USC aftermath

[okeefe4prez]

It was so odd that we couldn't run the ball between the tackles well all yr. But boy could they run QB sneaks with the best of em. And those are when everyone in the building knew that's what we were going to do too. So I have a tough time making heads or tails of some of those trends. But there's no denying that they were what they were.

I suspect the sneak is way easier to block for than a HB run up the middle. On a sneak, the QB will look for the soft spot and the guards just have to get a slight initial advantage for a fraction of a second to let the QB fall forward. It helps having a big dude like Stanley. On a HB run, Stanley has to get the snap, then hand it off and the RB needs time to get back to the line. It takes much more time to develop.

 

[uihawk82]

The Air Raid offense is not Trojan football. What always stuck out about USC football to me was their stable of top notch physical RB’s. They need to get back to their roots, their modus operandi that made them a national powerhouse year in and year out.

And they should have a great offensive line. But iirc USC is not in a great part of the big sprawl out there and maybe a lot of recruits want to go to a better place

 

[hawkdrummer1]

It was so odd that we couldn't run the ball between the tackles well all yr. But boy could they run QB sneaks with the best of em. And those are when everyone in the building knew that's what we were going to do too. So I have a tough time making heads or tails of some of those trends. But there's no denying that they were what they were.

Linder-Bomb leading the way.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

I suspect the sneak is way easier to block for than a HB run up the middle. On a sneak, the QB will look for the soft spot and the guards just have to get a slight initial advantage for a fraction of a second to let the QB fall forward. It helps having a big dude like Stanley. On a HB run, Stanley has to get the snap, then hand it off and the RB needs time to get back to the line. It takes much more time to develop.

For sure and I get all that. I'm mostly referring to like when Stanley could bust ahead for 3, 4 plus yards on them. That's just abnormal as all get out. To get 6 plus yards on a QB sneak means that O line can generate a push. (along with a big QB.) I think it's partially scheme. Play calling is an art and having QBs who can check in and out of things based on what the D is showing. For us to hit our ceiling our running game has to improve. I don't that's a new or unique take by any means. I hope with most (maybe all if we are ridiculously lucky) of the Oline coming back that'll improve. Even just a little would make a huge difference

 

[eledmonster]

They’ve had 5 head coaches in the last 10 years; their ship has sailed. No change is gonna help, and musical coaches is the death knell of a program. Miami, nebraska, Tennessee, Florida State is starting to do it...

I get that the old guard of the donor bases can’t come to grips with not being title contenders so they throw multi million dollar temper tantrums, but they also see everything through the homer goggles and assume that every great coach is gonna want to come play for their dumpster fire if they just throw a bunch of money at it. And then when good coaches don’t come calling, they start grasping at straws with the guru weirdo types like Mike Riley and before you know it they’re playing MAC teams in a bowl game once every two or three years.

I wonder if they are wishing they had kept Ed Orgeron, when he went 6-2 as an interim HC?

 

[ArvadaHawk]

They’ve had 5 head coaches in the last 10 years; their ship has sailed. No change is gonna help, and musical coaches is the death knell of a program. Miami, nebraska, Tennessee, Florida State is starting to do it...

I get that the old guard of the donor bases can’t come to grips with not being title contenders so they throw multi million dollar temper tantrums, but they also see everything through the homer goggles and assume that every great coach is gonna want to come play for their dumpster fire if they just throw a bunch of money at it. And then when good coaches don’t come calling, they start grasping at straws with the guru weirdo types like Mike Riley and before you know it they’re playing MAC teams in a bowl game once every two or three years.

as a ND fan dating back to the late 60's as a kid, i remember the John McKay and then John Robinson (1st stint) years and the cliff the program fell off after Robinson left the first time. Then came Pete Carroll. So, i don't think this valley is permanent.

 

[haydensly]

False. I knew our offense would show up. I predicted 50+, which we would have hit had we not let up late. The guard play got shored up with the break and Iowa's offense looked like what I was expecting all year. We might not have totally elite speed on the outside, but we finally have some decent speed. The biggest problem with our offense right now is we are just too damned soft on the middle of the o-line. If we had just slightly better o-line play, this team would have been 12-0 or 11-1 and on its way to Indy to lose to OSU by 42. I don't think the scheme or play calling is bad, but when you have guard play as bad as Iowa's was most of the season, you can't run up the middle and the passing game breaks down because the QB has a tackle or MLB in his face before he can even set his feet. Watch the games like PSU and Michigan without the heat of the moment anxiety and you'll see what I mean. If we have a good QB on the roster and the line is shored up, this ball club is going to surprise a helluva lot of people next year.

