• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Lower Level Transfers

H

HookedonGriz

Well-known member
DONOR
I saw a comment somewhere on egriz that showed some frustration with going after lower level transfers (D2 and NAIA) and wanting more FBS drop downs.

I thought it made an interesting discussion. I noticed there seems to be a purposeful intent by the Griz and others to land some of these lower level transfers. NDSU is doing the same thing this cycle and just landed a standout edge from MT Tech. In chatting with a few others about this strategy, some things stood out:

- sometimes a FBS transfer who didn’t pan out at their program may not do all that well at the FCS level, especially if it’s due to attitude, commitment, or just inability
- a lower level guy is often times a proven star in their conference or division and plays at an elite level already. They often have a chip on their shoulder from being passed up the first time by FCS or FBS. They are thankful a program took a chance on them and they are eager to ball out and prove themselves
- lower level guys don’t really have much in the way of NIL so getting a FCS $ or FCOA is a pretty big deal or bonus for them

The Griz have done well with lower level transfers lately, especially with Peck and Schafer and I think will continue to do well. The DE from CWU (King) has some very impressive accolades as does the safety Orlandi from Carroll College. This TE from St Thomas (Birdno) flashes on tape as well, granted St Thomas is now FCS (but was D3).

Will be interesting to see how this strategy plays out moving forward. It’s really no different than the FBS teams cherry picking the proven studs from FCS and it seems more times than not those players can contribute right away and play at a high level.
 
Last edited:
I don't care what level of Football they come from as long as they can play. Our last two NAIA transfers (Peck, Rice) both ended up being all-conference guys for us. I do think if you're gonna take a lower level guy, you need to go after someone who was either all-conference or all-american, which is the case with Orlandi and King. It doesn't matter as much with the special teams guys IMO.

I think the portal has been good to us so far! We really don't need a complete overhaul like we did last year. Just need to fill some holes.
 
Griz til I die said:
I don't care what level of Football they come from as long as they can play. Our last two NAIA transfers (Peck, Rice) both ended up being all-conference guys for us. I do think if you're gonna take a lower level guy, you need to go after someone who was either all-conference or all-american, which is the case with Orlandi and King. It doesn't matter as much with the special teams guys IMO.

I think the portal has been good to us so far! We really don't need a complete overhaul like we did last year. Just need to fill some holes.
Click to expand...
Agree 💯
 
An FBS drop-down might have the measurables, but if he’s leaving because of attitude or effort, that usually follows him. On the other hand, a D2 or NAIA standout is often a proven producer with a chip on his shoulder and gratitude for the opportunity. Those guys tend to buy in fast and play hungry.

Scheme fit matters too. A 4-star DE built for a wide-9 won’t thrive in a spill-and-kill front. Coaches who recruit to their system and culture hit more than they miss.

Curt Cignetti is a great example. At JMU and now Indiana, his mantra is “production over potential” and “smart, tough, disciplined”. He personally vets every portal addition and prioritizes proven players who fit his style over chasing stars. That’s why his teams are among the least penalized and most consistent.

Bottom line: whether it’s an FBS drop-down or a lower-level star, the question is: does he fit your scheme and culture? Montana’s recent hits (Peck, Schafer, King, Orlandi, Birdno) show that targeting hungry, proven guys works—and it’s the same logic FBS programs use when they cherry-pick FCS studs.
 
Some have been reading Oldngrizzly rambling where I brought this point forward. It's ok you can refer to my posts and start your own thread or even discuss it on a pod, heck most do.
 
406football said:
An FBS drop-down might have the measurables, but if he’s leaving because of attitude or effort, that usually follows him. On the other hand, a D2 or NAIA standout is often a proven producer with a chip on his shoulder and gratitude for the opportunity. Those guys tend to buy in fast and play hungry.

Scheme fit matters too. A 4-star DE built for a wide-9 won’t thrive in a spill-and-kill front. Coaches who recruit to their system and culture hit more than they miss.

Curt Cignetti is a great example. At JMU and now Indiana, his mantra is “production over potential” and “smart, tough, disciplined”. He personally vets every portal addition and prioritizes proven players who fit his style over chasing stars. That’s why his teams are among the least penalized and most consistent.

