that. It's damn near impossible to get that kind of NT from the portal at the FCS level. The 3-3-5 also has a lot of nuance that makes it tough to learn, especially in the way Bobby and co. have deployed it. IU utilized some 3-3-5 with heavy portal utilization, but it wasn't their base defense. I think it's increasingly clear that the defensive scheme and heavy portal utilization are incompatible. They should scrap one. I think they should switch to a base 4-3 or a base 4-2-5.

Comparing Power 4 FBS teams to FBS is laughable. They will pay and get the top players in the portal. FCS will get FBS drop downs who may not have even played much, FCS who look to live to better program, or D2 and NAIA guys wanting to move up. SDSU and USD had to go heavy this year due to coach changes and lack of depth showed as season went on. Prior to this year I disagree they used it heavily. You mentioned key additions. There is a difference filling gaps with key additions and signing 20, 30, 40 players and hoping 10 or 15 pan out.

[Grizzlies2026]

Not at all convinced the problem is the portal. The top programs in CFB are utilizing the portal at high rates. The majority of both Indiana and Miami's starts came from transfer guys. The only CFP programs who haven't adopted a major portal utilization philosophy were UGA and Alabama. At the FCS level, many of Illinois State's key guys were transfers and FBS drops. Tarleton, UM, SDSU, UND, USD, UCD, Ill St, and many more have heavily utilized the portal to make key additions. MSU, NDSU, UGA, and Alabama employ a unique philosophy in the new CFB landscape.

I think the true, clear problem lies in the compatibility of our schematics with bringing a lot of portal guys. The 3-3-5 is all fine and good, but you truly NEED a nose tackle who requires double teams in order for your backers to run free and cause the chaos that is the objective. We've had probably 2 NT's in Bobby's tenure capable of doing that. It's damn near impossible to get that kind of NT from the portal at the FCS level. The 3-3-5 also has a lot of nuance that makes it tough to learn, especially in the way Bobby and co. have deployed it. IU utilized some 3-3-5 with heavy portal utilization, but it wasn't their base defense. I think it's increasingly clear that the defensive scheme and heavy portal utilization are incompatible. They should scrap one. I think they should switch to a base 4-3 or a base 4-2-5.

Comparing Power 4 FBS teams to FBS is laughable. They will pay and get the top players in the portal. FCS will get FBS drop downs who may not have even played much, FCS who look to live to better program, or D2 and NAIA guys wanting to move up. SDSU and USD had to go heavy this year due to coach changes and lack of depth showed as season went on. Prior to this year I disagree they used it heavily. You mentioned key additions. There is a difference filling gaps with key additions and signing 20, 30, 40 players and hoping 10 or 15 pan out.

I think you’re being a bit disingenuous with your “20, 30, 40 players” point. The Griz have typically signed between 15-20 transfer guys in a normal cycle. They went higher this year because of a combination of a very large senior class and the house settlement. To be quite frank, 10-20 portal guys I believe is quite objectively a reasonable use of the portal, and the absolute norm at both the FCS and FBS levels. You’re right to point at the difference between P4 and FCS portal recruiting, but there’s a wealth of talent available even for FCS teams at nearly every position. The key difference is the lack of high quality trench talent available for FCS teams in the portal, something I note in my original post.

[BelligerentBobcat]

Not at all convinced the problem is the portal. The top programs in CFB are utilizing the portal at high rates. The majority of both Indiana and Miami's starts came from transfer guys. The only CFP programs who haven't adopted a major portal utilization philosophy were UGA and Alabama. At the FCS level, many of Illinois State's key guys were transfers and FBS drops. Tarleton, UM, SDSU, UND, USD, UCD, Ill St, and many more have heavily utilized the portal to make key additions. MSU, NDSU, UGA, and Alabama employ a unique philosophy in the new CFB landscape.

I think the true, clear problem lies in the compatibility of our schematics with bringing a lot of portal guys. The 3-3-5 is all fine and good, but you truly NEED a nose tackle who requires double teams in order for your backers to run free and cause the chaos that is the objective. We've had probably 2 NT's in Bobby's tenure capable of doing that. It's damn near impossible to get that kind of NT from the portal at the FCS level. The 3-3-5 also has a lot of nuance that makes it tough to learn, especially in the way Bobby and co. have deployed it. IU utilized some 3-3-5 with heavy portal utilization, but it wasn't their base defense. I think it's increasingly clear that the defensive scheme and heavy portal utilization are incompatible. They should scrap one. I think they should switch to a base 4-3 or a base 4-2-5.

You're missing a key portion to what schools like Indiana and Miami are doing.

They are bringing in proven players that performed well at the schools they were at prior to transferring. They're not playing a guessing game on if the player is good or not, they already know.

Now, UM is doing that with Orlandi this year. They did it last year with Wortham, Peck, and that LB from Eastern Illinois or wherever. However, the vast majority of the transfers are players that are dropping down because they weren't getting playing time at a higher level. Could they be good? Certainly! They got to where they were for a reason, but it's far from a guarantee, and comparing it to what the top FBS schools are doing in regards to transfers isn't exactly apples to apples.

FWIW, I hope Hanks works out well because I like to root for Montana kids, but hinging your DT depth on a guy who had to medically retire due to an achilles is one hell of a risk.