forums

On Judd Anderson

View as article
Advertisement
Wake_Cane said:
Yes but I don't want to have $500,000+ tied up in my scout team QB who may never even play a down for me. That's what has to be balanced against.
Click to expand...
You're not on the hook to pay anyone who isn't progressing or producing more than a year. Let's say you shell out money to sign a guy and he gets paid as a freshman but he's just not progressing and isn't ready to take the job as a second year player (any blue chip QB should be capable of starting as a sophomore) then you cut ties. He likely transfers out and you move on to the next guy. Singing an elite recruit doesn't mean you need to pay him elite recruit money for 4 years. Unless he turns out to be a superstar.
 
DTP said:
You're not on the hook to pay anyone who isn't progressing or producing more than a year. Let's say you shell out money to sign a guy and he gets paid as a freshman but he's just not progressing and isn't ready to take the job as a second year player (any blue chip QB should be capable of starting as a sophomore) then you cut ties. He likely transfers out and you move on to the next guy. Singing an elite recruit doesn't mean you need to pay him elite recruit money for 4 years. Unless he turns out to be a superstar.
Click to expand...
We will pay Cam Ward elite QB money for 0 years of being a scout team QB. These are tough choices with extreme tradeoffs that have to be weighed on a case by case basis.
 
Wake_Cane said:
Yes but I don't want to have $500,000+ tied up in my scout team QB who may never even play a down for me. That's what has to be balanced against.
Click to expand...

If you think there's a significant chance he'll never play a down, why sign him in the first place?

And what about the TF third team LT who never played a meaningful down this year, but was paid big money to sit? If the argument is "money tied up on the bench," doesn't that logic play closer to the FSU/Ole Miss model?
 
Lsu just had a Heisman Trophy winner who came from the portal. Not to mention the finalists for the Heisman this year Nix ( portal), Penix ( portal), Harrison and the winner Daniels ( portal ). Even further if Jordan Travis doesn’t snap his leg that’s another candidate, which makes four transfer qb’s as Heisman finalists.

It’s a new age and qb should be treated like free agency unless it’s just a generational type. Your money goes further bringing in a proven G5 / P5 guy every year or two and signing a developmental type. If you hit on one of your developmental guys even better.

Thats just my take on a situation that’s already a crap shoot unless your Lincoln Riley and he’s had his fair share of transfer qb’s.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
No_Fly_Zone said:
Fair enough. You spend more money on the proven commodity than an unknown one. I understand that premise.

But if a team is going that route at the most important position in football, it needs a better back-up plan than Anderson. I don't want a $2.5M starter and $25,000 back-up.

Yes, we should be trying to throw around big money for P4 starter-quality portal QBs.
Yes, we should also be throwing some (albeit it much less) money for solid HS QBs.
Click to expand...
It’s much much harder to find elite OL or DL in the portal than a qb. Most of those guys stay put.
 
Cribby said:
It’s much much harder to find elite OL or DL in the portal than a qb. Most of those guys stay put.
Click to expand...

I've never seen the numbers, but I'm confident that's right for OTs and DTs. Every year it seems there are some very good IOL and DE options. Seems like fewer OTs and DTs, though.

QBs, WRs, RBs, edge defenders, and DBs seem to make up the bulk of the quality, P4 starter quality dudes.
 
DTP said:
We just payed “allegedly” millions of dollars for a portal QB. Good quarterbacks are going to be expensive, period. Pay for the recruits or pay for the transfers. Otherwise you’re just hoping to find a diamond in the rough. Because if you think 5 star quarterbacks have a high bust rate, 3 star quarterbacks have a MUCH higher bust rate.
Click to expand...
You don’t pay for a position that has close to a 70% transfer rate if the player doesn’t start after year 2. Here’s the unfortunate reality, Miami hasn’t developed a real NFL QB in decades. The price Miami has to pay for elite HS QB’s is not the same price as other places that have either won at an elite level or are known for cranking out QB’s to the league.

