Edge Labs EDGE LABS Market intelligence
MLB CFB NFL
Board Research Tools The Lab Record Vault Sign in Get full access
Edge Labs · College football · Portal Intelligence

Who is reloading. Who is getting gutted.

The transfer portal rebuilds rosters every cycle, and the market does not bucket on it. For every program we surface the incoming transfer class by count and average stars, the net portal balance (in minus out), and total roster churn. This is roster intelligence, the talent moving underneath a team, not a pick and not a claim to beat a line. Every number is a literal count with the program set shown.

SECBig TenFBS onlyFCS only

Filters

season · division · conf
Clear
2025 portal cycle · Big Ten Roster movement, deduped to the latest snapshot
n=18 · small set
18 programs. A single conference or division slice. Honest counts, modest sample.
Programs in scope 18 with portal activity this cycle
Avg transfers in 30.3 per program, incoming
Avg transfers out 42.8 per program, departures
Star avg coverage 18 of 18 carry a class star avg

Biggest incoming classes

count × avg stars
Most transfers added this cycle. The star average is the recruiting composite of the incoming class · volume and talent are different questions.
# Program In Avg ★ Net
1 Purdue Big Ten 78 3.07 0
2 UCLA Big Ten 48 3.14 -3
3 Indiana Big Ten 37 3.06 -11
4 Wisconsin Big Ten 36 3.16 -9
5 Michigan State Big Ten 36 3.09 -4
6 Washington Big Ten 30 3.07 -20
7 Michigan Big Ten 29 3.20 -26
8 Minnesota Big Ten 29 3.07 -10
9 USC Big Ten 28 3.35 -15
10 Illinois Big Ten 27 2.92 -11
11 Maryland Big Ten 25 3.09 -24
12 Ohio State Big Ten 24 3.53 -7
13 Northwestern Big Ten 24 3.13 +5
14 Nebraska Big Ten 23 3.41 -25
15 Rutgers Big Ten 23 3.10 -23
Top 15 of 18 · n=18

Most roster churn

in + out
Total bodies moving in and out. High churn is a rebuilt locker room · who you saw last season is not who takes the field.
# Program In Out Churn
1 Purdue Big Ten 78 78 156
2 UCLA Big Ten 48 51 99
3 Indiana Big Ten 37 48 85
4 Michigan Big Ten 29 55 84
5 Wisconsin Big Ten 36 45 81
6 Washington Big Ten 30 50 80
7 Michigan State Big Ten 36 40 76
8 Maryland Big Ten 25 49 74
9 USC Big Ten 28 43 71
10 Nebraska Big Ten 23 48 71
11 Rutgers Big Ten 23 46 69
12 Minnesota Big Ten 29 39 68
13 Illinois Big Ten 27 38 65
14 Ohio State Big Ten 24 31 55
15 Iowa Big Ten 15 34 49
Top 15 of 18 · n=18

Net portal gainers

reloaded
Brought in more than they lost. Net balance is roster headcount, not a talent grade · a big net gain at low stars is still a rebuild.
# Program Net In Avg ★
1 Northwestern Big Ten +5 24 3.13
Top 1 · n=18

Net portal losses

gutted
Lost more than they replaced. A deep net loss is a roster bleeding out · context for who has to rebuild, never a read on a game line.
# Program Net In Out
1 Michigan Big Ten -26 29 55
2 Nebraska Big Ten -25 23 48
3 Maryland Big Ten -24 25 49
4 Rutgers Big Ten -23 23 46
5 Washington Big Ten -20 30 50
6 Iowa Big Ten -19 15 34
7 USC Big Ten -15 28 43
8 Penn State Big Ten -15 14 29
9 Indiana Big Ten -11 37 48
10 Illinois Big Ten -11 27 38
11 Minnesota Big Ten -10 29 39
12 Wisconsin Big Ten -9 36 45
13 Oregon Big Ten -9 19 28
14 Ohio State Big Ten -7 24 31
15 Michigan State Big Ten -4 36 40
Top 15 · n=18

Roster intelligence, not a bet. This is the talent moving through the portal, the data the market does not bucket on. It is context on who is reloading and who is rebuilding, never a pick, a win rate, or a claim to beat a spread. Star averages are the recruiting composite of the incoming class, not on-field production. Counts are deduped to the latest snapshot per program. 2020 is left out · it predates the portal era and is effectively empty. The newest cycle is still moving and marked in progress. Every number shows its program set (n). 21+ · research, not advice.