I was super duper negative coming off the Wisconsin loss because of how bad the o-line looked, but they cleaned it up a little bit more each week as the season progressed and the offense got a lot better.

I agree with most of this, although I can't say that I saw 50 points coming.
But you make some excellent points on the OLine, specifically the guards. You can't overcome a lack of blocking like we had mid-season. The worst pressure for a quarterback is pressure right up the middle. And not having a good running game makes everything more difficult.
This is the type of perspective you get after a season and is very unlike the melt-downs you see after we lose a game.

 

[okeefe4prez]

So, i don't think this valley is permanent.

I don't think it's permanent, but it's a lot deeper and hard to climb out of than USC fans realize. The playoffs have completely changed the recruiting landscape. Clemson walked in there and took the #1 QB in CA this year. The coaching instability really hurts recruiting, too. Guys don't want to commit when they know changes will occur and they won't know their role 2 years out.

The glory days are fading from the collective memory of the kids they are recruiting and that is not good. They are lucky because they are in a recruit rich territory, but as Texas, Florida State and Tennessee have shown, geography alone does not make you immune from falling off. Plus, in light of their admissions scandal, USC athletics is going to get a lot of scrutiny from compliance types. So while guys like Malzahn or Jimbo might be able to get a marginal recruit in on a wink and a nod, USC seems likely to me to be a program where the ivory tower eggheads are going to exercise additional control over the whole athletic department.

I'm not saying they can't get back to championship caliber, but in an era where they will have to beat Oregon and its Nike money and then turn around and beat two top 4 teams (likely OSU or two southern teams) in a row, the path back to the top for them based on the new landscape is really bad. The other factor that can't be discounted is that while the Big Ten Network and SEC Network are printing money, the PAC 12 Network is utter garbage and has virtually no penetration. The start time for their games is bad for most of the national TV market. The SEC is rumored to have just sold one game a week for $300 million to ESPN, which is probably more than the entire PAC 12 media package is worth. The negotiation for their expiring tier one game rights is huge and may even be an existential crisis level for the conference. The lack of marquis games that draw the level of attention of the Iron Bowl, OSU-UM, World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party, Red River Shootout, etc. does not bode well for the conference and will hurt USC relative to the teams it has to recruit against.

 

[Caddy]

Even if you remove the amount of recruits element, it' still a bad class. Their average star rating is historically low for them.

It comes out to like 38th, which in USC terms is an awful class.

 

[Seth53]

I don't think it's permanent, but it's a lot deeper and hard to climb out of than USC fans realize. The playoffs have completely changed the recruiting landscape. Clemson walked in there and took the #1 QB in CA this year. The coaching instability really hurts recruiting, too. Guys don't want to commit when they know changes will occur and they won't know their role 2 years out.

The glory days are fading from the collective memory of the kids they are recruiting and that is not good. They are lucky because they are in a recruit rich territory, but as Texas, Florida State and Tennessee have shown, geography alone does not make you immune from falling off. Plus, in light of their admissions scandal, USC athletics is going to get a lot of scrutiny from compliance types. So while guys like Malzahn or Jimbo might be able to get a marginal recruit in on a wink and a nod, USC seems likely to me to be a program where the ivory tower eggheads are going to exercise additional control over the whole athletic department.

I'm not saying they can't get back to championship caliber, but in an era where they will have to beat Oregon and its Nike money and then turn around and beat two top 4 teams (likely OSU or two southern teams) in a row, the path back to the top for them based on the new landscape is really bad. The other factor that can't be discounted is that while the Big Ten Network and SEC Network are printing money, the PAC 12 Network is utter garbage and has virtually no penetration. The start time for their games is bad for most of the national TV market. The SEC is rumored to have just sold one game a week for $300 million to ESPN, which is probably more than the entire PAC 12 media package is worth. The negotiation for their expiring tier one game rights is huge and may even be an existential crisis level for the conference. The lack of marquis games that draw the level of attention of the Iron Bowl, OSU-UM, World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party, Red River Shootout, etc. does not bode well for the conference and will hurt USC relative to the teams it has to recruit against.

Two things:

(Good post BTW)

#1--wait until some sort of "pay to play" comes to fruition. The mentality of recruiting locally so kids can stay local will be obliterated. In fact, any semblance of current recruiting emphasis will be obsolete.

