word is SC will take 29 in thier class

[Braveheart]

Even with these sanctions, I just don't see USC being down for that long after the sanctions ending. They just have too much history and too many positives to stay down forever. I just don't see the Trojans getting back up to the level of Pete Carroll's team with Kiffin at the helm, as Carroll is a far superior coach to Kiffin.

This is how I feel for the most part. The only thing Kiff has one Pete is his staff. Pete started off with a good staff at USC, and it got worse over the years (thanks to Pete's ego).

[greenyellow]

Even with these sanctions, I just don't see USC being down for that long after the sanctions ending. They just have too much history and too many positives to stay down forever. I just don't see the Trojans getting back up to the level of Pete Carroll's team with Kiffin at the helm, as Carroll is a far superior coach to Kiffin.

This is how I feel for the most part. The only thing Kiff has one Pete is his staff. Pete started off with a good staff at USC, and it got worse over the years (thanks to Pete's ego).

I also don't think he could find good enough replacements for the ones that left, or was unwilling to do it so that they didn't threaten his job standing.

[karlhungis]

Even with these sanctions, I just don't see USC being down for that long after the sanctions ending. They just have too much history and too many positives to stay down forever. I just don't see the Trojans getting back up to the level of Pete Carroll's team with Kiffin at the helm, as Carroll is a far superior coach to Kiffin.

This is how I feel for the most part. The only thing Kiff has one Pete is his staff. Pete started off with a good staff at USC, and it got worse over the years (thanks to Pete's ego).

Well, that is a side effect of running a successful program like that. Coordinators end up getting poached. I don't think that Pete's ego got in the way as much as the revolving door of coordinators moving on to greener pastures did.

[Braveheart]

Even with these sanctions, I just don't see USC being down for that long after the sanctions ending. They just have too much history and too many positives to stay down forever. I just don't see the Trojans getting back up to the level of Pete Carroll's team with Kiffin at the helm, as Carroll is a far superior coach to Kiffin.

This is how I feel for the most part. The only thing Kiff has one Pete is his staff. Pete started off with a good staff at USC, and it got worse over the years (thanks to Pete's ego).

Well, that is a side effect of running a successful program like that. Coordinators end up getting poached. I don't think that Pete's ego got in the way as much as the revolving door of coordinators moving on to greener pastures did.

That was part of it, but he made sure to hire guys who were his homies, regardless of how good they were. He had to be the main man who got all the credit. It was the Pete Machine at the end, not the hungry Pete Carroll who found the best guys available, but the Pete Carroll who thought he was USC. I'm not mad at Pete, he made USC what it's been for the last 10 years.

[MacDuck]

With Sarao & Carlisle added as verbals, that brings USC up to 17, not including the 8-9 EEs who have already signed. That likely means they have room for 3 more if they're stopping at 20. Appeals hearing on 22nd won't rule immediately, so they'll get to keep all the kids that sign. Bad thing for USC will be if the appeals hearing ultimately doesn't change the schollie loss of 10 per year for 3 years, then they're still looking at a loss of 25 (not 30 because they accepted 5 loss of '11 class) over the classes of '12, '13, & '14. It gets extended out 1 add'l year due to the appeal unless they want to try and do 25 in 2 classes ('12 & '13) which would seem almost impossible.

[Braveheart]

With Sarao & Carlisle added as verbals, that brings USC up to 17, not including the 8-9 EEs who have already signed. That likely means they have room for 3 more if they're stopping at 20. Appeals hearing on 22nd won't rule immediately, so they'll get to keep all the kids that sign. Bad thing for USC will be if the appeals hearing ultimately doesn't change the schollie loss of 10 per year for 3 years, then they're still looking at a loss of 25 (not 30 because they accepted 5 loss of '11 class) over the classes of '12, '13, & '14. It gets extended out 1 add'l year due to the appeal unless they want to try and do 25 in 2 classes ('12 & '13) which would seem almost impossible.

