Pretty good analysis Joe. I would take issue with this: "Unfortunately, that probably means that Chip Kelly will look to the transfer portal for reinforcements." I think we area heading to a time where the transfer class is going to be more important than the regular recruiting class. It's probably almost 50/50 or 50/50 now. So I wouldn't call it unfortunate that Chip is going to have to rely on his transfer class..
To be fair, I agree with the premise of it being almost 50/50, or at least that it *should* be... what's unfortunate is that for the past multiple years under Chip it's devolved to essentially *only* a reliance on the portal (with the notable exception of a 5* QB whom he mishandled so badly he left after a year) - which is hard to sustain in building a program for the long term.
While good coaching can develop recruits over time, most transfers aren't someone who can be developed - they are who they are - and stay only a year or maybe two which means missing on one or more not only hurts in that year but leaves a hole in years to come - witness last year's OL transfers: brought in 3 transfers, 2 never started and all 3 basically failed leading to not only protection problems this year but massive holes now/going forward...
17th ranked class is kind of an overstatement too. When they are all 3 star recruits, not a single one of them should be reasonably expected to contribute for at least 2 years. At least the transfer class appears to possibly have a few starters in it.
LOL, how true. Of course, we all realize this program is in the toilet and it will stay there as long as the Chipster (OG) and Jarhead Jarmond are running things. And of course, the Chipster will rely on the portal for talented players. Here is the problem with this philosophy, he is only getting 3* players even through the portal now. This means he would have to COACH these players to improve their capabilities to compete and build a strong team. As we have all seen (and heard), the Chipster (OG) doesn't COACH, in addition, a lot of these players will have more limited eligibility and so having any Jarhead Jarmond CONTINUITY most likely won't be possible with portal players as well. You cannot build a winning program just around portal players. It hasn't worked for any college team yet. Some may say this year's Washington Huskies were built on just portal players, but if you look closely, they had a healthy mixture of both excellent portal players and HS 5* and 4* players. The portal helps and is a partial answer but it's not the entire answer. UCLA's current HS class is pathetic because all the potentials know he will be gone after next season, if not sooner. What these players don't realize is Jarhead Jarmin's decision making capabilities. The Chipster (OG) could still be around after next year, even with a poor season like 3-9 or 4-8. As long as he beats SUC, he's gold for Jarhead, as we have now all seen. The problem with this is, I think SUC's defense will be much better next year and with the same ole UCLA offense... sorry.
I don't know why any of the potential portal or high school prospects would be concerned just because the majority of Bruin supporters/fans want Kelly gone.
It's not the fact that the fans/supporters want the Chipster (OG) gone. It's the "hopeful fact" he will be gone. These players are coming into the Chipster's (OG) system and to some extent, this is why they are there. Now you replace the Chipster (OG) and you get a different system, different assistants, which is now foreign to the players who signed up for the Chipster (OG) system and signed up to play for him and his coaches. The coaches know these players, the new coaches don't.
I really think any Marines would take issue with you referring to Jarmon as Jarhead. That is an honorary insult that has to be earned thru hard work, commitment, and faithfulness to your brothers in arms. Jarmon does not deserve the title...
Let's hope SUC or another Big-18 team picks him up!! Lol. Looks like we have also lost Jeremiah McClure, a 4* WR. Even the original 4* recruits are bailing out on the Chipster (OG). I guess they just don't realize what an offensive genius the Chipster (OG) really is!
Yes of course Evan, everyone that UCLA loses "sucks" according to you, from our D Coordinator to our one and only 5* (now 4* QB). And now we will get 3* and 2* players, who have the potential to become 4* at least IF COACHED, which we all know won't happen. Thanks Evan.
Did I mention the kicker Evan? I said we lost a 5* (now 4*) QB, we lose our D Coordinator (both of whom you have trashed and say sucked) and to protect the Chipster (OG) and Jarhead (not the marine definition) Jarmond (your two role models) you trash all those we've lost and say they all suck. Then you come up with someone who did suck (and I didn't mention) now you demand I explain. Come on. Grow up.
i literally said our now former kicker "sucks" and you responded "everyone that UCLA 'sucks' according to you." I ask again: what about our former kicker does not suck?
