Onboarding Athletes in College Football

The transfer portal has changed strength and conditioning in college football.

What has changed? Free agency and reduced roster sizes have changed the game dramatically. The transfer portal has created a need to adapt and take an approach that is similar to the National Football League. The challenge is to onboard athletes as quickly as possible, while mitigating risk.

In the past, a strength and conditioning coach could map out 4–5-year progression. When an athlete arrived on campus, they would embark on a 2–3-year developmental period. As the training maturity increased, we could gradually increase demands and complexity of the training.

With reduced roster sizes, the day of the walk-on may be in the past. Prior to 2025, it was common for roster sizes to approach 125 athletes. Programs may have a group of 40 athletes in a “developmental” mode affording a long term, year-round off-season approach for 3-4 years before stepping on the field.

This system led to some remarkable stories. In the 2003 NFL draft we had 3 walk-ons drafted. Dallas Clark (1^st), Bruce Nelson (2^nd) and Derek Pagel (5^th).

That will be difficult to replicate moving forward in the current system. There will always be a need for “developmental” training in college football, but there will be a smaller window of opportunity in this area. How should you, as a coach, approach this?

When you bring in a new athlete

Movement Screening

The first thing we would do with any new athlete is movement screening. Identifying dysfunctional movement patterns, compensations. The best ability is availability. Screening helps identify what might break and fix it before it does. Through proper screening, athletes can be channeled into corrective exercise groups that address mobility and stability needs. An efficient system will contribute to an athlete being mainstreamed as quickly as possible, while reducing injury risk.

Individual programs

In the current system, 30-40% of your roster can turnover in January. Athletes enter with different training experiences, training maturity and medical history. Designing programs that meet the needs of each individual is more critical than ever. In the past, a coach could take a slower, more conservative approach. A condensed time frame demands flexibility and creativity.

With a 4-5 year training horizon, coaches were able to implement Olympic lifts and barbell strength movements. While effective, these require a significant amount of time dedicated to properly teaching a new athlete and impose injury risks. You should never assume an athlete already has a baseline level of knowledge when entering your program.

Think back to first principles and be open-minded. We know that ground based, three dimensional and multi-joint movements are critical to developing the ability to apply force to the ground. Movements that incorporate all three components improve an athlete’s ability to jump high and run fast. How do we most effectively elevate performance while mitigating risk?

Progressive coaches will look to find more efficient means to develop lower body strength and power. Movements that minimize the teaching component and mitigate risk are best. In the strength area, SL movements allow for extreme loading while minimizing low back issues. In the power category, loaded jumps (bands, vests and dumbells) can be more velocity specific while eliminating the teaching component of the Olympic movements.

Building work capacity

Safe and effective entry into participation requires building work capacity. Elevating conditioning levels will develop resiliency and contribute to reducing injury risk. The challenge here is building work capacity while concurrently incorporating speed work. In this case, less is more while introducing speed development. Microdosing speed is best during this phase. Utilizing analytics, GPS tracking can be beneficial when progressing loads.

Wrap up

Programs that embrace the transfer portal will be the most effective in navigating the current landscape. Managing a fluid roster is challenging. An efficient onboarding system will lead to optimal performance while mitigating injury risk.