Ed O

I don't think it's necessarily good for players, and even if it is college football might be worse off for it. It definitely gives more freedom to student-athletes, which is a good thing, but it's unclear to me how their graduation rates are impacted and I'm not sure how many kids are simply losing their scholarships since once they enter the portal schools no longer need to honor them (and there's no guarantee another school will give them one). Like I said, though, even if it IS good for the players, it might hurt the game. Teams don't have the same continuity on the field. Fans don't have a chance to root for the same guys. Prominent schools can fill holes with portal free agents, undercutting potential parity. There are a host of reasons why the expanded portal might be bad for the game. I'm no fan of Lake, but I understand his view on the situation.

Ah, yes. I was thinking with the hard cap they closed that up, but... nope. Looking at Alabama, they've got 26 commitments this year, 25 in 2020, 27 in 2019, and 22 in 2018. Which I guess is 100 in four years, and presumably they did the EEs correctly to make the math add up.

So USC had 20 guys sign in December, two commit today, and four transfers. That adds up to 26 guys. I understand that Oregon has bumped its head against the 25-man limit before (see: Chris Steele, et al) and I'm aware that the NCAA might raise that limit this year, but how is USC doing it as things stand today? Anyone know?