Kiffen is no Pete Carroll, so what the hell is he sellng
OT: S Max Redfield to USC
Probably the same thing Carroll was selling? CA has a ton of talent, and SC is really the only elite team west of Austin. They have very good academics, tons of history in terms of NCs, Heismans, etc., great weather and a team built to win now. Not everyone prefers that, but it's not too hard to find 16 talented guys who do, especially when most of them grew up in bike riding distance from campus.
but Oregon has a lot of work to do if they want to be mentioned with the timeless 'elites' like USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama, etc. Oregon's been relevant for just barely 10 years now, right?
Oregon didn't go to a bowl game between 1963 and 1989. They went to the Rose Bowl once between 1920 and 1994 and won it for just the second time this past season. They've been solid the last two decades and have had an incredible run the last three years, but they just aren't in the same ballpark as SC (more Rose Bowl wins than Michigan, OSU and Washington, combined).
Agreed with both of the posts above. People in CA, at least SoCal, don't see Oregon as being in the same league as SC, figuratively, of course. Oregon is like the new money, who could blow through it at any point. USC is the wealthy family that has been the rich guy in town for generations.
There's no good reason to think Oregon can maintain their recent level of success. It's almost certain that SC will.
I know one extremely wealthy man who would beg to differ with you...
That's the problem. The athletic department's success at Oregon has been built on the back of Phil Knight. He is 74 years old. What happens when he dies?
The general assumption amongst Oregon fans (I live in Oregon) is that Uncle Phil money will be there regardless of whether or not Uncle Phil is. Their new basketball court is named after his son, and the feeling is that Knight will either set up a ridiculously large endowment for the athletic department or his children will keep the coffers full. In short, they aren't worried.
Whether that's true or not, only time will tell.
Not to mention that part of the reason they even won the Pac-12 was because of USC's ineligibility.
None of these guys were alive in 1989...
However, they still almost always have to take SC's leftovers for recruiting. SC has a chainlink fence up around California and a Brick wall around SoCal. Mcquay and Hargreaves will go else where because SC's remaining spots will be spent on more pressing positions.
OK, your first two statements pretty much contradict each other though. If they take your left overs, then they aren't elite. And as a guy who has seen the Pac-12 perspective and the national perspective, Oregon is not really elite. Oregon is kind of like Wisconsin in the Big Ten. The most successful team over the last 5 years or so, but not much success more than about 15 years ago, a poor recruiting base and still in that next tier in terms of overall program strength.
Oregon is flashier, partly because of the offense and partly because of Nike, but still short of that "elite program" status.
Wisconsin probably has a more stable program, all things being equal. They have nearly 2 million more people in their state, don't have to share that state with another D1 football program, have a bigger stadium and stronger academics as well.
Oregon has also probably benefitted (along with Boise State) from a lack of direction recently at places like Washington, Colorado, and ASU. If those programs can poach one or two of those second tier guys from Oregon every year, the Ducks will be in a much more difficult position.
Generally when you insult someone's intelligence you want your reply to be error free.
Might be able to help me out but the same thing could be said for UCLA just not quite the past history. What makes it so hard to get any traction for that program the last 15+ years?
Nothing this can do but help.
I think we might be seeing that severe scholarship restrictions can actually help a team recruit elite talent. You get to sell kids on a depth chart that's almost guarantees playing time and eventual starting positions. Depth is obviously a challenge, but I think there are some interesting lessons coming out of this.
I have a diary in mind here, but I'm pretending to work right now, so it'll have to wait for a bit.
SC isn't landing anybody they wouldn't have otherwise gotten, and if anything are losing out on guys they otherwise would have offered (their class is basically done with a lot of talented guys left on the board). Just about all of these guys are coming from CA (with two from the Delaware high school where the staff formed a relationship after recruiting still-young QB David Sills).
