Check out the latest batch of weekly answers…
1) Any idea what happened with Devon Moreland? It seemed he was a UCLA lean. Any chance at Jason Gibson? – Bruin818
The Moreland decision was very confusing to me. SMU? Kinda surprised they still have a program. Gibson said UCLA is in his top five, but there was no order given.
2) In 1998 an 0-2 UCLA team went into a game against #3 rated Texas in Austin as a 10 point underdog and won the game 63-3. UCLA then went on to win 20 games in a row. How was that turnaround accomplished so quickly and why can’t it be repeated? – Anonymous
I’m not saying it can’t be repeated. I’m saying I don’t think it will. Look, UCLA definitely has talent and there is some momentum building from last year. But I need to see a ton more from the offensive line and running game to think they have something special in store. Texas is pretty darn good.
3) Why hasn’t UCLA offered Dillon Van Der Wal? Is he next in line if/when the high-ranked TEs like Seferian-Jenkins and Barnett go elsewhere, or is UCLA just not that impressed with him? – Anonymous
I’m a little surprised they haven’t offered Van Der Wal yet. I think they will, even though they’re feeling good about their chances with Seferian-Jenkins. I know they’re interested in Van Der Wal, but with fewer scholarships available and less of a need at the position, I think it’s just about playing it tight.
4) Lane Kiffin seems to have decided that Max Wittek is the Trojan QB of the future and is passively encouraging Cody Kessler to de-commit. 1. Scout has Kessler ranked higher, how do you personally compare them? 2. Will UCLA have a shot at Kessler? – Anonymous
I like Wittek’s game a little more, but both are very good. I think UCLA will have a shot, but they’re pushing hard for Hundley, and that’s the priority at the moment.
5) Jon- It’s been hard not to notice the lack of overall size of the recent OL commits. While all have got good or more than desirable height, their respective bulk seem to be lacking. Are you aware of any shift in coaching/recruiting philosophies? Does the recent change to the “Revolver” offense necessitate looking perhaps into quicker, more agile OL? Or, forgive me, are we simply stacking recruits at this time for numbers? Thoughts?… – RC3UCLA
I think it’s a little of both, to be honest. Yes, to run more of an option game, or at least to value the running ability of the quarterback and outside game, quicker, lither linemen are preferred. The Broncos are a good example, as they routinely had among the league’s smallest lines but led the league in rushing. Also, I think UCLA views the majority of these early commits as projects, guys they know will have to get much bigger before contributing. Not everyone is an insta-starter like Su’a-Filo or Seantral Henderson.