#2--This resonates with "buy American." Uh, no, we're in a global economy. And college football recruiting isn't local anymore, not with social media, youtube, etc. Iowa kids for the most part stay in state, but not all of them.

 

[Caddy]

Two things:

(Good post BTW)

#1--wait until some sort of "pay to play" comes to fruition. The mentality of recruiting locally so kids can stay local will be obliterated. In fact, any semblance of current recruiting emphasis will be obsolete.

#2--This resonates with "buy American." Uh, no, we're in a global economy. And college football recruiting isn't local anymore, not with social media, youtube, etc. Iowa kids for the most part stay in state, but not all of them.

The really good Iowa players in high school typically go out of state. The ones that are so so typically stay in state as they don't have a lot of offers. There are exceptions with some legacy recruits however.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

I don't think it's permanent, but it's a lot deeper and hard to climb out of than USC fans realize. The playoffs have completely changed the recruiting landscape. Clemson walked in there and took the #1 QB in CA this year. The coaching instability really hurts recruiting, too. Guys don't want to commit when they know changes will occur and they won't know their role 2 years out.

The glory days are fading from the collective memory of the kids they are recruiting and that is not good. They are lucky because they are in a recruit rich territory, but as Texas, Florida State and Tennessee have shown, geography alone does not make you immune from falling off. Plus, in light of their admissions scandal, USC athletics is going to get a lot of scrutiny from compliance types. So while guys like Malzahn or Jimbo might be able to get a marginal recruit in on a wink and a nod, USC seems likely to me to be a program where the ivory tower eggheads are going to exercise additional control over the whole athletic department.

I'm not saying they can't get back to championship caliber, but in an era where they will have to beat Oregon and its Nike money and then turn around and beat two top 4 teams (likely OSU or two southern teams) in a row, the path back to the top for them based on the new landscape is really bad. The other factor that can't be discounted is that while the Big Ten Network and SEC Network are printing money, the PAC 12 Network is utter garbage and has virtually no penetration. The start time for their games is bad for most of the national TV market. The SEC is rumored to have just sold one game a week for $300 million to ESPN, which is probably more than the entire PAC 12 media package is worth. The negotiation for their expiring tier one game rights is huge and may even be an existential crisis level for the conference. The lack of marquis games that draw the level of attention of the Iron Bowl, OSU-UM, World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party, Red River Shootout, etc. does not bode well for the conference and will hurt USC relative to the teams it has to recruit against.

yeah, you're right. it is deeply systemic and dysfunctional. which, i am enjoying. Eff USC.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Two things:

(Good post BTW)

#1--wait until some sort of "pay to play" comes to fruition. The mentality of recruiting locally so kids can stay local will be obliterated. In fact, any semblance of current recruiting emphasis will be obsolete.

#2--This resonates with "buy American." Uh, no, we're in a global economy. And college football recruiting isn't local anymore, not with social media, youtube, etc. Iowa kids for the most part stay in state, but not all of them.

The pay to play will be monetization of likenesses and I honestly think Oregon is going to dominate the Pac 12 due to Phil Knight's connection to the program. They're going to be able to sign guys up to freaking Nike contracts when they turn 18. That is why I said USC will have to get through Oregon.

At the end of the day, I don't know that USC landing 4 and 5 stars is going to help them that much. They already have a ton of them and they aren't that good. The SEC isn't going to let USC walk in and take the southern players who dominate in the trenches, they'll be on the cutting edge of whatever is necessary to make sure they still have totally dominant linemen. Someone will emerge in there as a power, be it A&M, Georgia, Florida or the currently dominant teams. Unless the bidding wars get into stratospheric numbers like a million bucks for a 4 star and USC can come up with really creative ways to connect their alums with those recruits, I don't think they'll be able to recruit the kind of guys they need to become dominant again.

 

[ssckelley]

The really good Iowa players in high school typically go out of state. The ones that are so so typically stay in state as they don't have a lot of offers. There are exceptions with some legacy recruits however.

What the heck are you talking about? Iowa gets most of the top talent in state. The reason why some of these kids don't get many other offers is because they commit to Iowa early.

