Sorry, Bruins fans. Kiffin has a point. From 2006-07, I covered Pete Carroll's USC teams for a Southern California newspaper before switching to cover the 2008 season at UCLA. You didn't have to be the world's most insightful observer to see that different kinds of players showed up for practice on the two campuses. You just had to show up with eyes and ears.
I remember being shocked when I talked to a UCLA offensive lineman about losing his starting job and hearing him say he was just happy to be getting a good education. At USC, I saw players resort to fisticuffs while they competed for the same spot."
about 2 years ago
Joey Kaufman
56 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Funny and True Quote
I covered USC when Saxon was writing for the Times. We witnessed a few tussles, fighting, and intense competitions while covering the Trojans.
Saxon hits it on the the nose here.
oops
I mean Orange County Register…Saxon wrote for the OCR covering USC for two seasons, not the Times.
Whether it is true or not, that was then (2006-2007)
this is now, and Dorrell’s kids are leaving the program. The talent level has improved with Neuheisel’s first two classes and this year’s class is outstanding.
Even if true, I’m a little surprised that Kiffin made those comments because I rarely see any HC make comments that disparage the opposing players. Program bashing, yes; opposing coach, occasionally, but opposing players, pretty much never. Especially since so many of UCLA’s gets were kids who were looking hard at USC, and USC picked up a couple of UCLA’s anticipated signings.
Not sure I heard him disparage kids
I just re-listened to the presser.
http://all-access.cbssports.com/player.html?code=usc&media=164498
Saying that he can tell which school is right for a player right away is only disparaging if you think UCLA is an inferior program.
wait… maybe you’re right.
Nice straw man you've constructed there
he didn’t say " We can tell which school is right for a player right away." Maybe you should get the quote right before laying down your marker. He said,
“I watched it over the weekend, just to see if it’s the same, and it’s really still the same,” he said. “I guess we waste time continuing to recruit them. We know within the first 10 minutes whether they’re the type of guys that want to play here or there.”
When Kiffin says, “We waste time continuing to recruit them” do you really believe that’s a nothing line that isn’t disparaging toward the kids who believe that UCLA is a better fit? When Kiffin says, “We know in the first ten minutes whether they’re the type of guys that want to play here or there” that’s just a silly little line, totally meaningless and not to be considered as anything disparaging?
Setting aside the disparaging, sneering tone, it’s also incorrect factually-if it were true, there’d be no reason to keep offers open to those who ultimately chose UCLA until signing day.
It's only a disparaging remark if you make it out to be
There’s nothing offensive about Kiffin knowing whether or not a kid wants to play at SC or UCLA, and if he does know that the kid wants to play at UCLA, then it is a waste of time to continue to recruit them – this is not a shot at the kids, but a reflection of the competitive nature of the coaching staff (not wanting to let one get away).
"Sneering" - More Spin
1) “Sneering” means expressing contempt, smiling derisively, scornful facial expressions. Kiff expressed no emotion when he made these objective comments so matter-of-factly.
He also said “maybe” we waste our time. Implying that the staff MAY decide not to pursue the UCLA profile recruits in the future.
Your propaganda doesn’t work over here, 89.
It's funny to see how things change
Yesterday, it’s a “great quote,” and people on here agreed, saying things like “someone has to play in the Minor Leagues,” or “some guys are just to scared to make the jump to the elite level.”
Today, he’s just trying not to waste his time in recruiting.
by SuperBruinMan on Feb 4, 2010 1:12 PM PST up reply actions
A bit sensitive?
Maybe to a pedant with an inferiority complex the words could be taken as disparaging.
I sure wish I knew who you were talking about
…but with your vocabulary and mad word skilz, maybe you could tutor Ambles.
All hail the Trogans!
How to identify UCLA type players
They ask two or more of the following questions:
1. The neighborhood is scary., will I be safe on campus?
2. Can you guarantee me playing time?
3. Why should I waste my time on the scout team?
4. What are the dorms like?
5. Is it true that USC is going to receive the “death penalty?”
6. Have you read the Bruins Nation’s laundry list?
7. Where is the closest mall?
8. Why can’t I wear jersey #1 or #55?
9. Can my best friend have a scholie or preferred walk-on?
10. What’s the big deal about coming to USC?
9.
STILL LOCO AFTER ALL THESE YEARS!
NOW CELEBRATING THE DAWN OF THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
by M. AGRIPPA on Feb 4, 2010 11:08 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Hahaha!
Hey, maybe this thing deserves it’s own fanpost.
STILL LOCO AFTER ALL THESE YEARS!
NOW CELEBRATING THE DAWN OF THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
"Outstanding" and "Disparaging" - Nice Spin
1) You cannot have an “outstanding” class with only one 5 star recruit. You also cannot have an “outstanding” class if you don’t fill your most critical need position – QB. UCLA had a pretty good class, but certainly not “outstanding”.
2) “Disparaging” is a nice, contentious spin. But, to all who watched Kiffin’s interview, he was in no way being “disparaging”. Just making an innocuous observation.
Welcome to the No Spin Zone, 89. CC is the antithesis of BN.
I had no idea CC was the antithesis of BN
thanks for pointing that out, O master of the obvious. But seriously, where do you come up with this stuff? Prince is a RS freshman QB and Brehaut, his backup, was a true FR. Why do you think QB was a “postion of need” for UCLA ? Further, while it’s nice to see your OPINION as to what constitutes an outstanding recruiting class, your odd criteria for making that judgment doesn’t seem to be shared by anyone who actually rates the classes.