3 stars bust higher than 5 stars, yes you’re correct but they transfer a helluva lot less. We actually have an opportunity to have guys in our system for 3-5 years. Old QB’s win games. Emory is a capable, JB is capable, Cam Ward pre Wazzou was a 0 star. we don’t know what/who Judd is yet. But we do know Judd has the skill set and traits plus the biggest thing, he’s basically free.

this is the best article written on this subject. It talks through the exact data on top 50 QB’s transferring. The numbers say it’s a horrible investment. https://theathletic.com/4148781/2023/02/02/quarterbacks-college-football-transfer-portal/
 
Nil definitely changes how you have to recruit QBs. Just think about all the blue chip Top 100 guys that never amount to **** every class. Do you really want to pay them this massive NIL deal and them not end up doing anything of significance? If you do go after one of these guys it needs to be close to a sure thing.
 
Advertisement
COCane4Life said:
You don’t pay for a position that has close to a 70% transfer rate if the player doesn’t start after year 2. Here’s the unfortunate reality, Miami hasn’t developed a real NFL QB in decades. The price Miami has to pay for elite HS QB’s is not the same price as other places that have either won at an elite level or are known for cranking out QB’s to the league.

3 stars bust higher than 5 stars, yes you’re correct but they transfer a helluva lot less. We actually have an opportunity to have guys in our system for 3-5 years. Old QB’s win games. Emory is a capable, JB is capable, Cam Ward pre Wazzou was a 0 star. we don’t know what/who Judd is yet. But we do know Judd has the skill set and traits plus the biggest thing, he’s basically free.

this is the best article written on this subject. It talks through the exact data on top 50 QB’s transferring. The numbers say it’s a horrible investment. https://theathletic.com/4148781/2023/02/02/quarterbacks-college-football-transfer-portal/
Click to expand...
The reason top QBs transfer so much is because the top schools hoard them and when they don't beat out any of the other 5 star QBs they're competing with, they transfer. We're not Texas with a quarterback room full of elite prospects. The only way a 5 star QB would be transferring out of Miami is if he couldn't beat out Emory or Judd. And honestly, if he can't beat out those guys, I'd prefer he transfer rather than take up a roster spot. An elite quarterback should be able to take the starting spot in year two at the latest. If not, let him go somewhere else. The whole reason we had to chase a transfer quarterback for 2024 is because we signed a bunch of project quarterbacks who might take 3 or 4 years to be ready to play, if they're ever ready to play.
 
DTP said:
The reason top QBs transfer so much is because the top schools hoard them and when they don't beat out any of the other 5 star QBs they're competing with, they transfer. We're not Texas with a quarterback room full of elite prospects. The only way a 5 star QB would be transferring out of Miami is if he couldn't beat out Emory or Judd. And honestly, if he can't beat out those guys, I'd prefer he transfer rather than take up a roster spot. An elite quarterback should be able to take the starting spot in year two at the latest. If not, let him go somewhere else. The whole reason we had to chase a transfer quarterback for 2024 is because we signed a bunch of project quarterbacks who might take 3 or 4 years to be ready to play, if they're ever ready to play.
Click to expand...
Was Jake Garcia considered elite out of HS? Did he take their spot? Number 48 overall player in his class 16 spots from a 5 star.

The reason we chased a transfer the same reason Ohio State chased Will Howard. QB evaluation is incredibly difficult. Even schools that are stacking top ranked QB’s are taking QB’s in the portal. Your argument is flawed.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
If you think there's a significant chance he'll never play a down, why sign him in the first place?

And what about the TF third team LT who never played a meaningful down this year, but was paid big money to sit? If the argument is "money tied up on the bench," doesn't that logic play closer to the FSU/Ole Miss model?
Click to expand...
I didnt say significant chance he'll never play a down; I said significant chance he'll never play a down for me
 
Advertisement
CanesFan20 said:
Nil definitely changes how you have to recruit QBs. Just think about all the blue chip Top 100 guys that never amount to **** every class. Do you really want to pay them this massive NIL deal and them not end up doing anything of significance? If you do go after one of these guys it needs to be close to a sure thing.
Click to expand...
There can be no doubt. We’re completely ignoring locker room implications for stashing away freshman QB’s and paying them hundreds of thousands dollars.
 