The model going forward has to be recruit the trenches, a skill position here or there, a couple linebackers, and a couple secondary guys. Do not spend time recruiting QBs that you expect to do anything but be backups for a couple years. O-line and D-line probably need to grow together as groups, so target those guys out of high school. QBs are plugnplay, no reason to recruit them out of HS other than depth.
That said, I like the Hasselbeck recruitment, because a three star who knows he won't start next year may stay a few years. I was happy when Moore signed last year, but it was predictable that he would start, struggle, then bolt. And honestly, bolt is probably the wrong term, because that implies that he can do something quickly, when I'm pretty sure my 82 year old mother in law could run him down.
I did not understand the disappointment when he entered the portal. Ethan Garbers, who is not special, beat him out. Shouldn't happen to the top QB recruit in the country especially at a non elite program. He reminds me of some of our freshmen basketball players. Not as billed by the so called recruiting experts.
The disappointment was not that he entered the portal, the disappointment was what he said when he entered the portal. In case you forgot (selective memory); "For these next upcoming years, I just want to go to a place where I can get developed,” Meaning of course, he wasn't being coached at UCLA, which of course we all know to be true and accurate, because the Chipster (OG) doesn't COACH anyone.
Did Dante not get the benefit of the doubt? How long did Chip need to stay with him and after how many interceptions? He simply didn't earn the starting spot, which is saying a lot because Garbers is no stud.
First, the Chipster (OG) couldn't even name a starter (if you didn't remember), then he started two of the QB's, then replaced Moore after Moore got hurt. A good head coach names his starter, then sticks with him, period. Seems as though you are attempting to re-write history just to protect that crappy head coach. Just sick and tired of you Chipster (OG) apologist. Of course, next season will change your tune when you realize this coach is pure crap.
Lol this is my first comment in years. No need to be aggressive. It was an open QB competition. Moore got moore (pun intended) than the benefit of the doubt then lost us winnable games due to his interceptions. I'm tired of people always blaming the coach. The players play. Chip didn't throw it to the other team. That being said, I don't think Kelly should be the coach whatever you assume about me.
OK, forgive me, but I'm going to try for some nuance here... First of all, none of us know whether Dante Moore is going to be Tate Martell (5* who never made it) or Jayden Daniels (5* who looked meh, left bad coaching/bad situation, and won a Heisman) or where he'll fall on that scale... and while I have no idea what he's like as a person, the fact that he chose to transfer to a place where he knows he won't start next year but a place not satisfied with being #8 in the nation vs seemingly being satisfied with being #8 in the Pac12 doesn't exactly scream "low class thug".
Now, that said, he was clearly not ready for hardship/setbacks which is certainly on him, yes, but also on Chip since a major part of coaching is knowing what/how someone learns and what/how someone handles stress (you don't motivate Shaq the same way as Kobe or MJ, right?). There's a lot of blame to go around here - honestly, my disappointment comes from recalling Moore's best drive as a Bruin, which drew us to within 14-7 in his first true road game against the 2-time defending conference champ in a really tough environment after he put us in that hole to begin with - remember too, as bad as that/he was, we were a dropped slant to Norwood from a 14-14 tie which I think I even posted might be the most important play of the year... *That* guy on that drive looked nothing like the scared leadfoot kid he was by the end of the year and yeah, some of that is on him, but some of that is on coaching, or lack of it - finding a way to get someone with talent back to that even momentary resilience and in a positon to succeed rather than crumbling and being tossed out there anyway to fail.
Maybe he didn't respect Garbers and resented sitting behind him in a way he does respect Dillion Gabriel enough to sit, maybe he figured out he wasn't ready and he wouldn't get ready in our program, and maybe that confidence/athletic arrogance that got him to 5* status never comes back - all in all, its probably best that its over one way or the other, but its still disappointing it didn't work.
Let's just see how Dante Moore does with Oregon shall we. You can certainly criticize a raw Freshman's performance, but let's just see what he does with a different team.
He's already said he is content to sit behind Gabriel for a year and learn and develop - which is also a pointed shot at exactly what he did not get at UCLA.
Certainly the toughest position on the field to step up from high school football to Division I. I was hoping he'd redshirt in his first year. I remember a couple of the rating services only had him as a 4-star.
I doubt he would have took a chance to come to UCLA if he didn't think he had an excellent chance to start. Similar to Rosen. Otherwise, he could have gone to a much better football school.
Whatever Evan. I think it's time for your nap. Or perhaps you can get that next box of Jelly donuts for yourself and the Chipster (OG) - your idol, that and some nice milk for the both of you. Because you have both already "milked" UCLA long enough.
Chip: Hey Jarmond, just reaching out to let you know how the consistent continuos culture we have so brilliantly created together is really taking off. We've landed a top two spot in recruiting and I wanted to thank you for the jelly donuts after our illustrious bowl win. It is an honor to do what I love most - live the sweet life!
Jarmond: Wow, that's awesome! Keep up the great work Chip and enjoy your bonus too! I can't wait to take our consistent continuous culture into the BIG! I heard we are also 17th in recruiting as we enter the BIG! A top 18 finish is something to celebrate! Outstanding!!!
Consistent. Continuous. Culture.
UCLA Football!
Hat tip to Warplanner - who provided the original satire on Jarmond's consistent, continuous, culture doublespeak.
definitely not a good recruiting start. but the transfer portal is where you want to be in this day and age. players do not want to stay somewhere for 3-4 years anymore (unless they don't have any further aspirations). they want to play. is it better to recruit a raw talent that will leave sooner or later or get someone that has a couple years under their belt playing D1 players? Even the mighty LIncoln Riley knows this now. Schools will lose players. The schools that rise to the top are the ones that can replace lost players with better players.
exactly. And it's not even about the playing. It's about the money. Kids are going to be totally happy at their schools and transfer for more money. NIL out of control.
Why is it out of control? They are the ones who make the money and should have the right as an American to choose a better option. If you were being offered twice more to do your job in another state, would you not go?
NIL is out of control and that should not be a controversial opinion. The players are not paid. A select few are paid gobs of money by outside sources. Giving millions of dollars to players who have never taken a snap is bad for the game. If you want to pay players, let schools subsidize the players. The idea was to make it so they did not have to pick up minimum wage jobs so that they could afford to eat. These are unregulated collectives that are destroying college sports.
I agree with both you and Pyramid. NIL has exploded far beyond its original and relatively noble intent into a recruiting/free agency arms race and I feel it has already destroyed college football (and basketball will not be far behind).
But that arms race was the easily predictable evolution of unregulated economics in this country, and it's unfair to criticize the athletes for taking advantage of their opportunities. It's the same reason we're in the B1G Ten and the Pac-12 is now the Pac-2.
You didn't answer my question. Yes or no? We all have a right to pursue better opportunities. It's the least American thing to not be able to capitalize in a free market system when universities are raking in billions. The college sports model is absolute hypocrisy and a disgrace. That shouldn't be controversial.
The players are not paid. A select few are paid gobs of money by outside sources. Giving millions of dollars to players who have never taken a snap is bad for the game. If you want to pay players, let schools subsidize the players. These are unregulated collectives that are destroying college sports. These players are amateurs. They are STUDENTS. They are receiving a FREE education and FREE room and board. We were told they needed to be paid so that they would not have to go hungry or pick up minimum wage jobs in the middle of the night to make ends meet. NIL means NAME IMAGE AND LIKENESS. we were told they should be paid for their NIL being used in video games and other media. We were told they should be able to capitalize on their NIL through endorsement deals. Fine. Now, 17 and 18 year old kids are given millions in NIL money from boosters before they even take a snap. In exchange for nothing. And they aren't even paid by the universities. Let them pick up endorsements. Let them truly capitalize on their NIL. Let the schools pay them if they wish. But NIL is OUT OF CONTROL and has absolutely ruined college football.