You didn't put transfers into the equation.

[MacDuck]

Thanks Braveheart.

I know you have a better handle on this I do, so please correct where I went wrong. I'm not trying to be a smart ass as I want to have the correct info. I thought the transfers simply affected their total # on scholarship, thus why they were signing as many EEs as they could? How do the transfers affect the # of HS kids they want to sign on 2/2? Are you saying they will try and sign more than 20?

[Braveheart]

Thanks Braveheart.

I know you have a better handle on this I do, so please correct where I went wrong. I'm not trying to be a smart ass as I want to have the correct info. I thought the transfers simply affected their total # on scholarship, thus why they were signing as many EEs as they could? How do the transfers affect the # of HS kids they want to sign on 2/2? Are you saying they will try and sign more than 20?

USC has 3 schollies left, they won't go over that (gives them 20). Greyshirts are a possibility if s*** hits the fan. Transfers allow them to have spots open to do so.

If this staff knows one thing, it's the ins&outs of recruiting. The rules, loopholes, etc... I don't think they would risk hurting themselves. It reminds me of Snyder and the Redskins, he finds ways to get the Skins under the cap after their FA hoarding. This is similar, Lane and co. will get these guys in one way or another, and they've planned this since the sanctons (and haven't changed).

[MacDuck]

Thanks Braveheart.

I know you have a better handle on this I do, so please correct where I went wrong. I'm not trying to be a smart ass as I want to have the correct info. I thought the transfers simply affected their total # on scholarship, thus why they were signing as many EEs as they could? How do the transfers affect the # of HS kids they want to sign on 2/2? Are you saying they will try and sign more than 20?

USC has 3 schollies left, they won't go over that (gives them 20). Greyshirts are a possibility if s*** hits the fan. Transfers allow them to have spots open to do so.

If this staff knows one thing, it's the ins&outs of recruiting. The rules, loopholes, etc... I don't think they would risk hurting themselves. It reminds me of Snyder and the Redskins, he finds ways to get the Skins under the cap after their FA hoarding. This is similar, Lane and co. will get these guys in one way or another, and they've planned this since the sanctons (and haven't changed).

Sounds like I had it about right afterall as my main pt was they would be stopping at 20. Did I have the other part correct, that if the sanctions aren't lessened then they'll have 25 schollie reductions over the next 2-3 classes (after '11) since they're reducing by 5 now?

[Braveheart]

Thanks Braveheart.

I know you have a better handle on this I do, so please correct where I went wrong. I'm not trying to be a smart ass as I want to have the correct info. I thought the transfers simply affected their total # on scholarship, thus why they were signing as many EEs as they could? How do the transfers affect the # of HS kids they want to sign on 2/2? Are you saying they will try and sign more than 20?

USC has 3 schollies left, they won't go over that (gives them 20). Greyshirts are a possibility if s*** hits the fan. Transfers allow them to have spots open to do so.

If this staff knows one thing, it's the ins&outs of recruiting. The rules, loopholes, etc... I don't think they would risk hurting themselves. It reminds me of Snyder and the Redskins, he finds ways to get the Skins under the cap after their FA hoarding. This is similar, Lane and co. will get these guys in one way or another, and they've planned this since the sanctons (and haven't changed).

Sounds like I had it about right afterall as my main pt was they would be stopping at 20. Did I have the other part correct, that if the sanctions aren't lessened then they'll have 25 schollie reductions over the next 2-3 classes (after '11) since they're reducing by 5 now?

Yes, you were correct. Just brought up the greyshirts if they went over. I suspect that Kiffin is pushing out players to make "just in case" room. It seemed like Kiffin was gonna push out Markeith Ambles and Blake Ayles, but when Thearon Collier left the team, Markeith was re-instated.

[greenyellow]

Sounds like some fuzzy math is going on down there to keep as many players as possible on the roster. I think a lot of coaches know the best way to maximize roster space, but USC has seemed to make a science of it.

