Ok sure, I'll play your game.
MSU is woefully behind UM in the portal game because UM brings in so many transfers, where it seems the majority either have one season to play [No, most have multiple years to play], or they play well and promptly decide to transfer out again [Yes, some transfers transfer], resulting in bringing in more transfers. Sounds like a fun cycle to be in. Clearly it worked pretty well last year. Only lost 2 games, although the year prior things didn't go nearly as well. We'll see how it goes this year. So yes, UM has brought in more transfer players who have contributed [And thus has been way better in the Portal than MSU. That is all I've said. That is absolutely true. I don't even know why anyone would say or think otherwise. It is undeniable.] I would argue that MSU brought in the transfer player who contributed the most towards team success in Justin Lamson, but I'm sure that doesn't matter. [That may be true and he was very good, but he still wasn't first team all-conference, and wouldn't have started for UM]
By your same logic, I think we can safely say that UM is woefully behind MSU in high school recruiting [I don't know where UM is in high school recruiting, but UM may be behind, but not woefully, Again, that has nothing to do with comparing the teams in the Portal, and I haven't been discussing high school recruiting] Woefully behind MSU in developing players. [I don't agree.] Woefully behind MSU in building up offensive/defensive line talent and depth [I don't agree]. Woefully behind MSU in recent BSC championships. [1-2 in past 3 years, which are the most relevant years. A few ball the other way this year, and it would have been 2-1 UM] Woefully behind MSU in recent national championship victories and appearances. [Behind a bit in more recent times, but MSU is still woefully behind in championship appearances]
I know which category I'd rather be in. You take the portal wins, the offseason championships, I'll take the real one.