UCLA starters and their recruiting numbers

BE REAL is a two-faced FLUFFER. Here is some of his work from today's Wolfbag's blog:

_____________________________

BE REAL said:
Don't you just love how when SC ever does anything wrong the usual SUCLA suspects come on to the SC blog to discuss how SC has no class. Huuuuh? These SUCLA no-counts are lecturing us about class when they never display any themselves.

Is there any wonder we don't respect the SUCLA hypocrites.

RANT ON, losers, Trojans are too busy celebrating another great football year to pay you all much mind.

aka ONLYTHETRUTH

October 20, 2009 7:14 AM

jon, a great work-up this is.

worthy of recognition in the Jedi Archives, i sense.

however, final approval, the Jedi Council must give.

I didn't realize that Neuheisal was on the hot seat. Your comments at the end imply that there are rumblings about his performance.

Anon 5:38

Umm...actually I'm pretty sure historically USC does NOT start many young players. This is the first time in HISTORY they have started a true freshman at QB.

UCLA is on the hook for millions to Neuheisel and Chow and they're fighting just to get to mediocrity. They're on the hot seat.

Mother Theresa spends a curious amount of time on Scott Wolf's blog

"How come USC can start so many young players and still be successful?"

I'm sure that is a question Mitch Mustain and his mom has been wondering.

Jon AWESOME WORK!!!!

Dude you are totally smokin!!

Great idea to put his list together and I agree with your comments on coaches.

Sid,

While Barkley is the first true freshman to start at quarterback, this decade USC has started true freshman at every other position. Out of the nine Trojans who went in the last NFL Draft, seven started at least a handful of games as true freshman. The two exceptions being Mark Sanchez and walk-on Clay Matthews. But I think being first round draft picks helped them get over it.

There is absolutely no reason to think of any of the coaches on the "hot seat" after exactly 1 1/2 years. Excellent work by you Jon to breakdown the players not only by "ranking" but class. You can NOT discount the effect having young players has on the CONSISTENCY of performance. Every single player has shown signs of brilliance, but nobody has been able to do it consistently except BPrice, Forbath, and maybe Paulsen. It's no coincidence they are all upperclassmen.

On the flip side, it burns to see seniors Bosworths, Verner and RCarter over-run plays or get burned deep. Maybe they're trying to do too much...

Regardless, the good news is that this team is better than last year in all areas, and that is something you really couldn't say with the previous coaching staff.

And I suppose this list makes all those soft soduko playing bruin fans feel better, right? Excuses are like a$$holes we all have one. I'm not for getting rid of anyone but Im sure as hell for the team to start looking like a competitive relevant program. Defensively this post cant excuse, we got worked over on defense by Cal with a mostly veteran D. Until the Bruin Nation expects to annually be a top program without lame excuses we are destined to be mediocre

Biggest difference between SC and us is that when SC starts a frosh, he is surrounded by upperclassmen who were 4 or 5 star recruits. When we start a frosh, he is surrounded by frosh or sophs who were 3 or 4 star recruits. End of story. We will get there, it just takes some time.

You guys are all LITTLE GIRLS. USC might have a handful of true freshman play but they are always 5 star studs playing around junior or senior 5 star studs. If Barkley was playing around 10 5 star freshman he would look horrible. Next year is the Neu deadline. If he doesn't turn in 9 wins, dump him.

FYI - I did more research on this and created an index to measure the strength of a roster by experience and star ranking. It considers the 22 starters and works by assigning a point value to each player based on star ranking as a recruit and year in school. The following are the points assigned:

5 Star – Fr: 4, So: 6, Jr: 8, Sr: 10
4 Star – Fr: 2, So: 4, Jr: 6, Sr: 8
3 Star – Fr: 0, So: 2, Jr 4, Sr: 6
2 Star – Fr -2, So: 0, Jr: 2, Sr: 4

I posted the PAC 10 results on bruingold.com main forum.

that was the best pwned article
thanks Jon

Can you name one outstanding offensive player for UCLA that is not a 2008 or 2009 recruit. Maybe Paulsen, but he is often injured. Austin is slow and can't seperate from defenders.

I think there is legitimate criticism of the defensive performance to date, particularly Bulloughs lack of first half adjustments, but the offense is pretty much doing what is to be expected of a squad relying on 18 and 19 year olds with little college experience. It is one thing to have a player or two play as freshman, but when most of your line, your starting running back, and your fastest receivers are freshman, its gonna take time for things to gel.

Austin is a terrific player. It's the QB play that needs to improve.

Was Paulsen injured when he was WIDE OPEN down the middle on consecutive plays?

The most critical stat cited by Jon is this - Kevin Prince - 2008. And not cited by Jon - Prince ran the spread at Crespi.

Prince didn't play for two years. Developed in a different offense and had to relearn the position all in half a year beginning in the spring.

I believe on the only QB on the roster who came from a pro-style offense is Nick Crissman. Does it make much of a difference? I am would say it does.

Next year we need to see improvement. This year the Bruins still have a surplus of Dorell losers on the roster. If less than 9 wins next season we will see RELEASERICK.com come to life!

I'm tired of the young excuse! these kids have been playing football their whole life! you dont need to a 5th year starter to tackle or to catch a pass or to hit a wide open reciever!!!!! Maybe D Price should start playing more than 2 downs a series - how is he going to make it in the NFL?

If Boise State & Cinci can win with 3 star recruits so can we!!!! Doesn't anyone here get it? were going to finish last in the pac ten - LAST.

