State of the Progam

Ringing the Bell on a new era of UM Football.
minutefanjsf
Senior
Posts: 1618
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:17 am

Re: State of the Progam

Post by minutefanjsf » Tue Dec 03, 2019 3:51 pm

78 wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 3:37 pm
minutefanjsf wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:17 pm
78 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:00 pm
So if the transfer rumors are true, the only running backs on the team next year will be those who are included in this year's recruiting class. I guess we have to include Roberson, a converted wide receiver and Santiago, a converted linebacker, but I would prefer real running backs. It's easy to see this team winning one game max again next year.
Is Torres gone? Also there were 3 freshmen RBs that were decent size, (all from instate, PWO, maybe?) not sure if they can run....or pass protect...I don’t think any of them got in a game as true freshmen.
I guess that's my point. None of these guys played. Not sure if any of them are scholarship players or if they are good and there are expectations for them. My point stands that the only two running backs who played and who will be returning are a converted wide receiver and a converted running back. Doesn't give me much confidence.
Torres got some meaningful carries and did well. My guess is we are looking for a JUCO or grad transfer RB.

User avatar
econalum
Senior
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 10:31 am
Location: Acton, MA

Re: State of the Progam

Post by econalum » Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:31 pm

Whatever the students' reasons for xfer, given the already low roster numbers, it is a bad look for UMass and. hard to recruit against. :?
Feeling entitled is JUST a feeling...

minutefanjsf
Senior
Posts: 1618
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:17 am

Re: State of the Progam

Post by minutefanjsf » Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:10 pm

econalum wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:31 pm
Whatever the students' reasons for xfer, given the already low roster numbers, it is a bad look for UMass and. hard to recruit against. :?
Kids all over the country are transferring and new coaches are the main reason for large numbers of transfers. Rules are the same for all teams. CC for example had ten guys enter the portal...

McKinney
Senior
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:12 pm

Re: State of the Progam

Post by McKinney » Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:23 pm

minutefanjsf wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:10 pm
econalum wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:31 pm
Whatever the students' reasons for xfer, given the already low roster numbers, it is a bad look for UMass and. hard to recruit against. :?
Kids all over the country are transferring and new coaches are the main reason for large numbers of transfers. Rules are the same for all teams. CC for example had ten guys enter the portal...
Arkansas currently leads the country for most kids in the transfer portal at 31 (per 247sports). :shock: Huge aftermath from Chad Morris?
https://247sports.com/college/arkansas/ ... ferPortal/

Maybe my biggest surprise was SMU. They're having their best season in 35 years. First AP ranking and first 10 win season since their death penalty in 1987. And yet they currently have the 2nd most players in the transfer portal (30).

Other notables: #12 Penn State is 4th in the portal with 23 players. #17 Michigan is 10th in the portal with 20 players.

Now it may get worse, but despite how bad it may seem, UMass currently has the 81st most players in the transfer portal (right on the median).

The NCAA needs to do something about the 25 player limit in accordance with the increased volume of transfers.
Ryan McKinney - Class of 2019 - @mckinney2019

dennisdent
Junior
Posts: 713
Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 7:18 pm
Location: Too close to the Beltway

Re: State of the Progam

Post by dennisdent » Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:03 pm

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... m-10-title

Have to say that I agree that if UMass played Akron again the Zips would win. Bell would play Brito and we all know how that would end up. This program was coached so bad that they messed up being the worst program by suspending West and Brito being hurt, leading to the Curtis/Fallon show. :oops:

Berkman
Hall of Fame
Posts: 5320
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Mooresville, NC
Contact:

Re: State of the Progam

Post by Berkman » Fri Dec 06, 2019 4:45 pm

With the NCAA new policy to allow players to transfer after 4 games they need to allow the teams to replace scholarship that leave with a replacement scholarship player. If It means that a school looses say 7 scholarship players they should be allowed to offer scholarships to 7 more players in addition to the 25 they are limited to now. Some teams may never be able to get back up to the 85 scholarship player they are allowed to have.

Post Reply