Any Portal News Yet

[Cats and Dogs]

Vigen is definitely a bigger man than I. Both Marqui and Bullock were on the sideline today.

Honestly, because neither have played, I’m sure both have assisted on practice squad, so they have earned it. I thought Bullock was going to be decent. Marqui had a few good games, I also remember him making some strange decisions when the ball was is in hand, sometimes a bit of a liability of trying to do to much, I can see why, even now healthy, hasn’t had a chance to play.

I thought Bullock had played some this year, has he not?

[110010110]

Vigen is definitely a bigger man than I. Both Marqui and Bullock were on the sideline today.

If they still want to be involved with the team, then as far as I'm concerned they should be encouraged to do that. Keeping players off the sideline sounds like something Bobby Hauck would do and I don't want MSU to be that kind of program. I guarantee the players and coaches are supportive of the guys who are transferring and still consider them to be a part of the team as long as they're still here.

Unless the player is leaving for a big NIL deal, they are likely looking for a better opportunity to play. Transferring can be a fresh start on a team that needs their abilities and also frees up a scholarship for the team they are leaving. No need to feel jilted.

I completely agree. The harsh truth is every coaches job is to find players that will be able to replace the guys already on the roster. The fact that seniors like Bullock and Johnson have been passed on the depth chart by underclassmen like Neil Daily and Ryan Krahe tells me this coaching staff has been successful in their recruiting job.

[mslacatfan]

My personal opinion-
I have no problem with a player entering the portal that is not getting playing time. Examples above with bullock and Marqui, who have been passed up on the depth chart.

It’s the players that have been given a starting job and enter the portal that just drive me nuts.

My 2 cents

[nanacat]

This is from the article about Marqui Johnson...

"I personally believe I’m more than just a kick returner," Johnson wrote in the DM. "So much talent on a team of this caliber, can’t have everyone on the field at once."

And this totally makes sense. And is why the Cats are 13-0. This staff has done a tremendous job recruiting and developing talent. Tough to see players go, but probably a good problem to have in some ways too.

[Montanabob]

Vigen is definitely a bigger man than I. Both Marqui and Bullock were on the sideline today.

If they still want to be involved with the team, then as far as I'm concerned they should be encouraged to do that. Keeping players off the sideline sounds like something Bobby Hauck would do and I don't want MSU to be that kind of program. I guarantee the players and coaches are supportive of the guys who are transferring and still consider them to be a part of the team as long as they're still here.

Unless the player is leaving for a big NIL deal, they are likely looking for a better opportunity to play. Transferring can be a fresh start on a team that needs their abilities and also frees up a scholarship for the team they are leaving. No need to feel jilted.

I completely agree. The harsh truth is every coaches job is to find players that will be able to replace the guys already on the roster. The fact that seniors like Bullock and Johnson have been passed on the depth chart by underclassmen like Neil Daily and Ryan Krahe tells me this coaching staff has been successful in their recruiting job.

and to totally honest, the coaches may have told they were losing their scholarships. this happens every year but it isn't completely published why a player leaves and was it his or the programs decision. best to have that in private .

[PapaG]

My personal opinion-
I have no problem with a player entering the portal that is not getting playing time. Examples above with bullock and Marqui, who have been passed up on the depth chart.

It’s the players that have been given a starting job and enter the portal that just drive me nuts.

My 2 cents

I’ll start by saying I do have a bias on transferring, because I did so after a decent academic freshman year at UM to MSU the next Fall. It seemed a better fit for me and it ended up being one of the best of my life, even though I was “performing well,” if you will, in Missoula.

To me, this sounds like if they aren’t good enough to play, you don’t care if they’re around, but if they earn a starting spot (they aren’t given) and leave for whatever reason, then that upsets you and the player is disloyal. This is your own weighted system of loyalty, one you may even be unaware of holding.

So really, it seems to me that your view of a student-athlete’s worth to the university lessens if they can’t see the field, but those contributing on the football field are looked down upon if a better opportunity arises. Is this close to correct?

What if I told you the coaches, if a player asks, help all of the players who are seeking other opportunities and even advise them about their choices if advice is requested?

[coloradocat]

My personal opinion-
I have no problem with a player entering the portal that is not getting playing time. Examples above with bullock and Marqui, who have been passed up on the depth chart.

It’s the players that have been given a starting job and enter the portal that just drive me nuts.

