In the ever-expanding world of the NCAA transfer portal, the narrative is often framed around player empowerment—athletes taking control of their futures, finding better fits, or chasing dreams at the next level. But the most comprehensive data to date tells a different, more sobering story.
According to a new white paper by AD Advisors and Timark Partners, which analyzed over 14,000 Division I men’s basketball transfer portal entries since 2019, the portal isn’t lifting players up the ladder—it’s pushing them down it.
The Harsh Numbers
Here are the biggest takeaways from the study:
65% of all DI men’s basketball players who enter the portal either transfer down a level or don’t find a new home at all.
From the Power 4 and Big East (Tier 1) schools, 70% of transfers either drop to a lower tier or exit Division I altogether.
In Tier 2, which includes conferences like the A-10, AAC, and MWC, a stunning 74% of athletes either moved down or failed to transfer.
Even in Tier 3—the lowest competition level of DI—61% of athletes ended up transferring out of D1 or failing to find a new team. That means most of these athletes are exiting the Division I level completely.
The study also showed that many of these athletes bounce around multiple schools:
25–26% of athletes in Tier 1 and Tier 2 transferred multiple times, with the average number of teams played for exceeding two.
The Myth of the Upward Transfer
While a few high-profile names do “transfer up”—such as players moving from mid-majors to high-major programs—the data shows these are the exceptions, not the rule. Only:
12% of Tier 3 athletes moved up in competition.
16% of Tier 2 athletes moved up to Tier 1.
And among the few Tier 1 athletes who transferred but stayed within Tier 1, the majority landed with lower-ranked programs, usually within the same conference.
This trend—particularly of intra-conference movement—is also a new recruiting headache. SEC, Big Ten, and other top conferences are now routinely losing players to rival programs after investing years in their development.
So What Does This Mean?
The findings are crystal clear: for the vast majority of players, the portal is a step down, not up. It’s less of a talent showcase and more of a last resort for playing time. While the portal offers autonomy, it also introduces instability—rosters churn, development stalls, and many careers fade out altogether.
This also exposes a deeper systemic gap: players are making life-altering decisions in an increasingly complex, competitive, and volatile environment—often without the full picture or proper support.
The Call for a New Model
The authors suggest a future where every athletic department operates like a professional HR team—focused not just on recruitment, but also retention. Think: onboarding processes, player development, benefits guidance, and relationship management.
Because without that infrastructure? Schools will become nothing more than revolving doors—churning players in and out, with little continuity or community.
As House v. NCAA continues to reshape college athletics, and schools prepare for revenue sharing and increased NIL stakes, this data should serve as a wake-up call. If you're not building a system to support your athletes—before they enter the portal—then you're just building a pipeline to nowhere.
You can read the full study, Portal Pushdown: The Trend No One Talks About, at the link below