Where do I start? First and foremost I decided to look up UCLA’s ranking of the incoming class. It was the top 50, and where did (UCLA) end up? Any thoughts? They weren’t even ranked in the top 50. That was a surprise but then I realized Kelly’s recruiting process was different from the other collegiate coaches. He selects the players he wants for his program. He wants it to be comparable to Stanford. According to him, the idea of him selecting a recruit rather than the recruit choosing UCLA was suppose to be some kind of honor. I guess he was right because not many 4 or 5 star players are lining up to play for Ucla.
Just as a note. Stanford's overall (HS recruiting & transfers) recruiting rank is 42nd. UCLA's is 62nd. This is as of now. Of course, UCLA should and needs to move up and they will do this by getting 3*'s and 2*'s through the transfer portal (if they can). Stanford on the other hand currently has ZERO players coming through the portal and apparently is not interested in transfers. Certainly, a different philosophy playing out here. So, UCLA is definitely no longer "like Stanford" when it comes to recruiting.
The rankings don't mean much at this point. A lot of guys don't enter the portal until after the bowls and/or after the head coaching carousel stops. Most guys who are in the portal already have not taken their visits, so it's kind of like lookin at the the recruiting class rankings in August in the old days.
Evan, the rules of the portal are clear. No players can enter the portal after January 2, 2024. Now they have a second opportunity to enter the portal in May (for two weeks), however this period is after most spring programs are complete and the fall rosters are set. Looking at past history, some players move during this period, but very few compared to this period. If players in the portal currently are labeled as "Committed", this means they have signed on with their new school. At this point very few 3*, 4* and 5* players have NOT committed. Meaning there isn't much left. Now players still have 6 days, as you said after most of the bowl games, but again, it appears now we will be getting handful of players entering now vs a massive amount. And so far, none of the remaining 3*, 4* or 5* players are even on UCLA's radar or those players radar for that matter.
Nice going Evan, at this rate our entire defense, which I'm sure you will say, "sucked" is off to Trogan land. You and the Chipster (OG) firing on all cylinders now!!
So here are some interesting statistics; Current transfer portal players (3* and above) still available (have not been signed and committed to a new school yet); 40. Out of this 40 number, you have 25 3*'s, 14 4*'s and 1 5* - Rivals.com. In addition, out of these 40, you have 15 Quarterbacks, in which UCLA already has 6! Not sure but if a lot of 3*, 4* and 5* players don't enter before Jan 2, 2024, the ole Chipster (OG) doesn't have much to select from, he will need to go down to 2* or below players - No surprise here. Of course, after Spring Practice (May 1 - May 15), he may be able to pick up some players, but these windows are closing quickly. So far, the Chipster (OG) has done a lousy job in the portal, losing way more talent than he has gained. He'd better hustle... Don't count on it.
The ought to just line this up with the transfer portal window and call it "free agency" because that is what it is.
Pretty good analysis Joe. I would take issue with this: "Unfortunately, that probably means that Chip Kelly will look to the transfer portal for reinforcements." I think we area heading to a time where the transfer class is going to be more important than the regular recruiting class. It's probably almost 50/50 or 50/50 now. So I wouldn't call it unfortunate that Chip is going to have to rely on his transfer class..
To be fair, I agree with the premise of it being almost 50/50, or at least that it *should* be... what's unfortunate is that for the past multiple years under Chip it's devolved to essentially *only* a reliance on the portal (with the notable exception of a 5* QB whom he mishandled so badly he left after a year) - which is hard to sustain in building a program for the long term.
While good coaching can develop recruits over time, most transfers aren't someone who can be developed - they are who they are - and stay only a year or maybe two which means missing on one or more not only hurts in that year but leaves a hole in years to come - witness last year's OL transfers: brought in 3 transfers, 2 never started and all 3 basically failed leading to not only protection problems this year but massive holes now/going forward...
17th ranked class is kind of an overstatement too. When they are all 3 star recruits, not a single one of them should be reasonably expected to contribute for at least 2 years. At least the transfer class appears to possibly have a few starters in it.
..if they sign.
true. I saw the kid from SDSU visiting Florida.
Great writing and research per usual, Joe. I would only correct one slight factual error:
"Even perennial doormat Rutgers has a better recruiting class than the Bruins do."
..should be..
"Even soon-to-be-former perennial doormat Rutgers has a better recruiting class than the Bruins do."
.As you, I am also dismayed. The number of stars on that list resemble the Los Angeles heavens on a smoggy August night.
LOL, how true. Of course, we all realize this program is in the toilet and it will stay there as long as the Chipster (OG) and Jarhead Jarmond are running things. And of course, the Chipster will rely on the portal for talented players. Here is the problem with this philosophy, he is only getting 3* players even through the portal now. This means he would have to COACH these players to improve their capabilities to compete and build a strong team. As we have all seen (and heard), the Chipster (OG) doesn't COACH, in addition, a lot of these players will have more limited eligibility and so having any Jarhead Jarmond CONTINUITY most likely won't be possible with portal players as well. You cannot build a winning program just around portal players. It hasn't worked for any college team yet. Some may say this year's Washington Huskies were built on just portal players, but if you look closely, they had a healthy mixture of both excellent portal players and HS 5* and 4* players. The portal helps and is a partial answer but it's not the entire answer. UCLA's current HS class is pathetic because all the potentials know he will be gone after next season, if not sooner. What these players don't realize is Jarhead Jarmin's decision making capabilities. The Chipster (OG) could still be around after next year, even with a poor season like 3-9 or 4-8. As long as he beats SUC, he's gold for Jarhead, as we have now all seen. The problem with this is, I think SUC's defense will be much better next year and with the same ole UCLA offense... sorry.
I don't know why any of the potential portal or high school prospects would be concerned just because the majority of Bruin supporters/fans want Kelly gone.
It's not the fact that the fans/supporters want the Chipster (OG) gone. It's the "hopeful fact" he will be gone. These players are coming into the Chipster's (OG) system and to some extent, this is why they are there. Now you replace the Chipster (OG) and you get a different system, different assistants, which is now foreign to the players who signed up for the Chipster (OG) system and signed up to play for him and his coaches. The coaches know these players, the new coaches don't.
That wasn't my point, but given the players who are buying into his program I don't think this any big deal.
I really think any Marines would take issue with you referring to Jarmon as Jarhead. That is an honorary insult that has to be earned thru hard work, commitment, and faithfulness to your brothers in arms. Jarmon does not deserve the title...
I actually qualified this much earlier and said, "It's not the Marines definition". You'd have to read earlier comments.
Did I read that right? R.J. Lopez entering the transfer portal? I'm sure there's a better kicker enrolled at UCLA who can walk-on.
Let's hope SUC or another Big-18 team picks him up!! Lol. Looks like we have also lost Jeremiah McClure, a 4* WR. Even the original 4* recruits are bailing out on the Chipster (OG). I guess they just don't realize what an offensive genius the Chipster (OG) really is!
he got replaced. saw the writing on the wall. sucked anyways.
Yes of course Evan, everyone that UCLA loses "sucks" according to you, from our D Coordinator to our one and only 5* (now 4* QB). And now we will get 3* and 2* players, who have the potential to become 4* at least IF COACHED, which we all know won't happen. Thanks Evan.
Please explain what about 6 for 11 field goals does not suck. Dude hit 1 FG beyond 40 and was 50% 20-29 yards. Please explain. I'll wait.
still waiting.
Did I mention the kicker Evan? I said we lost a 5* (now 4*) QB, we lose our D Coordinator (both of whom you have trashed and say sucked) and to protect the Chipster (OG) and Jarhead (not the marine definition) Jarmond (your two role models) you trash all those we've lost and say they all suck. Then you come up with someone who did suck (and I didn't mention) now you demand I explain. Come on. Grow up.
i literally said our now former kicker "sucks" and you responded "everyone that UCLA 'sucks' according to you." I ask again: what about our former kicker does not suck?
It appears my request that you "grow up" is just too much to ask. I already answered your question. Thanks.