 

[Northside Hawk]

False. I knew our offense would show up. I predicted 50+, which we would have hit had we not let up late. The guard play got shored up with the break and Iowa's offense looked like what I was expecting all year. We might not have totally elite speed on the outside, but we finally have some decent speed. The biggest problem with our offense right now is we are just too damned soft on the middle of the o-line. If we had just slightly better o-line play, this team would have been 12-0 or 11-1 and on its way to Indy to lose to OSU by 42. I don't think the scheme or play calling is bad, but when you have guard play as bad as Iowa's was most of the season, you can't run up the middle and the passing game breaks down because the QB has a tackle or MLB in his face before he can even set his feet. Watch the games like PSU and Michigan without the heat of the moment anxiety and you'll see what I mean. If we have a good QB on the roster and the line is shored up, this ball club is going to surprise a helluva lot of people next year.

I was super duper negative coming off the Wisconsin loss because of how bad the o-line looked, but they cleaned it up a little bit more each week as the season progressed and the offense got a lot better.

Not disagreeing. I was paraphrasing what the gentleman was whining about.

I did predict a loss, for which I have ate my words, but those particular words came from anywhere but my mouth.

 

[Knight78]

And they should have a great offensive line. But iirc USC is not in a great part of the big sprawl out there and maybe a lot of recruits want to go to a better place

I've driven by. My uncle teaches at USC. It's a beautiful campus. But two blocks off of campus it looks like a frikkin' war zone. He admitted as much.

 

[LicThawk]

The slight improvement in running game had little to do with lineman development. It had to do with cutting the zone read calls to under 10 a game instead of 10 a drive. 5 offensive lineman moving laterally vs. 11 defenders run blitzing down-hill doesn't work with any personnel skilled or not.

I always saw mostly 3+ yard gains on straight ahead runs. -3 on zone read runs on running downs.

 

[Adam]

I don't think it's permanent, but it's a lot deeper and hard to climb out of than USC fans realize. The playoffs have completely changed the recruiting landscape. Clemson walked in there and took the #1 QB in CA this year. The coaching instability really hurts recruiting, too. Guys don't want to commit when they know changes will occur and they won't know their role 2 years out.

The glory days are fading from the collective memory of the kids they are recruiting and that is not good. They are lucky because they are in a recruit rich territory, but as Texas, Florida State and Tennessee have shown, geography alone does not make you immune from falling off. Plus, in light of their admissions scandal, USC athletics is going to get a lot of scrutiny from compliance types. So while guys like Malzahn or Jimbo might be able to get a marginal recruit in on a wink and a nod, USC seems likely to me to be a program where the ivory tower eggheads are going to exercise additional control over the whole athletic department.

I'm not saying they can't get back to championship caliber, but in an era where they will have to beat Oregon and its Nike money and then turn around and beat two top 4 teams (likely OSU or two southern teams) in a row, the path back to the top for them based on the new landscape is really bad. The other factor that can't be discounted is that while the Big Ten Network and SEC Network are printing money, the PAC 12 Network is utter garbage and has virtually no penetration. The start time for their games is bad for most of the national TV market. The SEC is rumored to have just sold one game a week for $300 million to ESPN, which is probably more than the entire PAC 12 media package is worth. The negotiation for their expiring tier one game rights is huge and may even be an existential crisis level for the conference. The lack of marquis games that draw the level of attention of the Iron Bowl, OSU-UM, World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party, Red River Shootout, etc. does not bode well for the conference and will hurt USC relative to the teams it has to recruit against.

Once USC feels like they have gone long enough without cheating and that the NCAA is no longer watching them. Then they will magically restore themselves to national prominence.

 

[HawkGold]

Once USC feels like they have gone long enough without cheating and that the NCAA is no longer watching them. Then they will magically restore themselves to national prominence.

Doubt it. The states hit the hardest are.:

California, IL NY, Mich. Wisc, NC and Ohio.

Washington is 7th. Maryland and NJ round out the bleeders.

The states with appreciable gain...TX and Alabama.

There is a correlation. OSU is getting Ohio recruits M used to get. IL is almost a non factor on producing players.

You will see more Iowa HS player playing D 1 not because of better output. Its a numbers game.

There is a correlation with states with higher or lower college degree rates.

 

[Adam]

Doubt it. The states hit the hardest are.:

California, IL NY, Mich. Wisc, NC and Ohio.

Washington is 7th. Maryland and NJ round out the bleeders.

The states with appreciable gain...TX and Alabama.

There is a correlation. OSU is getting Ohio recruits M used to get. IL is almost a non factor on producing players.

You will see more Iowa HS player playing D 1 not because of better output. Its a numbers game.

There is a correlation with states with higher or lower college degree rates.

When USC starts paying recruits again you can throw out the conventional recruiting analysis. People travel to any of the circles of hell for a paycheck.