5 star RB Davis to USC
So I'm sure I will catch some hell for this but here it goes anyway. Remember Kyle Prater, the 5 star WR a couple years ago from Illinois who ended up at USC that everyone was recruiting. He went to USC and eventually lost out to all the other WR they had most of whom were California recruits. Ty Isaac is the second 5-star RB to pull the trigger for USC in the last couple days now. Only one of them is going to start, only one will be the man, and only one will get the bulk of the work. I know, I know everyone says they will be a team player, and they just want the chance to compete, but at some point 5 star, ESPN 150, Under Armor, Army All-Americans expect to play. If its close dont you go with the local talent Davis kid where you are trying to keep/build a pipeline? (and Stockton St. Marys, and Lincoln where Davis is from is an area that produces a ton of talent)
Its very strange to me that a kid like Isaac who would be the favorite to be a starter in a couple years, at a school that is much closer, at a school that has a higher academic standing, at a school that has the best offesive line class in the country, at a school where his parents could attend every home game and most of the away games if they chose to, would choose USC?? Gotta hand to Kiffin and Old Ed as he is called in SEC country for getting the job done.
Almost forgot, Prater is now at Northwestern. Couldn't find the field in Southern California I guess. You can say what you want about injuries, but he was healthy at one point and some how still never played.
This isnt meant to be proof in any one direction just something I noticed. Ty looks to be the type that will stick it out no matter what.
Isaac is one player I wouldn't stop recruiting until signing day. You just never know.
I wouldn't get your hopes up though. Isaac seems like a smart guy and wasn't quick the pull the trigger. I would guess that he just felt more comfortable in USC's atmosphere than Michigan's, which is unfortunate for us but that's how the game is played. Yeah we are closer, have better academics, and whatever else you want to say but college is college to most recruits and rightfully so. Most aren't going to care whether he attended Michigan or Alabama if you tell them you played football. A lot of the times those guys get help from alums or fans and the simple exposure of playing. Plus USC has hot girls, medical marijuana cards, and sunny beaches (with sand as hot as the damn sun).
It sucks but he felt more comfortable at USC. Good for him, though it does sting missing out on a five star prospect (the main reason so many people actually wanted him; because his stars look and feel good).
I will definitely not get my hopes up, but I still recruit this (and any other highly coveted) kid until the final bell. Especially when in his "final two" prior to his verbal. 9 months is an eternity when you are in high school. Girlfriends, family situations, erosion of rapport with SC's coaching staff, etc.
Is Marijuana not a NCAA drug policy violation for medical card holders? Not sure why, but I've never considered this... MI has medical now, too, tho I hear. Can't beat the Cali Outdoor goodness, of course.
It is interesting, but given that Davis has been considered a USC lean, and even lock, for some time, Isaac had to know that this was likely to occur and factor that into his decision. It would be a much more intriguing story if Davis commited out of no where, or if USC had told Issac that they weren't going to take any other RBs...
but, it is a long way to NSD. Is it against NCAA rules to recruit someone's mom?
Dude said # of recruits at his position wasnt going to affect his decision.... For all we know he may welcome the competition at his position.
Jesus Christ, quit crying. We lost out on a fucking kid. Boo hoo hoo. Who gives a shit.
agreed
i mean the post was a little bit over the top. but you arent sad about losing out on ty isaac? i viewed him as a potential future heisman winner.
I’m not so concerned myself. First of all, calling a high school kid a future Heisman winner is extremely premature. Second, we already have good depth at that position. Third, I personally didn’t expect him to commit anyway (based on the very flimsy and biased belief that if you don’t commit shortly after having the COY chant your name while you’re in attendance, you’re never committing). Fourth, our O line should be good. Really, really good. If our O line recruits pan out, I am of the (also unsubstantiated- paging Mathlete?) belief that who the RB is doesn’t matter as much. Would have been nice to get him, but we didn't. I'm happy with who we have.
I think you're being a little pessimistic. Norfleet and Hayes as all-purpose backs, Rawls, Smith and possibly Johnson as every down backs, and Houma/Shallman as bruising fullbacks. Not to mention whoever signs LOI's for the class of 2014. We'll be fine by the time Fitz leaves.
Yeah I'm pretty impressed with Deveon Smith's film. I'm really confident with him pounding the rock in the future. He's perfect for the pro offense and our gigantic OL class. Isaac might be better, but Smith will be damn good.
We have so many options at RB after Fitz, idk what you are smoking. Between Rawls, Smith, and Shallman, plus with norfleet and hayes as our sproles like options, I think we will be just fine.
are so charming
My mom says I'm a catch.
Exactly. Thank you.
We all remember that situation. I am much more of a reader than contibutor to this board over these years, but I think most of us would agree with you. They certainly recruit well at USC, and I won't ever criticize a player for his choices. I met a couple of the song-girls years ago, and they would probably have made the choice difficult for me too (that is if I had any football talent and the opportunity to be a local celebrity there). We'll be fine, and so will USC; hopefully we'll have a chance to meet up with them again soon on the field.
We all remember that situation. I am much more of a reader than contibutor to this board over these years, but I think most of us would agree with you. They certainly recruit well at USC, and I won't ever criticize a player for his choices. I met a couple of the song-girls years ago, and they would probably have made the choice difficult for me too (that is if I had any football talent and the opportunity to be a local celebrity there). We'll be fine, and so will USC; hopefully we'll have a chance to meet up with them again soon on the field.
