The NCAA transfer portal is the most disruptive force in college sports right now — and almost all the coverage is aimed at fans tracking which wide receiver just left Ohio State, not at families trying to get their athlete recruited. But the portal reshapes the landscape your athlete is recruiting into, regardless of what sport they play or what division they're targeting. Over 31,000 student-athletes entered the portal in the most recent cycle. Understanding what those numbers mean for a high school recruit is the part almost no one explains.
What the transfer portal is
The portal launched in October 2018 as a compliance management tool — a database where college athletes can formally signal that they want to transfer. Under the old system, an athlete had to request permission from their current school before speaking to coaches at other programs. Coaches could block transfers, delay them, or impose conditions. The portal eliminated that permission requirement entirely.
The process now works like this: an athlete tells their school's compliance office they want to enter, the school must add their name to the database within two business days, and from that point coaches at any other school can legally reach out. Athletes can also request "no-contact" status while listed, which lets them explore options without being flooded with calls.
Two rule changes accelerated everything. In 2021, the NCAA granted immediate playing eligibility for one-time transfers in most sports — players no longer had to sit out a year at their new school. In 2024, the NCAA eliminated the one-time restriction entirely: athletes can now transfer as many times as they want and play immediately, as long as they meet academic requirements. Entry windows are sport-specific — football's main window runs in December and January, basketball in April, baseball in June — but those windows now open every year.
The result: from roughly 15,000 entries in 2018-19 to over 31,000 in the most recent cycle. That's not an anomaly. It's the new baseline.
How it changes the recruiting landscape for high school athletes
The core problem isn't that athletes transfer. It's that the portal gives coaches a parallel recruiting market that operates on a fundamentally different timeline and risk profile than high school recruiting.
A 21-year-old transfer with three years of college game film is a known quantity. A 17-year-old recruit is a projection. When a coach has a roster spot to fill, the portal offers proven production on a fast timeline — sometimes within days of a spot opening. High school recruiting requires committing to an athlete who won't set foot on campus for two years.
Coaches are explicit about this calculation. "A coach literally told me 'we like your film but we are going to see who enters the portal in December before we offer any more HS players,'" one athlete wrote. "So I'm just supposed to wait while everyone else commits?" Another parent: "My son is getting ghosted by coaches who used to be interested. Why would a coach take a chance on a 17-year-old when they can just grab a 21-year-old with three years of college experience from the portal?"
These aren't outlier experiences. They reflect a structural shift in how coaches build rosters.
New roster limits effective July 2025 have intensified this dynamic. Track and field programs went from effectively uncapped to a 45-athlete-per-gender limit. Programs across sports are managing tighter rosters with less margin for developmental athletes — which increases pressure to fill spots with players who can contribute immediately. Transfers meet that description better than incoming freshmen. The math is straightforward. Across sports from soccer to football to track and field, high school recruits are no longer the default first option for filling a roster spot.
The verbal commitment problem
Verbal commitments have always been non-binding. The NCAA's position has never changed: either side can walk away from a verbal commitment at any time. What changed is that coaches now have an efficient, organized mechanism to find upgrades after making a verbal offer to a high school recruit.
Before the portal, a coach who verbally committed a high school player in February had limited options if they wanted to upgrade — a graduate transfer here, a walk-on there. The portal changed that. December brings hundreds of players at every position into the database simultaneously, many with immediate eligibility. A coach who sees a better fit can stop returning calls. This isn't speculation: market research on the recruiting process documents verbal commitment instability as one of the most acute pain points families face, with the portal identified as a direct driver.
The NLI — the National Letter of Intent, once the only binding document in high school recruiting — was eliminated in 2024. There is now no formal binding mechanism in the process outside of a financial aid agreement signed after enrollment. A verbal commitment is exactly what the name implies: a word.
