Ryan Day says Ohio State will use the transfer portal, but “doesn’t like” leaning on it too much

Ohio State coach Ryan Day is making one point clearly as the Buckeyes prepare for the next phase of the college football season. Day said he appreciates what the transfer portal can add to a roster, but he also does not like what it does to team-building when it becomes a crutch, an “I don’t like it” reality he sees around the sport.

Day’s comments land in a moment when the portal has become a central part of nearly every major program’s offseason calculus. For most coaches, the portal is one of the quickest ways to fill positional needs, add experience, and adjust to what happens during spring practice and the early recruiting cycle. Lane Kiffin’s teams have often been referenced for how aggressively they build through the portal, and Day’s remarks reflect the broader debate about whether those roster “patches” are helping or eroding the foundation of long-term development.

In Day’s framing, the portal has legitimate upside for Ohio State. The Buckeyes, he indicated, were able to get transfer players who he believes will help the team next year. That acknowledgment matters because it directly ties the portal to on-field outcomes, not just off-field strategy. Still, Day’s stance is not simply pro-portal. He also sounded concerned about the game turning into a “rely on it every time” approach, rather than a complement to a program’s recruiting and development pipeline.

Ohio State’s coaching staff, like nearly all top programs, has to operate inside the current rules environment of college football. The portal exists, players can move, and coaches have to plan for attrition and opportunity, especially as roster turnover continues to be a defining feature of the sport. Day’s comments suggest the Buckeyes intend to use the portal when it genuinely improves the team, rather than treating it as the default path to roster strength.

The more subtle issue behind Day’s frustration is what it implies for continuity. When teams increasingly incorporate transfers on short timelines, the learning curve can be steep, and the culture of a program can be harder to sustain through consistent reps and shared offseason routines. Day’s “doesn’t hold back” approach points to a desire to protect the identity of how Ohio State builds players, even while acknowledging that transfers can provide immediate help.

For Ohio State fans, the practical question now is how the Buckeyes balance the portal with the rest of their roster plan as the season approaches. If the team continues to add newcomers and relies on them early, Day’s concerns could become a storyline to watch, particularly around chemistry, execution, and how quickly new players settle into the program. If Ohio State gets contributions that feel seamless and temporary, the portal will look less like a workaround and more like a targeted tool.

The larger takeaway for college football is that the portal debate is not going away. Coaches are not just evaluating talent; they are also wrestling with what the system rewards. Day’s message suggests Ohio State’s leadership sees value in the portal but wants to avoid a future where programs are defined less by recruiting and development and more by constant roster churn.