My 2 cents

I’ll start by saying I do have a bias on transferring, because I did so after a decent academic freshman year at UM to MSU the next Fall. It seemed a better fit for me and it ended up being one of the best of my life, even though I was “performing well,” if you will, in Missoula.

To me, this sounds like if they aren’t good enough to play, you don’t care if they’re around, but if they earn a starting spot (they aren’t given) and leave for whatever reason, then that upsets you and the player is disloyal. This is your own weighted system of loyalty, one you may even be unaware of holding.

So really, it seems to me that your view of a student-athlete’s worth to the university lessens if they can’t see the field, but those contributing on the football field are looked down upon if a better opportunity arises. Is this close to correct?

What if I told you the coaches, if a player asks, help all of the players who are seeking other opportunities and even advise them about their choices if advice is requested?

I imagine that @mslacatfan meant "earned", not "given".

Most of didn't play so we have a different perspective than you and other players. Everyone on the team is valuable but the starters are more valuable (I don't know how this could be controversial). Because starters are more valuable, when they leave for a "better opportunity" it's more frustrating than a 2/3/scout leaving for a chance to see the field on a lesser team. It's not that we don't care if non-starters are around, it's that we're disappointed that the starters don't stick with the opportunity they have here. Instead of painting us as essentially disrespecting non-starters, consider that we just want the starters to stay.

[BobcatDel]

My personal opinion-
I have no problem with a player entering the portal that is not getting playing time. Examples above with bullock and Marqui, who have been passed up on the depth chart.

It’s the players that have been given a starting job and enter the portal that just drive me nuts.

My 2 cents

I’ll start by saying I do have a bias on transferring, because I did so after a decent academic freshman year at UM to MSU the next Fall. It seemed a better fit for me and it ended up being one of the best of my life, even though I was “performing well,” if you will, in Missoula.

To me, this sounds like if they aren’t good enough to play, you don’t care if they’re around, but if they earn a starting spot (they aren’t given) and leave for whatever reason, then that upsets you and the player is disloyal. This is your own weighted system of loyalty, one you may even be unaware of holding.

So really, it seems to me that your view of a student-athlete’s worth to the university lessens if they can’t see the field, but those contributing on the football field are looked down upon if a better opportunity arises. Is this close to correct?

What if I told you the coaches, if a player asks, help all of the players who are seeking other opportunities and even advise them about their choices if advice is requested?

The other side of this is if I have spent several years coaching you, providing excellent facilities, nutrition, strength and physical training, provided team medical care, paid summer school so you can graduate on time (which we didn’t used to do), provided TV exposure so you can be recognized, surrounded you with high quality athletes so the team is recognized at higher level, hired top level coaches that are difficult to retain…..so I have invested money and time and resources and a first class education building you to a higher level….well yes I would like to hope there is an element of loyalty there if you have risen to starter level with the team. I really would have rather spent my time on other athletes developing them if they were going to have that loyalty and stick with the team to success. And why should I take kids out of high school to develop if they are going to leave…let’s just pursue a more transfer portal strategy….hire mercenaries from wherever we can get them that other people spent time developing….and yes I know teams are doing this. Call it my “weighted view of loyalty” but it is as a valid view just as yours.

At a minimum, I think if schools like MSU are going to be “farm team programs” for FBS programs then MSU should be compensated by the school which desires to take them…..put a value on it….maybe $25,000 for each year or perhaps $50,000 for each year of development we have invested in you. This can then be applied back to our internal programs toward s NIL to help pay or retain athletes or retain excellent coaches. This seems like a win win approach for all.

Now for those kids that aren’t going to make it or just don’t fit on the team or are buried too deep on the roster and would like playing time, I whole heartedly support coaches helping them find a place that they can fit. Yes I have known coaches that do this and I like that they can transfer to accommodate them to find a good home.

The fact coaches are allowing our kids to stay with the team even though they have said they want to enter the portal says as much about the kids as it does the coaches. I’ve seen it on teams and you probably have too….Some kids that are unhappy with their current situation can become a cancer and a disrupter to the team. You’ve seen it…they give a half a$$ effort in practice, they gripe and complain constantly, they cause dissension, they badmouth fellow players and coaches behind the scenes……the team notices this and it is contagious to the team effort. That the current kids are being allowed to stay with team probably says they are giving their best and have the right attitude and coach is letting them stick with it until they can move on. Just an opinion.