I think the only lesson is that a school with a high profile Heisman candidate coming off a 10-2 season and a head coach with a reputation as a good recruiter and an assistant coach with a reputation as the best recruiter in the country in a desirable location that is also a recruiting hotbed at a school that has undergone a major facelift (opening a shiny new football facility soon) and has seen a major upsurge in its academic reputation in the last decade while also producing the winningest team in major college football over the same time period will be able to convince a lot of good players to come there to play football.
People talk about LSU and Ohio having it easy being the only big name school in a talent rich state but frankly, USC might as well be in the same boat right now. California is just loaded every year and until Cal and UCLA become relevant, USC will continue to just load up on talent
but the Athletic Department don't give a shit about football. UCLA has better location than USC (USC campus is in the ghetto and has fences around it).
I agree with your first sentence entirely. UCLA's athletic department doesn't want to spend the money on football that they need to. However, I don't think the campus has much to do with it. Downtown LA is getting a lot better, especially for an athlete with all of the ESPN stuff going on down there, and the possibility of a football stadium being built right next to Staples.
And keep in mind where a lot of these football recruits are coming from. A lot of them might actually feel more comfortable in not-quite-south central LA than in Bel Air. And SC's campus isn't dangerous, it's just close to dangerous. 95% of the kids at SC are wealthy, private school kids. If D1 football players didn't feel safe, those other kids wouldn't stand a chance.
at LA a couple years ago. UCLA campus is in a much better location than USC.
Their facilities really have been appalling for a long time, but Tedford is a good coach and the stadium renovations and new practice facilities are way better. Still not quite a match for USC or Oregon on those fronts, but they're now probably third in the Pac-12. Their bigger challenge has been to get their teams to gel over time. They have tons and tons of NFL players from the past five years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Golden_Bears_football#Current_NFL_Players
Why was their only really good year Aaron Rodgers' last? Outside of that year, they struggle ot break .500 every time. So weird.
Stanford is also on a major hot streak with recruiting. So long as they keep winning, they'll be the fourth destination for recruits in the conference. Washington is also coming on a bit of late.
Yeah, Cal is a weird case. Like UCLA, they should be good, but they just aren't for some reason. But I'd put UW third in the Pac behind USC and Oregon.
Stanford isn't as much of a recruiting threat to the CA schools as you'd think, since they usually have small-ish classes due to low attrition, but mostly because they recruit nationally a lot more than any other west coast school. Stanford has 6 commits in the class of 2013, only once of which is from CA.
To me, Stanford seems to be in a tenous position at the top of the Pac-12. I could easily see them having a down year or two, big name players realize that it's Stanford Football again, and they go back to doormat. I don't think Stanford is as sustainable esp. with the higher academic standards...which Cal may also have to deal with so that may be irrelevant. Either way, I'm not sure that Stanford is going to be able to maintain their success without an Andrew Luck piloting the team
The corner they landed this week is from Tennessee. They pulled a receiver from Texas earlier this year. Max Browne, their big quarterback recruit is from Washington dtate. They also got a 2014 comitt from an o lineman from Chandler Arizona today. Let us not forget they took a running back recruit from Illinois off Michigan's plate about a month ago.
The geography of USC matters huge but the location of the recruits is no particular matter that Kiffin can't overcome. He was national recruiting coordinator for Carroll when they pulled the epic 2002 and 2003 classes which basically flipped them into a modern dynasty.
Well, you can just say "West Coast" instead of CA if you want, because that would include the kids from WA and AZ. USC pretty much owns the western half of the US.
And yes, they get kids from elsewhere every year. But the majority of every class of theirs is from CA.
EDIT: Over the last two classes, 23 of 32 commits/signees are from CA, almost 3/4, plus the top recruit from Washington each year. 25 of 32 from the west coast.
^^^^This. I tutored a number of SC football players during my time there (02-06). Naturally our discussions turned to football quite often. I asked each of them why the rest of the league couldn't hang with them and they all gave different versions of the same answer. The vast majority of highly talented football players on the west coast go to SC. One very high profile guy I talked to even told me his best friend from high school had to go elsewhere in the Pac-12 (10 at the time) because he never got that SC offer. In his words, "playa could start on any other team in the country 'cept ours."
