Transfer Portal Logic Flaws

I agree completely. A player’s desire for a specific factor, like playing time, should be shaped by variables such as their star rating, overall rating, and class year. Take, for instance, a three-star freshman with a 72 overall and impact potential who commits to Florida. At a powerhouse program like that, he will start low on the depth chart and has yet to prove himself, so if playing time is his dealbreaker, the importance of that factor should reflect his situation. Realistically, his playing time dealbreaker should not be graded higher than a C or C minus, given that he is a newcomer competing for snaps on a stacked roster. If Florida is loaded with upperclassmen at his position, he would have been aware of this before committing, so it is reasonable to expect he would be satisfied with limited playing time, maybe 200 snaps or less, rather than expecting a major role.

For example, the five-star quarterback Malachi Nelson spent last season on the bench at Boise State behind Maddux Madsen. Nelson got limited snaps and sat on the bench majority of the year. The coaching staff informed Nelson that Madsen would remain the starter in 2025, Nelson made the decision to transfer. He ended up at UTEP, a much smaller school, where he could secure guaranteed playing time. Nelson’s situation is telling because as a five-star quarterback, he transferred from two large schools seeking immediate playing time, which he was only able to achieve by going to a small school even. By contrast, seeing three-star freshmen transfer simply because they are not getting snaps is a bit unrealistic. While it does occasionally happen in real life, the frequency with which it occurs in the game does not reflect how these decisions actually play out. Adding this kind of context would make player behavior feel far more authentic.