The model going forward has to be recruit the trenches, a skill position here or there, a couple linebackers, and a couple secondary guys. Do not spend time recruiting QBs that you expect to do anything but be backups for a couple years. O-line and D-line probably need to grow together as groups, so target those guys out of high school. QBs are plugnplay, no reason to recruit them out of HS other than depth.
That said, I like the Hasselbeck recruitment, because a three star who knows he won't start next year may stay a few years. I was happy when Moore signed last year, but it was predictable that he would start, struggle, then bolt. And honestly, bolt is probably the wrong term, because that implies that he can do something quickly, when I'm pretty sure my 82 year old mother in law could run him down.
Your 82-year old mother-in-law could also probably pick off a Dante Moore pass!
I did not understand the disappointment when he entered the portal. Ethan Garbers, who is not special, beat him out. Shouldn't happen to the top QB recruit in the country especially at a non elite program. He reminds me of some of our freshmen basketball players. Not as billed by the so called recruiting experts.
The disappointment was not that he entered the portal, the disappointment was what he said when he entered the portal. In case you forgot (selective memory); "For these next upcoming years, I just want to go to a place where I can get developed,” Meaning of course, he wasn't being coached at UCLA, which of course we all know to be true and accurate, because the Chipster (OG) doesn't COACH anyone.
Yeah, no one who Chip has coached has ever gone to the NFL. Super smart take, here.
lol. mic drop.
So, you really think the Chipster (OG) actually coached those players!! LOL. Wow.
exactly. low class thug.
More childish name calling from a child.
You might not agree with Evan, but get off your soap box. I think the principle here is to debate not call people children.
Did Dante not get the benefit of the doubt? How long did Chip need to stay with him and after how many interceptions? He simply didn't earn the starting spot, which is saying a lot because Garbers is no stud.
First, the Chipster (OG) couldn't even name a starter (if you didn't remember), then he started two of the QB's, then replaced Moore after Moore got hurt. A good head coach names his starter, then sticks with him, period. Seems as though you are attempting to re-write history just to protect that crappy head coach. Just sick and tired of you Chipster (OG) apologist. Of course, next season will change your tune when you realize this coach is pure crap.
Lol this is my first comment in years. No need to be aggressive. It was an open QB competition. Moore got moore (pun intended) than the benefit of the doubt then lost us winnable games due to his interceptions. I'm tired of people always blaming the coach. The players play. Chip didn't throw it to the other team. That being said, I don't think Kelly should be the coach whatever you assume about me.
OK, forgive me, but I'm going to try for some nuance here... First of all, none of us know whether Dante Moore is going to be Tate Martell (5* who never made it) or Jayden Daniels (5* who looked meh, left bad coaching/bad situation, and won a Heisman) or where he'll fall on that scale... and while I have no idea what he's like as a person, the fact that he chose to transfer to a place where he knows he won't start next year but a place not satisfied with being #8 in the nation vs seemingly being satisfied with being #8 in the Pac12 doesn't exactly scream "low class thug".
Now, that said, he was clearly not ready for hardship/setbacks which is certainly on him, yes, but also on Chip since a major part of coaching is knowing what/how someone learns and what/how someone handles stress (you don't motivate Shaq the same way as Kobe or MJ, right?). There's a lot of blame to go around here - honestly, my disappointment comes from recalling Moore's best drive as a Bruin, which drew us to within 14-7 in his first true road game against the 2-time defending conference champ in a really tough environment after he put us in that hole to begin with - remember too, as bad as that/he was, we were a dropped slant to Norwood from a 14-14 tie which I think I even posted might be the most important play of the year... *That* guy on that drive looked nothing like the scared leadfoot kid he was by the end of the year and yeah, some of that is on him, but some of that is on coaching, or lack of it - finding a way to get someone with talent back to that even momentary resilience and in a positon to succeed rather than crumbling and being tossed out there anyway to fail.
