NFL Draft: How NIL and transfer portal have impacted small-school prospects, plus top options from 2025 class

Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) and the transfer portal have had a massive impact on college football, and it has filtered up to the NFL as well. 

The transfer portal was instituted in the fall of 2018, and the inclusion of a one-time transfer rule allowing immediate eligibility and transfer windows were added in subsequent years. NIL was adopted in the summer of 2021. The feeling was that either or both would cripple small schools and their ability to place players in the NFL as more of them transferred up to Power 5 schools. Although a small sample size, there is now data to address that theory. 

Over the past 10 years, I recorded the number of prospects drafted from Group of 5 conferences (Sun Belt, American Athletic Conference, Mountain West, Conference USA and Mid-American Conference), as well as other small-school prospects to see if the number of draft prospects coming from those institutions had, in fact, been impacted.

Ten prospects from non-power programs have been drafted in the first round over the past five years:

• Toledo CB Quinyon Mitchell, Eagles (No. 22 overall in 2024)
• Cincinnati CB Sauce Gardner, Jets (No. 4 overall in 2022)
• Northern Iowa OT Trevor Penning, Saints (No. 19 overall in 2022)
• Tulsa OL Tyler Smith, Cowboys (No. 24 overall in 2022)
• Chattanooga OG Cole Strange, Patriots (No. 29 overall in 2022)
• BYU QB Zach Wilson, Jets (No. 2 overall in 2021)
• North Dakota State QB Trey Lance, 49ers (No. 3 overall in 2021)
• Tulsa LB Zaven Collins, Cardinals (No. 16 overall in 2021)
• Houston EDGE Payton Turner, Saints (No. 28 overall in 2021)
• Utah State QB Jordan Love, Packers (No. 26 overall in 2020)

It is worth noting that conference affiliation was determined by which conference each prospect resided at the time of being drafted. A discretionary choice was made to lump independent Notre Dame teams in with Power 5 schools because of the heights at which it recruits. The other independent schools were sectioned with Group of 5 schools. The number of Group of 5 and other small-school prospects were added up and divided by the number of total picks over that 10-year period to determine the average. 

There is a lot of red among the non-Group of 5 subcategory in recent years, but the Group of 5 results are not as conclusive. The theory is that small-school prospects below the Group of 5 may be matriculating upwards to the Group of 5 schools, which offsets some of the losses felt by Group of 5 prospects transferring to Power 5 programs. 

Jets senior football advisor Rick Spielman — the longtime former Vikings general manager who drafted the likes of Adrian Peterson and Justin Jefferson — illustrated the benefit some prospects receive by continuing their collegiate careers. 

“If they’re going to be a Saturday pick and even a late Friday pick, why not go back to school and try to improve your draft stock?” Spielman said in an interview back in December. “Because I’m sure these colleges have some kind of, not only NILs, but whatever insurance packages. Whatever the total financial packages, it’s probably worth more than if they’re not a first- or second-round pick. Or they’re transferring to another school.”

East-West Shrine Bowl football operations director Eric Galko noted that new opportunities have relieved the pressure to leave college at the first opportunity to earn money in the NFL. Instead, they can transfer up to a Power 4 program, gain additional exposure and continue their development while still earning money. 

“Guys can now get paid in college. Guys no longer have to make leaving college decisions based solely off money. The next domino of that is guys can opt to choose their development over playing in the NFL right away because they can stay in school, make money and get similar value to what they [would earn in the NFL]. The next step of that is that guys do not feel pressured to leave early before they are ready and therefore, the guys when they do come out, are a little more refined.”

There is another level to the conversation that is more nuanced. Can a general manager’s draft choices shed some light on a personal or organizational philosophy? The number of non-Power 5 draft choices by each general manager was divided by each general manager’s total number of selections on each day of the draft to reveal a percentage. 

There are 13 personnel executives who have been in their positions pre-dating 2020. Of those, 11 are among the 14 who have drafted an above average rate of non-Power 5 talent on Day 3. Eric DeCosta of the Ravens and Brian Gutekunst of the Packers are the two exceptions — although it’s worth noting that DeCosta has one of the highest percentages of picking non-Power 5 prospects on Day 2, while Gutekunst traded up in the 2020 NFL Draft to select a non-Power 5 player (Utah State’s Jordan Love) with the No. 26 overall selection.

Among newer general managers, it could be a matter of total opportunities. A batter in Major League Baseball may not get a hit in his debut, but it does not mean that he will not hit .250 or better on the season or over the course of his career. More data is needed to conclude how the decision-makers of these teams view non-Power 5 players.

Top non-power conference prospects in the 2025 NFL Draft

All rankings via CBS Sports’ consensus prospect rankings.

1. RB Ashton Jeanty, Boise State

• Prospect ranking: No. 11 overall | Position ranking: No. 1 RB

Jeanty is a well-rounded running back prospect who should hear his name called early in the 2025 NFL Draft. He is a dynamic runner who also provides value in pass protection and pass catching. In 2023, he caught 43 passes without dropping a single attempt, according to TruMedia. Among running backs with at least 100 rushes last season, Jeanty’s 40.5% tackle avoidance rate was the best.

2. EDGE Mike Green, Marshall

• Prospect ranking: No. 18 overall | Position ranking: No. 5 EDGE

If the pre-draft process were a test, then Green aced it. He flourished at the Reese’s Senior Bowl in January and acquitted himself well at the NFL Scouting Combine. Green posted 17.0 sacks and three forced fumbles in his final season with the Thundering Herd. Marshall has not had a first-round pick since quarterback Byron Leftwich in 2003. 

3. IOL Grey Zabel, North Dakota State

• Prospect ranking: No. 27 overall | Position ranking: No. 2 IOL

Zabel played offensive tackle and offensive guard at North Dakota State, but he cross-trained at center during the Reese’s Senior Bowl as well. Projected as an interior player, Zabel brings great value with positional versatility. The Bison have produced a top-50 overall selection in three of the past four years. 

4. CB Shavon Revel, East Carolina

• Prospect ranking: No. 32 overall | Position ranking: No. 3 CB

Revel is a long, trait-sy cornerback who had garnered notoriety coming into his final season with the Pirates. He recorded two interceptions in three games before a torn ACL brought his season to a disappointing end. In a relatively weak cornerback class, Revel stands to benefit despite his injury. 

5. DL Darius Alexander, Toledo

• Prospect ranking: No. 45 overall | Position ranking: No. 8 DL

Alexander is another prospect who used the pre-draft process to his advantage. He showed that he could compete with power-conference talent at the Reese’s Senior Bowl, then blazed a 4.95-second 40-yard at the NFL Scouting Combine at 305 pounds. It is a deep defensive interior group, but Alexander is unique in the way that he also aligned on the edge for the Rockets in 2024.

Other non-Power 4 prospects in the top 100 overall: Bowling Green TE Harold Fannin Jr. (No. 53), Utah State WR Jalen Royals (No. 80), William & Mary OT Charles Grant (No. 85), SMU RB Brashard Smith (No. 86), Central Arkansas EDGE David Walker (No. 95) and Western Michigan CB Bilhal Kone (No. 98). 

The 2025 NFL Draft is to take place from April 24-26 at Lambeau Field in Green Bay, Wisconsin. More draft coverage can be found at CBSSports.com, including the weekly mock drafts and a regularly available look at the eligible prospects.