8 thoughts on “Scholarship Reduction Fact Of The Day”

1. Wolf… you STILL don’t get it, do you?…. it’s about quality, not quantity…..and, of course, how the players are used and developed….

2. Now it’s scholarship reduction “of the day”?? As in he plans on beating this dead horse on a DAILY BASIS?

   • just wait until he gives us the “sock color of the day”

     • I think he finally gave that one a rest.

       Now it’s “USC’s offense should go uptempo” as the 2nd dead horse along with the 2-3 blogs where he really REACHES to bash Kiffin. (like that takes much of a reach)

3. Yup…Pendergast took high quality players and created a good defense in less than a year. With the talent available, there is no reason the O-line shouldn’t be better. I keep hoping that this line will improve and result in a more explosive offense that can put points on the board. The more likely scenario is that the O-line simply will not be able to handle increase in talent level they will see in the coming weeks.

   • Valid point regarding the O-Line……with a new LT and Center, as well as Walkers slow development, and Graff’s inconsistent play, the passing game really doesn’t have a chance…..even if we use 100 players per game…..

4. This line of argument is ridiculous. If SC had 15 more players, they’ll likely would have developed at least another 1 or 2 O-Linemen, another corner or two, and at least another receiver. With those, they certainly would have played more than 48 players against Utah State. Instead, those would-have-been players went to Stanford (O-Line), Oregon (CB), and UCLA (receiver). The players SC didn’t play against Utah State aren’t ready.

5. Oh Another Scholarship reductions write up..
   GO FIGURE!

Comments are closed.