[HelenaCat]

My personal opinion-
I have no problem with a player entering the portal that is not getting playing time. Examples above with bullock and Marqui, who have been passed up on the depth chart.

It’s the players that have been given a starting job and enter the portal that just drive me nuts.

My 2 cents

I’ll start by saying I do have a bias on transferring, because I did so after a decent academic freshman year at UM to MSU the next Fall. It seemed a better fit for me and it ended up being one of the best of my life, even though I was “performing well,” if you will, in Missoula.

To me, this sounds like if they aren’t good enough to play, you don’t care if they’re around, but if they earn a starting spot (they aren’t given) and leave for whatever reason, then that upsets you and the player is disloyal. This is your own weighted system of loyalty, one you may even be unaware of holding.

So really, it seems to me that your view of a student-athlete’s worth to the university lessens if they can’t see the field, but those contributing on the football field are looked down upon if a better opportunity arises. Is this close to correct?

What if I told you the coaches, if a player asks, help all of the players who are seeking other opportunities and even advise them about their choices if advice is requested?

The other side of this is if I have spent several years coaching you, providing excellent facilities, nutrition, strength and physical training, provided team medical care, paid summer school so you can graduate on time (which we didn’t used to do), provided TV exposure so you can be recognized, surrounded you with high quality athletes so the team is recognized at higher level, hired top level coaches that are difficult to retain…..so I have invested money and time and resources and a first class education building you to a higher level….well yes I would like to hope there is an element of loyalty there if you have risen to starter level with the team. I really would have rather spent my time on other athletes developing them if they were going to have that loyalty and stick with the team to success. And why should I take kids out of high school to develop if they are going to leave…let’s just pursue a more transfer portal strategy….hire mercenaries from wherever we can get them that other people spent time developing….and yes I know teams are doing this. Call it my “weighted view of loyalty” but it is as a valid view just as yours.

At a minimum, I think if schools like MSU are going to be “farm team programs” for FBS programs then MSU should be compensated by the school which desires to take them…..put a value on it….maybe $25,000 for each year or perhaps $50,000 for each year of development we have invested in you. This can then be applied back to our internal programs toward s NIL to help pay or retain athletes or retain excellent coaches. This seems like a win win approach for all.

Now for those kids that aren’t going to make it or just don’t fit on the team or are buried too deep on the roster and would like playing time, I whole heartedly support coaches helping them find a place that they can fit. Yes I have known coaches that do this and I like that they can transfer to accommodate them to find a good home.

The fact coaches are allowing our kids to stay with the team even though they have said they want to enter the portal says as much about the kids as it does the coaches. I’ve seen it on teams and you probably have too….Some kids that are unhappy with their current situation can become a cancer and a disrupter to the team. You’ve seen it…they give a half a$$ effort in practice, they gripe and complain constantly, they cause dissension, they badmouth fellow players and coaches behind the scenes……the team notices this and it is contagious to the team effort. That the current kids are being allowed to stay with team probably says they are giving their best and have the right attitude and coach is letting them stick with it until they can move on. Just an opinion.

Great post...agree 100%!

[stevo]

[PapaG]

This has been obvious since Hauck attacked Fife after a TD drive and then did the “hug” photo op later that half.

Chaotic program. Hoping Bobby stays 10 more years.

[cat22[2010]]

I am just shocked and never in a million years would have expected this to happen....

[Prodigal Cat]

Fife …. BEEP
Portal …. BEEP
Collision course … BEEP

[Montanabob]

https://406mtsports.com/college/big-sky ... 0b9c5.html

[mslacatfan]

[Bocephus]

This has been obvious since Hauck attacked Fife after a TD drive and then did the “hug” photo op later that half.

Chaotic program. Hoping Bobby stays 10 more years.

Kinda hoping he stays in the Big Sky so he can stick it to Bobbi next year.

[Monymony]

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Gilman next. Poor dude can’t even get out of the backfield.

[MSU Doc]

It must have slipped his mind to thank his coaches...

[BelligerentBobcat]

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Gilman next. Poor dude can’t even get out of the backfield.

I’m not sold there’d be enough takers at schools that would make it worth it to leave.

[mslacatfan]

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Gilman next. Poor dude can’t even get out of the backfield.

I’m not sold there’d be enough takers at schools that would make it worth it to leave.

Gonna disagree with ya there…. That dude is super talented.