In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 463
Online now 96 Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Not that I *mind* seeing them fall off of a cliff, but being down 0-24 to UCLA? Any Wolverine fans in the California area have any insight? Did the team just quit on Kiffykins?
There D sucks. I would seriously consider not going to USC if i was a defensive player. Bad coaching can really hurt your draft stock.
Two words for you: LANE KIFFIN.
Part of it is that UCLA is playing with a toughness that USC did not expect. To put it into a fight, UCLA came out swinging and punched USC in the face. All week out here in LA no one in the media was giving the Bruins a chance and that has to make the players angry.
Another thing is toughness comes from the coaches, and obviously Jim Mora > Lane Kiffin in that department.
Also UCLA is pretty damn underrated and this doesn't surprise me. Hundley is legit, and watching the Heisman race between him, Marriota and Johnny Football is gonna be awesome the next 3 years because I think they are all redshirt freshmen.
"Isn't it amazing what somebody will do when he can't bunt." - Vin Scully
Would USC fire Kiffin and his staff if Notre Dame blew out USC in the LA Coliseum?
* * * N E O . R E T R O * * *
neo is right. It's very simple, and it's Lane Kiffin. Not much else to say about it.
They recruit top athletes, but they don't coach them up. So you've got top athletes running around getting pushed around because they aren't taught fundamentals or anything. Nice that he can recruit, but he can't coach.
And frankly, I love seeing USC fans defending him on tBB. I'd love to see USC keep Kiffin for as long as possible.
Hmm. Previously I assumed USC would defeat ND, but now....man. From preseason #1 to finishing out of the top #25 on a two-game losing streak + losses to two in-state programs? Recruiting fallout, please.
This post was edited by Kenetic 17 months ago
kiffin is terrible and is reason number 1. ....Number 2 is sanctions (and injuries). I laughed when they were put at number 1. kiffin alone is worth at least two losses. He's really come into his own this season too.
Do any of you guys think this season will hurt their recruiting? I really don't think it will at all. Still sooo much to sell in promoting that program. Just sucks seeing guys your school is closing in on pick SC when you know they might not reach their full potential.
Media was saying no way he got fired even if he lost the rest of his games. That's awsome, most of us knew it would be a ball of flames spiraling towards earth, so hopefully they keep him so he can finish the job.
No matter what players or staff he has, he has not proven he can win.
Yeah but all crap aside, they are under some serious sanctions and IMO that is a legitimate reason for why they aren't as good anymore. Everyone hates Kiffin but 75 scholarships isn't a lot if you want to contend, that's some depth you're going to miss especially on the lines.
Yep, you cant blame Kiffin for everything...to be fair we gotta wait 3 years once his recruits start playing more minutes and they can dress a full team of 85
It's the best 75 players in the country.
I'm sure hoke would be undefeated with that team.
This post was edited by kylebennett7127 17 months ago
I love it. It's great to hate USC. I hope they keep their sleazeball coach and recruit the best players anyone has ever heard of. Then coach them up to that lofty 6-6 mark and grab their seat at the Alamo Bowl.
I hope Michigan targets the recruits and loots a few top defensive recruits from the five star dumpster fire known as USC. They will get coached here.
Even today, USC has more talent than any team in the country than Bama. Kiffin does less with more than any coach in football.
C'mon. Kiffin has an extremely talented roster that fits his coaching style as if he had picked them.
Nah, you are extremely mistaken if you think 75 highly recruited guys will always be better over the course of a season than 85 guys who were also pretty highly recruited but maybe somewhat less so. There's a reason the SEC benefits from oversigning so much. Just because you're signing guys who are 4 star/5 star guys, it doesn't mean they'll all play like that, surely we as Michigan fans of all people would know a lot about that. The more depth in numbers you have the better you will be.
It's not like this is Madden where you just plug guys in a lineup according to who has the best stats and then you go. Less scholarships means less room for error, it also means that attrition will kill you over the course of the year and instead of starting guys when you think they are ready, it means starting them because the guy behind them is even less ready and the guy behind that guy is a walk-on. And if someone gets injured, as is guaranteed to happen, you won't have much room for maneuver before you have a true freshman or walk-on playing. Again, we ourselves saw that in the Carr/Rich Rod transition.
I don't care for Lane Kiffin but if people think 10 schollies less don't really affect a team over the course of time, they don't understand this sport very well.
Wrong, it's Monte Kiffin.
Monte has no clue how to defense the spread offense.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports