Neuheisel: Bruins' offseason will be ...

Neuheisel: Bruins' offseason will be different

There are 30 comments on the LA Daily News story from Dec 8, 2008, titled Neuheisel: Bruins' offseason will be different. In it, LA Daily News reports that:

The first few months of coach Rick Neuheisel's return to UCLA were spent recruiting, hiring a staff and trying to re-connect with disgruntled boosters, who were often treated like outsiders under Karl Dorrell's ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at LA Daily News.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
cvv

Glendora, CA

#1 Dec 8, 2008
Is this a red flag to any Bruin fans?
Kyle

Carlsbad, CA

#2 Dec 8, 2008
As CRN has said, it's not about the Xs and Os, but about the Jimmys and Joes. If the existing OL and DL Jimmys and Joes get stronger, faster, and quicker, it can't do anything but help. If the existing skill Jimmys and Joes learn how to run routes with their eyes closed, and if the existing QB Jimmys and Joes learn how to connect with receivers and backs without drilling holes in their chest or throwing high enough for only Manut Bol to make the grab, it can't be anything but good.

That said, we need better, faster, quicker Jimmys and Joes. Though it's still relatively early in the recruiting hunt for F09, Pete's already got a #4 ranked class while ours is ranked 28th. CRN and Co. have A LOT of work to do between now and Feb. We've got some really great kids who've signed their LOTs already, but we need more.
Kyle

Carlsbad, CA

#3 Dec 8, 2008
cvv wrote:
Is this a red flag to any Bruin fans?
In what way? What's your concern?
davideski

Kaneohe, HI

#4 Dec 8, 2008
Do you know how many 2009 recruits were at the game and who were they?

thanks,

David
Westside Bob

Canyon Country, CA

#5 Dec 8, 2008
UCLA cannot out recruit USC for one simple reason - academic standards. UCLA can only take a couple of borderline kids in each class - that's a 3.0 gpa with a 980 sat. USC can take 20 kids with a 2.0 gpa and 980 score. The pool of recruits for USC is FAR bigger. So forget trying to out recruit USC in terms of talent.

“USC=Greatest team of BCS era!”

Since: Aug 08

Burn, baby, burn!

#6 Dec 8, 2008
Westside Bob wrote:
UCLA cannot out recruit USC for one simple reason - academic standards. UCLA can only take a couple of borderline kids in each class - that's a 3.0 gpa with a 980 sat. USC can take 20 kids with a 2.0 gpa and 980 score. The pool of recruits for USC is FAR bigger. So forget trying to out recruit USC in terms of talent.
Funny, the basketball team doesn't seem to have that problem.

So what was so different in the admissions policies between the 90s when UCLA was spanking our butts and now? Please give it up, this is a tired excuse that diminishes the skills and abilities of both teams. Or is it too hard to simply admit that USC's football team is better this year that you have to attach some qualifier to it?

“USC=Greatest team of BCS era!”

Since: Aug 08

Burn, baby, burn!

#8 Dec 8, 2008
UCLA ROB wrote:
<quoted text>
The basketball team doesn't have to recruit 20 players, they usually don't recruit more than 4 or 5 per year. Ben Howland can be selective, he could have recruited O.J. Mayo but he didn't. Ben Howland has a certain criteria he goes by and if the recruit doesn't fit the profile, he lets someone else recruit him. Your comparison is that of apples and oranges.
Excellent rebuttal, on topic, and without emotions. I accept that response as valid. Point taken.

What about my 2nd point, though, about UCLA not having any problem recruiting quality guys in the 90s during "8 straight"?

Also, just remember, I believe UCLA is better than they played this year, and they will be a much improved team next year. That's why I don't buy that whole "it's the admissions policies" excuse. That's a cop-out that belittles the current players. I just think it was a tough 1st year for CRN and the Bru-crew. Too many injuries, too many holes to fill, but the foundation is there. I can't imagine many teams doing any better after losing the #1 & #2 QBs, their top receiver, their top TE, and half their O-line. Don't blame it on admissions; blame it on inability because of the lack of personnel, bad luck, and definitely blame it on the rain!

Oh, and I definitely think that DeWayne Walker is getting the shaft. Hate to say it, but I think Walker should have been hired before Sarkisian. CRN is living on borrowed time as far as DW goes. It won't be long before he's got his own program, if people would just give him a chance.

“America & LEGAL Americans 1st”

Since: Aug 08

Chatsworth

#9 Dec 8, 2008
UCLA ROB wrote:
<quoted text>
The basketball team doesn't have to recruit 20 players, they usually don't recruit more than 4 or 5 per year. Ben Howland can be selective, he could have recruited O.J. Mayo but he didn't. Ben Howland has a certain criteria he goes by and if the recruit doesn't fit the profile, he lets someone else recruit him. Your comparison is that of apples and oranges.
OJ Mayo didn't do that much good for USC anyway. The rule where kids have to go at least one year of college before going to the NBA draft should be lifted.

“USC=Greatest team of BCS era!”

Since: Aug 08

Burn, baby, burn!

#10 Dec 8, 2008
West Valley Dave Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
OJ Mayo didn't do that much good for USC anyway. The rule where kids have to go at least one year of college before going to the NBA draft should be lifted.
The rule just says that they have to be one year removed from high school. Whether they spend that year in college or in Europe, it doesn't matter.