[uostudent]

I disagree about Kiffin. He's a pretty good x's and o's coach and obviously a tremendous recruiter. To steal two recruits away from Stanford is pretty impressive. I always felt that Kiffin was a better OC at USC than Sarkisian. All of my USC friends would always blast Sarkisian for his conservative playcalling. Imo, Washington did fairly well this year because Nick Holt is a very good DC.

USC's big problem this season was their defense and their depth. Once the sanctions actually take effect, this is going to kill USC. I think USC is deferring them to next year's recruiting class due to the appeal. If they overbook their class, they'll greyshirt a few players. They are not an SEC program, they weren't intentionally trying to overbook their class.

[Supreme]

I disagree about Kiffin. He's a pretty good x's and o's coach and obviously a tremendous recruiter. Two steal two recruits away from Stanford is pretty impressive. I always felt that Kiffin was a better OC at USC than Sarkisian. All of my USC friends would always blast Sarkisian for his conservative playcalling. Imo, Washington did fairly well this year because Nick Holt is a very good DC.

USC's big problem this season was their defense and their depth. Once the sanctions actually take effect, this is going to kill USC. I think USC is deferring them to next year's recruiting class due to the appeal. If they overbook their class, they'll greyshirt a few players. They are not an SEC program, they weren't intentionally trying to overbook their class.

USC stealing recruits from Stanford is impressive?

[Braveheart]

I disagree about Kiffin. He's a pretty good x's and o's coach and obviously a tremendous recruiter. Two steal two recruits away from Stanford is pretty impressive. I always felt that Kiffin was a better OC at USC than Sarkisian. All of my USC friends would always blast Sarkisian for his conservative playcalling. Imo, Washington did fairly well this year because Nick Holt is a very good DC.

USC's big problem this season was their defense and their depth. Once the sanctions actually take effect, this is going to kill USC. I think USC is deferring them to next year's recruiting class due to the appeal. If they overbook their class, they'll greyshirt a few players. They are not an SEC program, they weren't intentionally trying to overbook their class.

USC stealing recruits from Stanford is impressive?

Stealing All-Americans in january is always impressive. It's even more impressive for a school on probation.

I disagree about Kiffin. He's a pretty good x's and o's coach and obviously a tremendous recruiter. Two steal two recruits away from Stanford is pretty impressive. I always felt that Kiffin was a better OC at USC than Sarkisian. All of my USC friends would always blast Sarkisian for his conservative playcalling. Imo, Washington did fairly well this year because Nick Holt is a very good DC.

USC's big problem this season was their defense and their depth. Once the sanctions actually take effect, this is going to kill USC. I think USC is deferring them to next year's recruiting class due to the appeal. If they overbook their class, they'll greyshirt a few players. They are not an SEC program, they weren't intentionally trying to overbook their class.

Kiff is a good play-caller, and learned under Tedford. I'm not knocking him as a coach when I say he's no Pete Carroll. Pete is one of the greatest CFB coaches of all-time. Sarkisian is conservative, but his style works for him. Lane has the talent to gamble, so he'll do that. USC fans will complain about the OC unless they put up stats that compare with the bush years. Alot of the fans hated Kiffin as OC too.

As for USC last season, they didn't practice tackling all year and it showed. They were afraid of injuries and decided that was the better way to go. USC got a lil better with it at the end of the year, but it hurts the defense when tackles are missed oftenly (Monte can call a great game on D, but it wont matter if the players whiff while in posistion). Alot of fresh faces on D too, they'll be a little better this upcoming season (experience always help), but I don't think they'll beat UO with their silly tackling.

[greenyellow]

If they have to do no contact practices, I don't see them being ready to beat a lot of good teams. Only when a team goes hard and full-bore can they get good enough reps to prepare for game conditions. I do notice that Lane will try some new things out on offense that you wouldn't see under Sark, but they have to stick what works for their personalities. It would be like Chip Kelly trying to go to a slow-down, I-back offense in that it just wouldn't work.