Maybe he didn't respect Garbers and resented sitting behind him in a way he does respect Dillion Gabriel enough to sit, maybe he figured out he wasn't ready and he wouldn't get ready in our program, and maybe that confidence/athletic arrogance that got him to 5* status never comes back - all in all, its probably best that its over one way or the other, but its still disappointing it didn't work.
Let's just see how Dante Moore does with Oregon shall we. You can certainly criticize a raw Freshman's performance, but let's just see what he does with a different team.
you actually think he'll beat out Dillon Gabriel?
not a chance
He's already said he is content to sit behind Gabriel for a year and learn and develop - which is also a pointed shot at exactly what he did not get at UCLA.
Certainly the toughest position on the field to step up from high school football to Division I. I was hoping he'd redshirt in his first year. I remember a couple of the rating services only had him as a 4-star.
I doubt he would have took a chance to come to UCLA if he didn't think he had an excellent chance to start. Similar to Rosen. Otherwise, he could have gone to a much better football school.
Well, let's see. You have our resident football expert Evan saying no way. I'm just saying, let's see how Dante Moore plays (if he does).
if he does indeed. because Gabriel will beat him out, like i said.
Whatever Evan. I think it's time for your nap. Or perhaps you can get that next box of Jelly donuts for yourself and the Chipster (OG) - your idol, that and some nice milk for the both of you. Because you have both already "milked" UCLA long enough.
Hey! We got a mention on CBS Sports.com regarding National Signing Day!
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/national-signing-day-2023-winners-and-losers-of-early-signing-period-college-football-recruiting-rankings/
I mean, not the mention you'd want of course... :-(
I believe Chip feels there's no such thing as bad publicity!
Damn, they name dropped only 2 schools in the country as recruiting losers.
Well at least we're Top 2 in something.
Chipster Alfraud and his BFF Jarmond have stoked the DUMPSTER FIRE flames, once again! Big time L for these two!
Chip: Hey Jarmond, just reaching out to let you know how the consistent continuos culture we have so brilliantly created together is really taking off. We've landed a top two spot in recruiting and I wanted to thank you for the jelly donuts after our illustrious bowl win. It is an honor to do what I love most - live the sweet life!
Jarmond: Wow, that's awesome! Keep up the great work Chip and enjoy your bonus too! I can't wait to take our consistent continuous culture into the BIG! I heard we are also 17th in recruiting as we enter the BIG! A top 18 finish is something to celebrate! Outstanding!!!
Consistent. Continuous. Culture.
UCLA Football!
Hat tip to Warplanner - who provided the original satire on Jarmond's consistent, continuous, culture doublespeak.
Hat tip also to BB88 for the investigative journalism that uncovered the gift of jelly donuts for Chip!
definitely not a good recruiting start. but the transfer portal is where you want to be in this day and age. players do not want to stay somewhere for 3-4 years anymore (unless they don't have any further aspirations). they want to play. is it better to recruit a raw talent that will leave sooner or later or get someone that has a couple years under their belt playing D1 players? Even the mighty LIncoln Riley knows this now. Schools will lose players. The schools that rise to the top are the ones that can replace lost players with better players.
exactly. And it's not even about the playing. It's about the money. Kids are going to be totally happy at their schools and transfer for more money. NIL out of control.
Why is it out of control? They are the ones who make the money and should have the right as an American to choose a better option. If you were being offered twice more to do your job in another state, would you not go?
NIL is out of control and that should not be a controversial opinion. The players are not paid. A select few are paid gobs of money by outside sources. Giving millions of dollars to players who have never taken a snap is bad for the game. If you want to pay players, let schools subsidize the players. The idea was to make it so they did not have to pick up minimum wage jobs so that they could afford to eat. These are unregulated collectives that are destroying college sports.
I agree with both you and Pyramid. NIL has exploded far beyond its original and relatively noble intent into a recruiting/free agency arms race and I feel it has already destroyed college football (and basketball will not be far behind).
But that arms race was the easily predictable evolution of unregulated economics in this country, and it's unfair to criticize the athletes for taking advantage of their opportunities. It's the same reason we're in the B1G Ten and the Pac-12 is now the Pac-2.
Both things can be true.