I read an article on how that rule will change college basketball dramatically. The bigger schools that are known basketball powerhouses are said to probably suffer the most from the "one-and-dones." Meanwhile the mid-majors will benefit, as they will keep their kids for a lot longer and they will be more in sync with each other and develop great teamwork. Beyond that, the really good prospects may go to Europe where they can earn some money during that one year, rather than risk their careers playing for free in college. Then, to top it all off, the "one-and-dones" will wreck schools' graduation rates.

“America & LEGAL Americans 1st”

Since: Aug 08

Chatsworth

#11 Dec 8, 2008
CPEM wrote:
<quoted text>
The rule just says that they have to be one year removed from high school. Whether they spend that year in college or in Europe, it doesn't matter.
I read an article on how that rule will change college basketball dramatically. The bigger schools that are known basketball powerhouses are said to probably suffer the most from the "one-and-dones." Meanwhile the mid-majors will benefit, as they will keep their kids for a lot longer and they will be more in sync with each other and develop great teamwork. Beyond that, the really good prospects may go to Europe where they can earn some money during that one year, rather than risk their careers playing for free in college. Then, to top it all off, the "one-and-dones" will wreck schools' graduation rates.
I think it should be up to the kid and his parents. That's the way it is in baseball. When I played baseball at Chatsworth HS long, long ago (in a faraway nightmare!) several of my teammates were drafted and a few made it to the majors. That's the way it should be with basketball. I can't see changing rules for football because of the physical nature of the game.
Joe

United States

#13 Dec 8, 2008
The first thing the coach said during the press conference was that they need to get "bigger." And that was a huge sigh of relief. For years now it looks like these players are small and sluggish compared to players from teams like Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Florida...

As for outrecruiting USC....its not about that at all..... There is an abundance of talent in California so these Rankings on sites like Rivals and Scout is not a big thing. UCLA and USC has almost always been in the top 30 in recruiting.

This season was about injuries and inexperience. Lets face it, atleast half the team were either True Freshmen or Redshirt Freshmen.

Things will change...I'm just glad they are going to get bigger...that is #1.

Otherwise they have an amazing group of coaches, and their recruits look good.

GO BRUINS!!!!
Bob C

Camarillo, CA

#14 Dec 9, 2008
Rick has to recruit better - maybe use some JC transfers. UCLA has only one four star QB coming in next year. He needs a five star and two four star backups. Rivals.com rates UCLA recruits 30th in the nation for 2009 and you know who's first.
cvv

Glendora, CA

#15 Dec 9, 2008
Don't we hear the same thing every year? I mean the same exact stories! If Rick is such a good head coach why does he have to change everything? BTW, Dorrell was able to win 10 games , go to a bowl every year and beat SC with the same entrance requirements.
cvv

Glendora, CA

#17 Dec 9, 2008
No one is talking to you so STFU!
UCLA ROB

Los Angeles, CA

#19 Dec 9, 2008
cvv wrote:
No one is talking to you so STFU!
Oh, your getting mad and pouting like the cry-baby Mauloogy???
whaaaaaaaaaaaa whaaaaaaaaaaaaa whaaaaaaaaaaa
cvv

Glendora, CA

#21 Dec 9, 2008
I guess it didn't sound familiar to you did it dude?
UCLA ROB

Los Angeles, CA

#22 Dec 9, 2008
El Monte Flores Gang wrote:
blahbalblblallblb
dude, this is a football thread, take your gang crap somewhere else, there are plenty threads for you to have fun at.

“USC=Greatest team of BCS era!”

Since: Aug 08

Burn, baby, burn!

#24 Dec 9, 2008
Wah! My team lost for the 43rd time so the best I could do is denigrate the winning team by altering their players' names so that it becomes insulting and funny in my childish, immature, 7th grade brain. Wah!

Please, get over it. Some of us actually have been respectful in our posts and offered constructive criticism, and your reply is to "STFU" and "your opinion is not wanted" and name-calling. Who is acting like a baby?

“America & LEGAL Americans 1st”

Since: Aug 08

Chatsworth

#27 Dec 9, 2008
Too bad you guys can't just put your junk back in your pants and get on with constructive comments about the article. Why do these threads always disintegrate into a "Mine's bigger than yours" mentality?

“USC=Greatest team of BCS era!”

Since: Aug 08

Burn, baby, burn!

#28 Dec 9, 2008
manhattan beach dude wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW it's your u$c buddy cvv with the STFU stuff
See no matter how civil you and I can be it's just not possible for UCLA and u$c fans to really get along:)
True, true. But he was really only replying to the post in which you called him an arsehole.

But that's besides the point. Both you and Rob are letting these n00bs who haven't posted in these topics before until now get your panties all in a twist. Then you guys go off with the insults. Then I get my panties in a knot when I read some of the bullshyt that gets posted by guys I thought were serious fans and not punks, and then I have to spend half my day refuting the BS. No serious discussion can happen because everyone gets all butt-hurt. Ignore those losers, and they'll go away. We're here to talk football and college sports in general, not see who's cawk is bigger (like WV Dave Smith puts it).

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Marcus Everett Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bruins' Carter wants revenge vs. BYU (Sep '08) Oct '09 bubba George 93
News UCLA senior receiver Austin relishing role as m... (Aug '09) Aug '09 Lapu 1
News Slim Pickings for Bruins (Apr '09) May '09 R U Serious 28
News Slim pickings among Bruins (Apr '09) Apr '09 Checkpoint Charlie 7
News Bruins hold out hope of a big upset (Dec '08) Dec '08 R U Serious 15
News UCLA didn't end USC's football monopoly (Dec '08) Dec '08 No Worries 1
News Bruins try to stop OSU's Rogers (Nov '08) Nov '08 CPEM 3
More from around the web