Lance Roffers said:
Any time I’m thinking about a discussion of recruiting, I go back to the fact that recruiting sites are trying to do two things:

1. Their own stated goal is to try and project players to the NFL and not to college. By that very admission your criteria is much different. College football is littered with highly successful QB’s who never had requisite arm strength, height, running ability etc. that the NFL would require to be drafted.

2. They’re trying to sell subs, are unqualified to truly be scouts, and simply rely on coaches to give their “bumps” in rankings.

At the end of the day, recruiting QB’s is a tiny hit rate. What my research has shown to be most successful is a blend of data from an appropriate level of competition, track record of beating teams ranked higher than they are and/or elevate a program from previous status, and recruiting offers (this is a proxy for game film since my model cannot “watch” film and I can’t grade every HS QB in America and enter a grade).

Even then, the r^2 I’m getting on HS QB to college All-Conference at P5 level is ~.22. Much better than recruiting rankings ~.08.

My opinion is teams should be doing the research to put a process in place to identify ways to maximize their chances of hitting on an All-Conference player in college. If your process is moving your implied chances from 22% to 26%, it’s a good Expected Value move, but when you do hit on only one out of four, fans will still see it as a failure by staff and not just the inherent probabilities in play.
Click to expand...

Please refrain from the presentation of verifiable data and well structured analysis.

This is CIS.

It is not appropriate nor appreciated.

Warm regards,

The Management
 
Wake_Cane said:
I didnt say significant chance he'll never play a down; I said significant chance he'll never play a down for me
Click to expand...

Do you think that distinction makes a difference? Ok. Why would you ever sign and roster a kid if you thought there was a significant chance he'd never play a down for you?
 
Advertisement
Cribby said:
Lsu just had a Heisman Trophy winner who came from the portal. Not to mention the finalists for the Heisman this year Nix ( portal), Penix ( portal), Harrison and the winner Daniels ( portal ). Even further if Jordan Travis doesn’t snap his leg that’s another candidate, which makes four transfer qb’s as Heisman finalists.

It’s a new age and qb should be treated like free agency unless it’s just a generational type. Your money goes further bringing in a proven G5 / P5 guy every year or two and signing a developmental type. If you hit on one of your developmental guys even better.

Thats just my take on a situation that’s already a crap shoot unless your Lincoln Riley and he’s had his fair share of transfer qb’s.
Click to expand...
Yup and with the exception of Caleb, all the notable QBs he's had transferred to him at OU (Baker, Murray, & Hurts).
 
01Canes said:
We're a year removed from the first two picks in the NFL Draft being former 5* HS QB's who weren't transfers in CJ Stroud and Bryce Young, both of whom led their respective teams to 41-point performances when their WR's were healthy against utterly dominant UGA defenses littered with future first-round draft picks.
Click to expand...
Stroud and Young were home runs in the Class of 2020. Here are the rest of the Top 10 quarterback recruits that year:

2. Transfer
4. Wide Receiver
5. Transfer (as Running Back)
6. Transfer
7. Transfer
8. Transfer
9. Wide Receiver
10. Transfer

The evidence points to an obvious trend. I get the resistance to Judd from you and @Rellyrell and don’t disagree. But I think you guys are stuck on an outdated QB recruiting model that ignores changes in the game.
 
Wake_Cane said:
You seem to completely understand my argument actually.
Click to expand...

In the context of the actual subject of this thread (i.e., Judd Anderson), I'm not entirely sure what your argument is.

If we had a c/o 2024 $500K QB on the roster behind Ward, I suspect it wouldn't be too difficult to convince him to stick around for 2025 (when Ward is gone). If he loses the competition for QB1, maybe he bolts in the May portal window. Money off the books that you carried for a season. If he wins the job, you've got a steal at $500K and renegotiate his NIL for 2026 (great problem to have since it means he's performed). If someone outbids you, then you take that money and use it to grab another portal QB.

Instead we have Anderson as QB5 for 2024 (maybe QB3 in 2025) and all I have read the last 2 weeks is about "limited roster spots."

My beef is not with a portal-focused approach at QB1. My issue is with the false equivalency that you can't allocate some money to a HS QB while you execute that portal-focused strategy.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top