You didn't answer my question. Yes or no? We all have a right to pursue better opportunities. It's the least American thing to not be able to capitalize in a free market system when universities are raking in billions. The college sports model is absolute hypocrisy and a disgrace. That shouldn't be controversial.
The players are not paid. A select few are paid gobs of money by outside sources. Giving millions of dollars to players who have never taken a snap is bad for the game. If you want to pay players, let schools subsidize the players. These are unregulated collectives that are destroying college sports. These players are amateurs. They are STUDENTS. They are receiving a FREE education and FREE room and board. We were told they needed to be paid so that they would not have to go hungry or pick up minimum wage jobs in the middle of the night to make ends meet. NIL means NAME IMAGE AND LIKENESS. we were told they should be paid for their NIL being used in video games and other media. We were told they should be able to capitalize on their NIL through endorsement deals. Fine. Now, 17 and 18 year old kids are given millions in NIL money from boosters before they even take a snap. In exchange for nothing. And they aren't even paid by the universities. Let them pick up endorsements. Let them truly capitalize on their NIL. Let the schools pay them if they wish. But NIL is OUT OF CONTROL and has absolutely ruined college football.
Where do I start? First and foremost I decided to look up UCLA’s ranking of the incoming class. It was the top 50, and where did (UCLA) end up? Any thoughts? They weren’t even ranked in the top 50. That was a surprise but then I realized Kelly’s recruiting process was different from the other collegiate coaches. He selects the players he wants for his program. He wants it to be comparable to Stanford. According to him, the idea of him selecting a recruit rather than the recruit choosing UCLA was suppose to be some kind of honor. I guess he was right because not many 4 or 5 star players are lining up to play for Ucla.
Just as a note. Stanford's overall (HS recruiting & transfers) recruiting rank is 42nd. UCLA's is 62nd. This is as of now. Of course, UCLA should and needs to move up and they will do this by getting 3*'s and 2*'s through the transfer portal (if they can). Stanford on the other hand currently has ZERO players coming through the portal and apparently is not interested in transfers. Certainly, a different philosophy playing out here. So, UCLA is definitely no longer "like Stanford" when it comes to recruiting.
The rankings don't mean much at this point. A lot of guys don't enter the portal until after the bowls and/or after the head coaching carousel stops. Most guys who are in the portal already have not taken their visits, so it's kind of like lookin at the the recruiting class rankings in August in the old days.
Evan, the rules of the portal are clear. No players can enter the portal after January 2, 2024. Now they have a second opportunity to enter the portal in May (for two weeks), however this period is after most spring programs are complete and the fall rosters are set. Looking at past history, some players move during this period, but very few compared to this period. If players in the portal currently are labeled as "Committed", this means they have signed on with their new school. At this point very few 3*, 4* and 5* players have NOT committed. Meaning there isn't much left. Now players still have 6 days, as you said after most of the bowl games, but again, it appears now we will be getting handful of players entering now vs a massive amount. And so far, none of the remaining 3*, 4* or 5* players are even on UCLA's radar or those players radar for that matter.
Nice going Evan, at this rate our entire defense, which I'm sure you will say, "sucked" is off to Trogan land. You and the Chipster (OG) firing on all cylinders now!!
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/usc-football-trojans-bring-over-another-db-from-ucla/ar-AA1lUPEP
So here are some interesting statistics; Current transfer portal players (3* and above) still available (have not been signed and committed to a new school yet); 40. Out of this 40 number, you have 25 3*'s, 14 4*'s and 1 5* - Rivals.com. In addition, out of these 40, you have 15 Quarterbacks, in which UCLA already has 6! Not sure but if a lot of 3*, 4* and 5* players don't enter before Jan 2, 2024, the ole Chipster (OG) doesn't have much to select from, he will need to go down to 2* or below players - No surprise here. Of course, after Spring Practice (May 1 - May 15), he may be able to pick up some players, but these windows are closing quickly. So far, the Chipster (OG) has done a lousy job in the portal, losing way more talent than he has gained. He'd better hustle... Don't count on it.