Players never seem to care about depth charts. Every year I notice that kids would rather go to the "it" school with a bunch of other 5 star recruits then go to some other school where their skills are needed. See our OL last year and this year.
That is why schools like Alabama are able to keep oversigning elite players. (We could too if we wanted to.)
I saw a video clip recently of some random 3* Linebacker announcing his college choice at the halftime of a basketball game. They stopped everything while 1000 fans breathlessly awaited this kids announcement of where he would attend college. This scene repeats itself hundreds of time across the country every year.
The point? That there is so much fussing and fawning over high school athletes that even have a sniff at D1, that they all wind up thinking they are Pro-Bowl bound and the rest is a formality. All sense of reality is gone. They are all going to be stars. Why worry about mundane issues like a depth chart? There are Song Girls to chase.
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you have. One kid will not make or break the program. Our O-line will make our running backs look good.
"a school that has a higher academic standing"
I'll just leave this here....
USC: 23
Michigan: 28
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/spp+50
Arguments can be made in favor of either school, but neither is far enough ahead of the other so as to enable your kind of sweeping statement.
I'm not sure which is more ridiculous, the original argument, or the fact that people still cite usnews as an accurate authority on educational quality.
I agree that U.S. News is a terrible source. You do have me on that, and I apologize. I merely wanted to make the point that it isn’t quite as clear as the OP seems to believe. I figured that adding some kind of citation would be a bit more compelling than just stating it. If you prefer though, I’ll just stick with this: “You know, USC’s a pretty damn good school too.”
US News is a terrible source, but USC's also done a lot over the last 15 years in terms of hiring faculty and boosting its grad programs and departments to make itself a much better school. It's no longer (only) the Univ. of Spoiled Children. It's not at the level of its aspirational institutions (Stanford, Vanderbilt and Northwestern) but it has improved markedly.
You have to be interested in law. You're always nit picking about some bs.
The world rankings use a different methodology and are much more focused on international programs/international students.
So a different ranking methodology makes one list more valid than the other?
In theory, it could.
In relation to this particular discussion, when did princess aurora ever say that the world rankings were superior? All he said was that they used a different methodology, not that one was better than the other. Yeesh.
USNews takes into account student/faculty ratio (public universities obviously have a larger ratio), 'selectivity' of applicants (public schools have more slots/year, thus "lower" selectivity). Thus, UCLA, UCBerkley, Michigan, UNC, UWisc, UVa are all dinged.
If you goto Asia, no one knows wtf USC is. But they sure as hell know where University of Michigan is.
Stop with the world ranking BS. This is heavily heavily weighing faculty prestige and grad programs that football players will never see / benefit from. Let's just call them equals as undergrad, even though the "experts" would say that USC's undergrad is better.
I read an article in the Times last year about those college ranking sites. USnews is one of the worst. It's essentially advertising for the college and not a true reflection of the quality of the institution. Simply put, there are politics and money involved. That's why USnews has no real credentials but they are the first to pop up in a google search of college rankings. It's merely advertising for the colleges and lacks any true merit.
The Shanghai Rankings are a list of global rankings that are probably the most fair, as they are global (no involvement with US colleges). Michigan is 22 and USC sits at 46, right behind Penn State. USC is good, but it's often perceived as being better than it is because it's private. Most people don't delve into the methodology behind these rankings so sites like USnews get away with fooling people. Academics play a really insignificant role in football recruiting, though.
You do realize that ranking is for under grad only? Doesn't take into account law, med, etc.
This is what OSU and Sparty say about our O-Line class. He'll be fine. If he would've succeeded at Michigan, he'll find a way to succeed at SC. Not to mention Michigan's class already has two running backs, though not as highly touted, in the fold. Move on.
Who knows if he will succeed at SC. By Ty's sophomore year, USC will have two more 5* running backs and not every one of them will be successful.
He might want to get away from home or he might be into the ladies, you just never know. With that being said, I wouldn't feel bad in the slightest if we flipped him later on!
Yeah, that was a horrible post. Are you are saying that any 5-star kid from Illinois that commits to USC is going to fail and transfer back to the midwest because it happened once?
I think he was saying that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for two top 3 running backs to go to the same school.
For now.
Well that's kinda the point. Tyler never surpassed McKnight and only got his shot after McKnight left early for the NFL. He got lucky that he even got a shot at all.
Also, kind of funny since neither of them actually impressed in college. Tyler never had a 1000 yard season and McKnight barely inched over one himself. They both had pretty good averages when they ran but never got a ton of carries at USC. McKnight went in the 4th to the Jets and has 323 yards while Tyler was signed to Green Bay at a free agent and has never played a down in the NFL.
We sometimes get too excited over a high ranking. Nobody is a guaranteed stud at the next level of competition.
Honestly, we should just be happy with the kids we get.
Losing out to USC is almost a given. I would expect that unless a kid grows up completely enamoured with Michigan (Morris), USC is going to win 9 out of 10 battles due to location.
Its a paradise out there.
take the Metro to practice?
Not a fan of the reasoning. It is in USC's best interests to play the best kid. It won't hurt the pipeline if the high school coaches are reasonable people.
We lost out on a 'non-essential' kid to some coaches who are awesome at recruiting.
I upvoted for the info about Davis committing, however.