Four weeks from today, a new era for the transfer portal officially begins.
The winter transfer window will open on the Monday after conference championship weekend, extending from Dec. 9 to Dec. 28. The seventh year of college programs utilizing the NCAA transfer portal has already begun, with more than 50 FBS players currently on the market. Thousands more will be making moves a month from now.
This year's cycle will hit at a fascinating moment for the sport, on the morning after the first 12-team College Football Playoff bracket is set. Athletic departments are still working on their revenue sharing plans and budgets for 2025. They have more money to spend this offseason, which also means the cost of player retention and acquisition is going up.
It's too early to make solid projections on which players will put their names in the portal. But one month out, here's what to expect from the evolving transfer marketplace.
Jump to:
Rev-share era | Buyers
Losing players | QB market
Receivers | How it works
Entering the revenue sharing era of recruiting
Will this be the craziest transfer portal cycle of all time?
Coaches, personnel staffers and industry sources surveyed by ESPN, on the condition of anonymity so they could speak candidly, are bracing for that possibility but are curious to see just how differently this transfer market plays out as college football prepares for the post-House settlement era of revenue sharing.
The reported projected cap of $20.5 million per school that athletic departments can distribute to student-athletes next year means Power 4 programs that can fully fund revenue sharing could be spending upward of $15 million on their football roster next season. Group of 5 programs are hoping to get to $2-3 million.
What does that mean for the transfer market?
The Power 4 programs with well-run NIL collectives and CFP ambitions were already investing $10-20 million to build up their 2024 teams. Recruiting staffers at those contender schools expect more teams in their conferences to be able to keep pace going forward.
"I feel like this is going to be the last big window," one Big 12 director of player personnel (DPP) said. "I just think with everybody having money and the same or similar amount of money, you probably won't see people moving around as much. You'll see G5-to-P5 transfers, sure, but I just get this vibe it's not going to be what it's always been."
As one SEC DPP put it, the programs that have been thriving in portal recruiting can no longer just throw out $250,000 offers to good players who are making only $50,000 at their current school. The Power 4 programs that could barely raise $2 million or $3 million in NIL funds should have a better shot of retaining their talent.
"It's raising the floor for people who used to be really bad at this," the SEC DPP said. "They can be close to average now, so they don't lose all their guys."
It's reasonable, then, to expect more Group of 5-to-Power 4 transfers than ever this offseason as those players continue to go where they can get paid. Last year, 272 scholarship G5 players ended up joining P4 teams, including 88 who earned all-conference recognition in 2023.
This will also be the first full transfer portal cycle since the NCAA officially dropped its one-time transfer rule in May. Shifting to unlimited transfers doesn't necessarily guarantee that the total number of players who change schools this offseason will significantly increase -- more than 2,700 FBS scholarship players transferred in 2023-24 -- but it will mean a lot more repeat transfers.
The total number of transfers has been increasing year after year, but keep in mind that the pool of players who gained an extra season of eligibility from the NCAA for the COVID-19-shortened season in 2020 is shrinking as those players continue to graduate and cycle out. That means the pool of veteran talent that everyone wants -- proven multiyear starters with pro potential -- might not be what it once was this winter.
In this year's cycle, those players have more incentive to come back than ever before.
"I think guys are going to try to stay in college as long as they can and just find the best opportunities to be able to get paid, because there's going to be more money than ever in the game," one ACC DPP said. "I think it'll have the most amount of kids in the portal that we've seen. It's going to be crazy, and it's already started."
Who's going big?
During last year's December transfer portal window, it immediately became clear which programs were going all-in for 2024.
Ohio State, Oregon and Ole Miss all spent big on transfer talent to chase a national championship in the first year of the 12-team College Football Playoff. Miami did the same in the spring window after seeing just how special quarterback Cam Ward was in practice. All four are still in the playoff hunt today.
Buckeyes coach Ryan Day needed to go get a quarterback and much more after losses to Michigan and Missouri. Oregon came up short against Washington in the Pac-12 title game. Ole Miss had too much good talent returning from an 11-win team. Those programs emerging as highly motivated buyers made total sense. This season, expect the teams that lose conference title games, miss the CFP field or lose first-round games to feel similarly compelled to spend.
Florida's decision last week to bring back Billy Napier for 2025 signaled that the Gators will be one of those buyers. They're going to do all they can to build around quarterback DJ Lagway and their underclassman talent in a must-win year, believing that's a wiser investment in the short term than burning $40 million on a coaching change.