UCLA had an outstanding class, USC had an outstanding class.
I’m going to call your Missus and tell her to talk some sense into you.
STILL LOCO AFTER ALL THESE YEARS!
NOW CELEBRATING THE DAWN OF THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Careful amigo, Sra. Loco surprised me with this little number one day
It’s also available in Cardinal and Gold
STILL LOCO AFTER ALL THESE YEARS!
NOW CELEBRATING THE DAWN OF THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
UCLA did have a good class
But failed to fill its important needs. Your OL will be torn to shreds. You have under-developed QBs. Your WR class is meh at best (struggled against the better defensive teams).
While UCLA did hit the refresh button in the front 7 on defense, keep in mind all of USC’s offense has replenished. And USC’s secondary WILL kill yours. Don’t give me the RM defense, 5 of his INTs were against San Diego State and Jonathan Crompton…
UCLA's biggest needs were on defense
The biggest single need was DT, then probably LB and CB. We’ll have three sophomore QB’s next year. Bringing in Nottingham would have been nice, but it wasn’t a huge need. UCLA will probably get 2 QB’s next year. Obviously any UCLA fan would’ve been thrilled if the class included a top receiver, but it wasn’t a big need at all. OL was a big need, but the situation wasn’t dire like last year. Di Paolo would have been a nice addition, but the haul is decent as it is.
by SuperBruinMan on Feb 4, 2010 5:14 PM PST up reply actions
With all due respect SBM
How can you say that ucla’s need was on “D” when the offense didn’t score all that many points all year.
Frak we are talking Not So Super Ruin Man-----What else would he say.
So what do you think of Len Washington lately
LA Sports is what keep me off the streets and out of trouble, thanks to all the teams Rams, Dodgers, Lakers, USC sports and the Love of Tennis.
by so.cal.native1952 on Feb 7, 2010 1:18 AM PST up reply actions
Then and Now
Neuheisel’s kids are still jumping the fence.
In his first year, the seniors jumped and the team skipped practice.
In his second year, he outlawed the jumping of the fence, so what did they do? Skipped a day of practice while jumping the fence during Bowl Game preparations.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
True they jumped the fence, but something changed
a) UCLA still won the game against Rutgers and
b) the asshat seniors that led the charge are gone.
BTW, consider that UCLA had no players drafted last year,
will likely only have two playesrs drafted this year, and may have only one player drafted this year, kicker Forbath (unless somebody really blows up and leaves early.) If my projection is correct, that would be three draft picks in three years. That just goes to show you how weak the recruiting was under Dorrell.
it is player development and nothing else and ucla will have 5-7 players drafted this year.
and set another thing straight (as per LK) we have to now develop these players to NFL players. and to set another thing straight 80% of NFL players aren’t worried about education as much they are about the pay check and being a starter.
by so.cal.native1952 on Feb 4, 2010 9:46 AM PST up reply actions
Lets just all face it Ucla is the gold standard in FB and in Sports in general, I mean any school that has had that many SOFTBALL CHAMPIONSHIPS is tops.
by so.cal.native1952 on Feb 4, 2010 11:21 AM PST reply actions
Softball cheaters!
The NCAA stripped the ruins of their 1995 national title for bringing in an Aussie ringer aptly named Tanya Harding.
STILL LOCO AFTER ALL THESE YEARS!
NOW CELEBRATING THE DAWN OF THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Softball?
Does USC have a softball team?
No, we play real sports. We also don’t have gymnastics and tiddly-winks.
lono, have you seen those girls that play softball?
other than Jennie Finch, most of them could probably knock you on your ass (and mine, too.) Those girls are tough!
And as long as USC is fielding women’s golf, women’s water polo and women’s tennis teams, I question your interpretation of “real sports.” :-)
But I am happy to know that USC doesn’t have gymnastics and tiddlywinks.
USC used to have gymnastics though
They even won the national championship in 1962.
by SuperBruinMan on Feb 4, 2010 5:17 PM PST up reply actions
UCLA: NCAA Certified and Sanctioned Sports Cheaters
Here’s the NYT story on their disgraced 1995 Softball team and their “Ringer Fron Down Under”: NYT
Read on and get to know your “rival” my young Trojan soldiers.
On Monday in Oklahoma City, the 23-year-old Tanya Harding of Queensland, Australia, pitched U.C.L.A. to the Division I women’s softball championship over its arch-rival, the University of Arizona. By yesterday, the school said Harding was gone from Westwood, taking incompletes in all her courses, completing a stay in Los Angeles of two whole months. That’s less than one quarter’s worth of study, but enough time to etch her name into the N.C.A.A. record book. -NYT
Here she is, she kick you ass!
^fUCLA’s TANYA HARDING^
STILL LOCO AFTER ALL THESE YEARS!
NOW CELEBRATING THE DAWN OF THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Lovely 'aint she?
STILL LOCO AFTER ALL THESE YEARS!
NOW CELEBRATING THE DAWN OF THE AGE OF AUGUSTUS
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
I didn't say they were hot-just rough (Jenie Finch aside)
and Finch didn’t go to UCLA. Your photos kinda prove my point!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