Bottom line: whether it’s an FBS drop-down or a lower-level star, the question is: does he fit your scheme and culture? Montana’s recent hits (Peck, Schafer, King, Orlandi, Birdno) show that targeting hungry, proven guys works—and it’s the same logic FBS programs use when they cherry-pick FCS studs.
Click to expand...
Bingo!
 
HookedonGriz said:
I saw a comment somewhere on egriz that showed some frustration with going after lower level transfers (D2 and NAIA) and wanting more FBS drop downs.

I thought it made an interesting discussion. I noticed there seems to be a purposeful intent by the Griz and others to land some of these lower level transfers. NDSU is doing the same thing this cycle and just landed a standout edge from MT Tech. In chatting with a few others about this strategy, some things stood out:

- sometimes a FBS transfer who didn’t pan out at their program may not do all that well at the FCS level, especially if it’s due to attitude, commitment, or just inability
- a lower level guy is often times a proven star in their conference or division and plays at an elite level already. They often have a chip on their shoulder from being passed up the first time by FCS or FBS. They are thankful a program took a chance on them and they are eager to ball out and prove themselves
- lower level guys don’t really have much in the way of NIL so getting a FCS $ or FCOA is a pretty big deal or bonus for them

The Griz have done well with lower level transfers lately, especially with Peck and Schafer and I think will continue to do well. The DE from CWU (King) has some very impressive accolades as does the safety Orlandi from Carroll College. This TE from St Thomas (Birdno) flashes on tape as well, granted St Thomas is now FCS (but was D3).

Will be interesting to see how this strategy plays out moving forward. It’s really no different than the FBS teams cherry picking the proven studs from FCS and it seems more times than not those players can contribute right away and play at a high level.
Click to expand...
Some guy named O’Connell rings a bell….I think he plays for the Seahawks now.
 
406football said:
An FBS drop-down might have the measurables, but if he’s leaving because of attitude or effort, that usually follows him. On the other hand, a D2 or NAIA standout is often a proven producer with a chip on his shoulder and gratitude for the opportunity. Those guys tend to buy in fast and play hungry.

Scheme fit matters too. A 4-star DE built for a wide-9 won’t thrive in a spill-and-kill front. Coaches who recruit to their system and culture hit more than they miss.

Curt Cignetti is a great example. At JMU and now Indiana, his mantra is “production over potential” and “smart, tough, disciplined”. He personally vets every portal addition and prioritizes proven players who fit his style over chasing stars. That’s why his teams are among the least penalized and most consistent.

Bottom line: whether it’s an FBS drop-down or a lower-level star, the question is: does he fit your scheme and culture? Montana’s recent hits (Peck, Schafer, King, Orlandi, Birdno) show that targeting hungry, proven guys works—and it’s the same logic FBS programs use when they cherry-pick FCS studs.
Click to expand...
Do you think that may be why we didn’t go after the kid that just signed with NDSU?
 
A good football player is a good football player if it's NAIA, FCS, P4. Let's be honest...speed matters mostly out wide. Let's look at when Ford led the nation in picks and all of that. Was he elite speed? Absolutely not. Good speed, but not elite. Was he a good football player? Yeah he was. A lot of "right place at the right time" stuff is because you understand the game. Basketball reference too...good rebounders are good rebounders because they process the physics quickly. Football is the same way. Understand leverage, positioning, fundamentals...you can be a good player. We need good football players. I don't care if they are 5* Arch Manning type, or zero star Cam Ward type. Get some dudes that can play the game (joke intended here)
 
AZGrizFan said:
Do you think that may be why we didn’t go after the kid that just signed with NDSU?
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. I don't think our scheme fits his strengths. We need more athletic and versatile Dline with how much we need to stunt and twist within our scheme.
 
406football said:
I tend to agree. I don't think our scheme fits his strengths. We need more athletic and versatile Dline with how much we need to stunt and twist within our scheme.
Click to expand...
Hmm I watched a tech game this year and he’s plenty quick, strong and athletic to stunt and twist
 
406football said:
I tend to agree. I don't think our scheme fits his strengths. We need more athletic and versatile Dline with how much we need to stunt and twist within our scheme.
Click to expand...
Hmm I watched a tech game this year and he’s plenty quick, strong and athletic to stunt and twist
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top