The programs that have disappointed this season -- such as Florida State, Oklahoma and USC -- will have to pull off some wins in the portal in December to help get things fixed. "Anyone that's on the hot seat, you just have to go crazy," another SEC DPP argued. So will the senior-heavy teams like Indiana that have dramatically flipped their roster via the portal.
"We're still going to have to hit the portal hard in December," Indiana coach Curt Cignetti told ESPN, "because the one thing about being in that roster situation I was in, a lot of the guys you bring in are one-year guys and some are two-year guys. So you're looking at somewhere between 28 and 31 seniors on this team. You're going to have to do it again."
Who's losing players?
The recent history of the transfer portal suggests programs going into Year 1 or Year 2 tend to produce the most roster attrition. Indiana, Colorado, Michigan State, Cincinnati, Alabama and Georgia Tech lost the most scholarship players among the Power 4 programs in the 2023-24 cycle.
This year's coaching carousel is getting off to a belated start and might end up being quieter than usual, which creates a little more suspense for this portal cycle. Hot-seat situations at Florida, Arkansas and Baylor have simmered down. Other struggling coaches have buyouts that are prohibitively expensive.
Another factor in the zero in-season firings by Power 4 programs thus far: Athletic directors recognize those moves can blow up a roster. Indiana, for example, hired Cignetti as fast as possible but still had 13 starters in the portal by the time he arrived in Bloomington. Coaching searches that last several weeks can now take a real toll.
Teams are already deep into the process of advance scouting their opponents' rosters and determining whom they would offer if those players hit the portal. They've already watched tape of players at Utah State, East Carolina, Southern Miss and Rice following their coaching changes and know whom they'd like to offer. ECU wide receiver Chase Sowell and Rice left tackle Ethan Onianwa are two examples of multiyear starters who are expected to be coveted by Power 4 programs if they do become available.
These personnel departments hear lots of whispers about which players are unhappy in their current situations and looking to leave. Those back-channel conversations with agents, trainers, high school coaches and other third-party contacts will accelerate over these next few weeks as players line up potential destinations before they officially put their name in the portal.
Another busy QB cycle
At this time last year, you wouldn't have guessed that Will Howard would be the next starting quarterback at Ohio State or that Dillon Gabriel would be leading No. 1 Oregon. This year's QB market should yield many more surprises.
Let's start here: 20 Power 4 teams are set to lose senior starting quarterbacks at the end of the year. There's plenty of internal debate going on right now at those programs about the plan for 2025. Some teams like Oregon, Washington and Ole Miss have clear successors. Ohio State and a few others will have crowded rooms and competitions in spring ball. A bunch more are going to be looking to the portal with the hopes of upgrading.
The draft decisions that LSU's Garrett Nussmeier, Penn State's Drew Allar, Georgia's Carson Beck and others make in January are worth monitoring, too. Will those programs roll with the backups who are up next or pursue more experienced options? Will they scare off their young quarterbacks who'll likely transfer if they take a swing on a veteran passer who may or may not be better?
"I think a lot of schools are struggling with this: talented, young, inexperienced quarterbacks. What do you do?" one SEC DPP asked. "If you need to take a transfer quarterback this year, how good of one do you need to take? It better be worth it."
There are teams with obvious portal needs at the position like Colorado, Michigan, Auburn, Miami and Florida State. But who is going to be the highly touted quarterback who sets off the domino effect this year? It's still early, but there doesn't seem to be a clear No. 1 target right now whom everybody will want.
It's not hard to identify obvious portal candidates like USC's Miller Moss, Texas A&M's Conner Weigman and Oklahoma's Jackson Arnold who've gone through challenging seasons, have dealt with being benched and would have lots of options if they decided a fresh start is needed elsewhere. But unlike in recent years, this cycle won't be dominated by sixth-year seniors.
Two years ago, it was Sam Hartman, Devin Leary and Tanner Mordecai who figured out that one more year of NIL money outweighed the risk of being a late-round NFL draft pick or going undrafted. This season we're seeing Cam Ward, Dillon Gabriel, Kurtis Rourke and many others taking advantage of their extra year and shining. Who's next?
Those veteran quarterbacks with an extra season of eligibility are cycling out of college football, and there are fewer coming back next year due to a technicality with their eligibility clocks: Quarterbacks who enrolled and redshirted in 2020 get to play four seasons, not five.
Georgia Tech's Haynes King, Kansas' Jalon Daniels, Purdue's Hudson Card and North Carolina's Jacolby Criswell lead the short list of Power 4 starting quarterbacks capable of coming back for a sixth year. Four more starters -- Cameron Rising (Utah), Blake Shapen (Mississippi State), Tyler Van Dyke (Wisconsin) and Max Johnson (North Carolina) -- suffered season-ending injuries this fall and could seek medical redshirts to return in 2025.
