Realistic USC "Steals"

[freedjr]

With the new sanctions, does anyone know of any players on USC they think might REALISTICALLY come to Oregon? I'm not talking about who we want or who would be a good fit, but who might actually seriously consider Oregon.

[bigsugarduck]

I dont have a clue! but heres some possibilities anyways!

Dillion Baxter. I think we were probably 2nd for him but it was a DISTANT second. Of the 2010 USC class he appears to be the most likely to contribute right away so he is more likely to miss bowl games than the other recruits. However he is already enrolled and I'm not sure how that would work.

Christian Thomas. I think we were 2nd for him as well. Sure would be nice to have some flexibility with Curtis White....

Giavanni di Paola. We were on his list though I don't think he ever visited. Can never have enough top Oline guys..

George Uko. He was also recruited by the Ducks but something funky happened with his overinvolved Dad if I recall? Maby dad will get involved again and tell george to look elsewhere...one can hope!

In terms of upperclassmen...a few of their DT's were recruited by the Ducks (with us finishing 2nd as usual) Christian Toupu obviously has a loose connection to Oregon through his brother and Jurell Casey was another guy we recruited.

[woundedknees]

Baxter, IMO, is a problem due to the fact he not only enrolled early, but participated in spring drills.

IIRC, that means he would lose a season of eligibility by transferring.

[soduck]

I believe it was stated upperclassmen could transfer with no penalty, why could not Baxter, but does any one know about Pac 10/16 rules of transferring in your own conference and mandatory sitting out a extra year?

[squintsdd]

I believe it was stated upperclassmen could transfer with no penalty, why could not Baxter, but does any one know about Pac 10/16 rules of transferring in your own conference and mandatory sitting out a extra year?

I think it's that the upperclassmen wouldn't have an opportunity for a bowl if they stick around, but the underclassmen would still have an opportunity once the bowl ban is lifted. Basically they just want to give everyone a chance to get into a bowl game still

[DarronThomas5]

The espn story stated it was juniors and seniors who can transfer anywhere no questions asked because they can no longer play in a bowl game at usc. I believe the freshmen and sophomores are being left in the wilderness as they will have to sit out if they transfer and I believe usc could control where those players transfers to where they have no say on any juniors and seniors.

[hines]

we steal no one and get zero SC transfers.

[karlhungis]

we steal no one and get zero SC transfers.

I'm with Hines.

[nehalem]

hines wrote:
we steal no one and get zero SC transfers.

I mostly agree; but alot of weird things have happened this week.

[Bigducker]

Your no fun Hines !

[Boom]

So Scout shows 6 USC verbal commits. Does that mean they can only take 9 more?

[greenyellow]

So Scout shows 6 USC verbal commits. Does that mean they can only take 9 more?

Maybe. USC is appealing the decision and it could take the NCAA until the spring 0f 2011 is done with the appeal. If that's the case, they could recruit normally until the appeal is done so they would more than likely be able to take a full class for 2011.

[AutzenMember]

So Scout shows 6 USC verbal commits. Does that mean they can only take 9 more?

Maybe. USC is appealing the decision and it could take the NCAA until the spring 0f 2011 is done with the appeal. If that's the case, they could recruit normally until the appeal is done so they would more than likely be able to take a full class for 2011.

Do they HOLD those six verbals??? Any kid of caliber would be crazy to start their college career under these circumstances. Although, I'm sure Lame will be actively spinning!

[picksix]

agree with auztenmember!!!!!!! I wonder how Santrel Henderson feels now?????

[maxduck]

In news maybe more relevant to UW fans, it's been learned today that the Pac-10 recently ruled that it will not waive its transfer rules to allow USC players to transfer within the conference.

Due to the sanctions placed on USC Thursday, the team's juniors and seniors are free to transfer without having to sit out a year as a penalty under NCAA rules.

But that only applies to going outside the conference. The Pac-10 has an interconference transfer rule that requires football transfers to sit out one year, and that will apparently not be waived in this case (technically, all petitions to transfer have to go through the conference and be approved).

The NCAA rules would allow for players to transfer without sitting out the one year. But the Pac-10 has apparently decided not to waive its rules in this case, effectively meaning USC's players won't transfer within the conference (there might be a guy with a redshirt year to could consider it, though any junior with a redshirt year could also just stay at USC until the time the team is again eligible for a bowl game).

A Pac-10 official today confirmed that's how the rules will work.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/h ... cation=rss