Did the guy go to LB Poly or Tustin High?
One of the guys I tutored did attend LB Poly, so I'm sure you can deduce who that was. However, he is not the one that told me the bit about his friend.
A scholly reduction can be a positive factor in recruiting but we should call it what it is. Lane Kiffin is a great recruiter. During his 1 yr at Tenn he was able to rake in players like Bryce Brown and Arnett, and he's doing the same at USC. Whatever he's selling, kids have always bought for some reason. Or maybe the young men are swept away by all of the "coincidental" orgies that take place everytime they visit...
This has to lock up McQuay right? I mean us vs Vandy shouldn't be a contest other than proximity to home
I didn't even know Vanderbilt had a football team, what the heck is he waiting for?
i don't know man. james franklin has got his players believing in themselves and not settling for doormat status. they were insanely close to upsetting georgia and arkansas last year. there's a lot of momentum in that program. not saying they're contenders this year or even next year, but i could easily see why a recruit would want to go there now.
Yea I was joking.
Not really. He is very interested in producing music and Vandy is supposed to have a great program.
The good thing is when he visited he was able to tour the studios with Jack Kennedy.
I'm a music major, and gigging jazz musician in Indianapolis. There is a good amount of musicians that work in both cities. The ones I know say without a doubt Belmont is the better music school, especially for recording engineers. So, the idea of Vandy having a leg up in that regard is kind of a myth. I suppose there is the close proximity to the scene there, but the school itself isn't as high profile as Michigan for recording. That's just my opinion, so take it as you will.
Hah. The jokes on USC. Their avg stars on rivals went down
So funny! Really scary that's the case
I really hope Hoke can continue to build on the relationships he established while coaching at SDSU... there is just so much talent in California.
USC will typically get the best players from the state, but that still leaves many top guys available that we would all love to come to Michigan.
Any chance Kiffin has found some kind of loophole and is going to sign more than their 18 everyone says they have? I mean, they seem to still be leaders for a number of guys.
It's getting crowded in that SC defensive backfield, Sua.
Not scared of USC at all. It's almost impossible to have a great team without depth.
Can't tell if serious.
Respond with some insight instead of the canned skeptical response, please.
I'm sorry that the quality of my response did not meet the high standards that you expect/ exemplify on this board on a daily basis. In the future I will go to great lengths to make sure that I fulfil any and all quality standards set forth by you, oh great barometer of what qualifies as "postable." I hope I have not offended you, and hope that your Thor-wrath has been avoided with this humble statement of apology. Godspeed, eFriend.
The interesting part about the McQuay recruitment will be what happens if James Franklin has another successful season at Vandy and big time programs start their coaching searches. He will be at the top of all of their lists.
Yeah, or a TE. SC likes to use the TE, and they don't have any in this class and only one in the class before. Point is, they have needs and DB is obviously not one of them anymore.
The Trojans already have 3 OL commits in the 2014 class and the west coast has a bunch of highly rated guys at LB next year (not to mention 4 freshmen played at LB for the Trojans last year) so it looks like Kiffin and Co. are content to wait on those spots rather than reaching for a guy in 2013. DT is really the only glaring need spot on the depth chart but after Bigelow and Vanderdoes I'm not sure Kiffin has anybody on the board who he would take above a 5* type at another position.
Well, there was some scuttlebutt about Cravens being recruited as a LB.
So I'm not the only one who thinks its weird that USC is pulling better classes than the years they were caught cheating for in the middle of scholarship penalties... I'm not really expecting their recruiting to suffer when they're allowed full class numbers again. This is just a little crazy. "Hey Farva, what's the name of that restaurant you love with all the goofy crap on the walls?"
It shouldn't seem that weird. They're one of the only programs in the country who can pitch "top program" and "favorable depth chart." Not to mention "proximity" to some of the top talent in the country.
"Hey kid, you want to be a 3 year starter at LB/DE/anything else for a program like USC? Well because of our limits, you'll only have to beat out one kid and I know you have what it takes."
Except to the kids in CA, where they just have to offer and then they come.