Locke was rated the #1 punter in his class and only got 4 stars!.... That sucks... what does a kid have to do?

Boise State recruits since 2005

2005 2006
5 star - 0 5 star - 0
4 star - 2 4 star - 0
3 star - 4 3 star - 3
2 star - 8 2 star - 15

2007 2008
5 star - 0 5 star - 0
4 star - 1 4 star - 1
3 star - 9 3 star - 6
2 star - 15 2 star - 12
1 star - 1 1 star - 1

2009
5 star - 0
4 star - 1
3 star - 7
2 star - 13

How does this staff find a way to develop and win with less?

I like the Analysis. Not sure it in the top 3 success factors of college FB team success. I’d go with effort, imagination & execution. See Boise State.

I am an Alum '90 and season seat holder since graduation. I have seen coaches come and go. I enjoyed the Bob Toledo teams the most. Obviously CRN has not had enough time to turn this around. It is only a matter of time, he will get it done. As for this team, the players talent level and preparation is not the problem. Our defense & special teams is good to go.

The offense has issues.

1.) Play calling in the red zone is terrible.
2.) QB doesn’t trust the WRs
3.) WRs run sloppy routes,
4.) WRs come out of cuts slowly,
5.) WRs drop balls
6.) WRs don’t fight through contact at the line
7.) WRs don’t block very well
8.) OL is muuuuch better this year
9.) TEs don’t get used, why?

Norm Chow has not impressed, I am not sure he cares anymore. At the end of the day, if our WRs don’t make plays we are one dimensional and really easy to shut down…just blitz the run gaps.

I would guess Boise State doesn't have the staff turnover like UCLA. Everyone is on the same page.

At UCLA during Dorrell's tenure, you had 4 different offensive coordinators and 4 different Oline coaches.

I will weep with the person who can name all 8.

Annonymous happily cites experience (without giving details) about Sc and ignores talent level. Others do the opposite. Imagination and all that is fine - and what wouldn't we give to play Boise State's schedule this year - but to succeed against the big boys you need a combination of both talent and experience/maturity - especially at key positions like OL and QB. Especially if you're going to go with a pro-set offense as opposed to playing a spread O which magnifies what a remarkable combo-athlete like a Dixon or Tebow can do. Of course, such an offense falls completely apart if you lose such an athlete as Oregon did before playing us a couple years ago.

It's a great post, Jon. Sc is young in key spots this year - and aren't as good as they have been as a result. Their QB is a true freshman, but a five star talent and exceptionally gifted even at that level. But their line to date anyway hasn't dominated anywhere near to the level many expected.

When you have 68 frosh and sophs on your squad, some patience is required. That's an attribute that's grown awfully scarce these days, especially among those who have turned their hobby into a virtual life on which we depend to provide us the dose of glory that lightens our step, our mood, and the burdens we carry. Patience is a b---- as they say. But with so much youth, this team should emerge at a level we can all appreciate. Next year's schedule is magnitudes of difficulty tougher than this year's, but i think we'll do okay next year and come out challenging for a BCS bowl berth in 2011.

thanks for the perspective, Jon

An excellent analysis, Jon. We have the talent to compete. With some experience, we'll be fine.

Hmmmm....only two of the guys on defense are from 08/09 (I don't believe Hester started) and one of those was 5 star Rahim Moore.

I could see the argument from the offensive side of the ball...regardless of class all of these guys are only in their second year with this system. The defensive side I have a harder time defending, however, as Bullough does a lot of the same things Walker was doing. It shouldn't be a stretch to expect this defense to have done a better job against Cal, imo.

Unfortunately, I think some of the coaches we currently employ will be gone soon when we can't pick up the difference in what their former employer was paying them. That means another new system, for better or worse.

Moore, Jones are tru sophs. Dye is a redshrit freshman. Price is a true frosh.

You have Tepa (true frosh) and Holmes (rs frosh) also getting minutes.

for a similar result, go look at this year's draft rankings and see how UCLA stacks up (or doesn't stack up) against the rest. The talent level's either not there for the older classes or just never developed - either way, we have the young guys leading the younger guys right now.

Solid stats and theory by theuclan on Boise State.

As far as questioning their schedule, they did beat Oregon and Utah.

From a fan base that was praising this so-called "dream team" of coaches...there sure seems to be a lot of complaining and excuses!! kids lace up their shoes to go out and hit and be instructed and its seems neither is happening at UCLA. F a Star ranking!! Boise St, Utah and TCU get over with the players they have...so UCLA should have no excuse except for the coaching isnt up to par....its just that simple

What was the final score of that Boise State/Utah game?

okay Boise State plays in a weaker conf - but who on this board thinks the Bruins can go into Boise and win? I'm as die hard as they come and i think it would be a blow out!

I leave for Arizona on thursday - lets hope we can salvage our season with an upset.

Take a deep breath, people.

Really, a coach needs 5 (five) years before you might consider moving on. Coaching other's recruits is not fair, and the first year is usually a wash since recuits can be wary of transitions. Karl got his time, and it was fair.

If you want a miracle, try church. This is college football. The passion for the job that CRN shows, at his alma mater, will be worth its weight in gold... eventually.

The Daily Bruin has an article that can be interpreted in a number of ways, one being that Neuheisel is feeling a bit of pressure.

http://beta.dailybruin.com/articles/2009/10/19/imediocre-team-frustrates-coachi/

i dont get it