The transfer portal may finally start to cool from the wildfire it’s been in recent seasons, especially if revenue sharing forces the Power Four into similar—and much smaller—spending lanes. Schools that just splurged $14–22 million this cycle could be looking at only $3–4 million next year once football takes its massive cut and basketball eats second off a $21 million, essentially hard cap. With fewer giant bags to throw around, the market should correct itself, and the random, money-driven moves—players hopping to schools with no regional or roster logic—should decline.
But don’t mistake this for an end to transferring. Even before unlimited transfers, NIL deals, and bidding wars, college basketball saw more than 1,200 moves per year. Revenue sharing might stabilize rosters a bit and reduce desperate overpays, but it won’t stop the churn—especially at non-P5 mid-major programs, where player budgets will remain significantly lower.
I’ve compiled a list below of about 200 players who are strong candidates to move next offseason, focusing on mid- and low-major standouts, as well as players at schools with coaches on perceived hot seats or low-resource Power Five programs. The reasons behind these potential moves fall into a few clear patterns:
Coaching Instability: Some players are tied to programs where the head coach could jump to a bigger job—or get fired—putting the entire roster at risk. When a coach leaves, players follow, or at least start exploring options.
Playing Time Crunches: Others are facing a numbers crunch. The role they think they deserve likely won’t align with the minutes they’re about to get, pushing them to find greener pastures.
Serial Movers: Some have already transferred once or twice. When a player has shown no inclination to stay put and there’s still more money—or opportunity—to be had, history tells us how that story ends.
Motivations differ: some will move to chase a bigger role, some will move because they fell short where they are, and a select few will follow the next payout or the next clean slate. But the conclusion is consistent: movement is coming—more targeted, more strategic, and this year, far more likely tied to coaching dynamics than the free-for-all bidding wars of the past two cycles.
Below are our mock transfer expectations, highlighting top mid- and low-major candidates, the reasons they might move, and their likely destinations. While no projection is perfect, this should provide a roadmap for understanding how the next portal wave could reshape college basketball rosters.
