Tremendously insightful on an important question. A few minor observations.
First, in my uneducated view relative data is not the same as absolute data. So, while the portal might be smaller in overall impact versus recruiting for talent acquisition, it doesn't mean that the portal has no value at all. Thus, Dabo's ignoring of it feels a bit specious and misguided - he's unnecessarily leaving value on the table for Clemson.
Having said that, the additional insight that the net outflow from the portal appears more important than the inflow is also very important. It makes intuitive sense that better programs will take care of their more prized recruits creating more retention and leaving somewhat less talented players for the portal.
Consequently, Swinney in theory might be able to show that his 100% focus on recruiting results in a more cohesive culture with less net outflow via the portal resulting in great talent. This is at least plausible and found in other settings too such as uniformed soldiers performing better than mercenaries, corporate recruits in the private sector out of college doing somewhat better long term than transfers from other companies etc.
Certainly, having a more organic and deep understanding the culture and practices of a particular organization are valuable and build loyalty. Still, if I were a Clemson fan I would be unhappy at the stridency of Dabo's position here. He might elect to use the portal less, but not using it at all strikes me as overly narrow and poor judgment.
Lastly, I would love to see this analysis expanded to other sports. While the NBA with its fewer players is clearly different, baseball and football with their larger rosters and robust free agent markets and annual Draft would seem to mimic well the collegiate portal/recruiting dichotomy. While different financial restrictions and limited rosters at the professional level are complicating factors, the essential question would seem to be very much the same. Are free agents a better or worse value than home grown Draft picks in building a winner? I'm sure front offices would love some insights.
Tremendously insightful on an important question. A few minor observations.
First, in my uneducated view relative data is not the same as absolute data. So, while the portal might be smaller in overall impact versus recruiting for talent acquisition, it doesn't mean that the portal has no value at all. Thus, Dabo's ignoring of it feels a bit specious and misguided - he's unnecessarily leaving value on the table for Clemson.
Having said that, the additional insight that the net outflow from the portal appears more important than the inflow is also very important. It makes intuitive sense that better programs will take care of their more prized recruits creating more retention and leaving somewhat less talented players for the portal.
Consequently, Swinney in theory might be able to show that his 100% focus on recruiting results in a more cohesive culture with less net outflow via the portal resulting in great talent. This is at least plausible and found in other settings too such as uniformed soldiers performing better than mercenaries, corporate recruits in the private sector out of college doing somewhat better long term than transfers from other companies etc.
Certainly, having a more organic and deep understanding the culture and practices of a particular organization are valuable and build loyalty. Still, if I were a Clemson fan I would be unhappy at the stridency of Dabo's position here. He might elect to use the portal less, but not using it at all strikes me as overly narrow and poor judgment.
Lastly, I would love to see this analysis expanded to other sports. While the NBA with its fewer players is clearly different, baseball and football with their larger rosters and robust free agent markets and annual Draft would seem to mimic well the collegiate portal/recruiting dichotomy. While different financial restrictions and limited rosters at the professional level are complicating factors, the essential question would seem to be very much the same. Are free agents a better or worse value than home grown Draft picks in building a winner? I'm sure front offices would love some insights.
Thanks as always.