Parents who follow this landscape closely disagree about what it means. One father, hoping rule changes would help: "I hope this would lower the number of 'committed' players getting dumped at the last minute with no place to go." Another parent in the same discussion: "I think it will increase the likelihood of committed players getting dumped at the last minute." That two engaged, informed parents reach opposite conclusions should tell you something about how volatile the environment has become.
This doesn't mean verbal commitments are worthless — most hold. It means that treating a verbal offer as a done deal, and stopping outreach to other programs, is a mistake the current landscape no longer allows.
How the portal affects different divisions
The transfer portal's impact is not uniform. Division choice now involves the portal question directly.
NCAA Division I is the most disrupted environment, especially in football and basketball. These programs have the most scholarship money at stake, the most national competition for talent, and correspondingly the most portal activity. At D1 programs, the competition between portal transfers and high school recruits for the same roster spots is documented and growing. High school recruiting class sizes at major programs have shrunk in recent cycles as coaches fill more spots through the portal.
NCAA Division II operates on an equivalency scholarship model — partial scholarships split across a roster rather than full rides. Portal activity exists, but the financial scale is smaller, and the displacement effect on high school recruits is less severe. D2 is a meaningful option for athletes who would be competing for roster spots at D1 programs that increasingly prefer proven transfers.
NCAA Division III has zero athletic scholarships. Without scholarship dollars driving portal movement, the financial mechanism that fuels aggressive portal use at D1 is absent. Coaches still recruit through the portal, but the environment is significantly more stable for high school recruits.
NAIA operates outside the NCAA transfer portal entirely. NAIA has its own separate system and eligibility rules. There is one critical trap: time spent competing at an NAIA institution counts against an athlete's NCAA Division I eligibility clock. Athletes who use NAIA as a stepping stone to D1 will arrive with less remaining eligibility than a traditional high school recruit — and some arrive ineligible entirely.
What high school families should do differently
The portal is a structural feature of the recruiting landscape. It doesn't reverse course when signing day passes or when the news cycle moves on. Here's what it means for how families approach the process:
Start earlier.
If coaches are waiting for portal windows before committing to high school recruits, you want to be the athlete a coach has had a two-year relationship with — not someone they're hearing about in October of senior year. Coaches who have built a genuine connection with an athlete and their family are less likely to break a verbal offer for a portal stranger.
Build a bigger target list.
Target 30–40 programs rather than 15–20. Some of those programs will fill your position through the portal and go quiet. Having more options means no single program's pivot leaves you without a path.
Ask coaches directly.
When you're in contact with a coach, it's fair to ask: "What percentage of your roster spots do you fill through the portal versus high school recruiting?" A program that recruits primarily through the portal for your position is not a reliable target, regardless of how much they express interest in your athlete. A coach who values developmental high school athletes and builds around them is a different conversation.
Treat verbal commitments as provisional.
Keep communication open with your other target programs until you've signed a financial aid agreement. This isn't disloyalty — it's recognizing the reality of a landscape where commitments on both sides have no formal backing.
Take division fit seriously.
If the portal is displacing high school recruits at D1 programs in your athlete's sport, the answer may not be to compete harder for the same spots. D2 and D3 programs may offer more playing time, a more stable recruiting relationship, and a better overall experience — especially for athletes who aren't elite national prospects.
The bottom line
The transfer portal didn't create bad recruiting — but it fundamentally changed the terms. Coaches who previously had limited mid-cycle roster options now have access to an open market that runs on a faster, lower-risk timeline than high school recruiting. The families who navigate this well are the ones who build relationships early, target programs realistically across a range of divisions, and don't confuse a verbal offer with security.
If you're still getting oriented to how college recruiting actually works, the transfer portal is one piece of a larger system — the overview maps the full process across all eight steps. When you're ready to build a list of target programs that accounts for portal dynamics, our guide to building a college recruiting target list walks through how to evaluate fit at multiple division levels. And if you're deciding between D1, D2, and D3, the division choice now directly involves the portal question — the stability of the recruiting environment varies significantly by level.