The shortage of senior passers this offseason has personnel departments taking a closer look at quarterbacks with multiple seasons of eligibility, both at the Power 4 and Group of 5 level. Four weeks out, they've already done their homework, and there's plenty of buzz about which ones they hope hit the portal. They're currently expecting a deep (and pricey) QB market but perhaps not one with many big-name stars on the move.
"There's not one who's worth $3 million," one industry source said, "but I think you're going to have a lot of million-dollar quarterbacks or $750,000-plus. I mean, you had quarterbacks moving around for $250,000 or $300,000 this year that were real, proven guys. That's just not going to happen next year."
In this revenue sharing era, some programs will have the ability to match those offers and hold on to their QB1. A source at one Power 4 program said their rising quarterback is making between $200,000 and $300,000 this year after rejecting bigger programs who tried to poach him last offseason. If they need to pay him $1 million next year, they'll make it work.
Maybe the good ones will become harder to swipe. Or maybe it just means coaches desperate for a top quarterback will have to overpay this winter.
'Million-dollar receivers'
Former Texas wide receiver Johntay Cook II started getting calls from contenders last Thursday morning, as soon as word spread that he'd parted ways with the Longhorns.
The talented former top-50 recruit is moving on after two seasons as a backup in Austin. He's the first big-name talent at that position who has made it known he plans to transfer. Don't be surprised if you see many more wideouts making moves a month from now.
"People are going to go crazy for receivers," the industry source predicted. "There are going to be a lot of million-dollar receivers. There's a lot of teams willing to pay a million dollars for a receiver."
A big reason for that? Look at the teams at the top of the initial CFP rankings. Oregon will have to replace Tez Johnson and Traeshon Holden and will likely lose Evan Stewart to the NFL draft as well. Ohio State's receiver room is always loaded but will miss Emeka Egbuka. Georgia has a major need after the suspension of Colbie Young and dismissal of Rara Thomas. Miami must replace its all-time leading receiver in Xavier Restrepo.
We saw this play out in the spring portal window with defensive tackles. If too many programs are trying to address the same need at the same time, players at that position are sure to pop up in the portal. Derrick Harmon (Oregon), Simeon Barrow Jr. (Miami), Damonic Williams (Oklahoma), Jermayne Lole (Texas), Jared Harrison-Hunte (SMU) and Gavin Meyer (USC) all hit the market at the right moment and are playing critical roles for their new teams this fall.
Recruiting staffers recognize that the going rate for top players at the most valuable positions is likely to go up in this cycle. They're in the process of figuring out their plans and guiding principles for how much they're looking to spend at each position to finish at or under budget.
"The part we've been having the hardest conversations about is: What is everybody's value?" the Big 12 staffer said.
The cap management element of the job is new territory for many of these GMs and DPPs, and some expect the transfer market to become more regulated over the next year. For now, though, they still anticipate another wild offseason is imminent.
"I think people are going to overpay because at the end of the day, at most places, it's still the head coach making the call," one SEC DPP said. "It's not the AD. It's not the GM. It's the head coach. They're overpaying because they need to get the right players in. That's always going to be the case because your coach's job security is dependent upon it, so who cares? Overpay and deal with that issue later."
How will it all work?
The actual process of securing commitments from transfers is changing for this transfer portal cycle.
In October, the NCAA Division I Council approved the elimination of the national letter of intent program. The process of schools getting recruits signed to binding agreements needed to be modernized for the revenue sharing era. This year, NLI paperwork will be replaced by written offers of athletics aid that recruits will sign in addition to their NIL contract with their school.
In the past, schools would announce incoming transfers who signed financial aid agreements, but those players could still flip to another school if they got a better offer before they enrolled. Now, transfers will sign agreements that bind them to the school and ban other schools from continuing to contact and recruit them.
Naturally, recruiting staffers are skeptical about the enforcement around those requirements.
"The first time the NCAA doesn't do something about it, we'll be back to square one," one SEC DPP said.
Because schools cannot begin distributing revenue sharing funds until July 1, these coaching staffs and athletic departments will be asking signees to agree to receive less money in the spring and await full payments in the fall.
There's hope among these recruiting staffs that putting these deals in writing from the start will help curb some of the deceptive recruiting that goes on in the transfer space every year, with players frequently getting promised much more money during their recruitment than they end up earning.
"You can make promises in January and then you have to deliver on them in the summer," one DPP at a Group of 5 school said. "You can't just straight-up lie to guys. It's going to be a different world, which is good."