Frost fired

trojanfan12 said:
Stopped reading here because you're wrong. It's as much about "who can get me to the NFL" as anything.
Click to expand...
Here is from the period of 2000-2020 for the total number of players drafted into the NFL -- tell me if you can tell what the common denominator is for these schools?

Ohio St.141
Alabama127
LSU126
Miami (FL)119
Florida117
Georgia115
USC112
Florida St.109
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
WITHOUT A DOUBT. You don't think Oklahoma or Notre Dame had the money to pay those coaches? They left because of LOCATION.

It is rocket science. Do you truly think it is just a coincidence that the elite programs in CFB just so happen to be located in or in Clemson's case, right on the border of talent rich states? Mind blowing to me how people don't get this.

Same reason Saban left Michigan State in the middle of the night to go to LSU. Same reason Mario Cristobal left Oregon to go to Miami. Same reason the coach before him left Oregon to go to Florida State.
Click to expand...
No, it’s not rocket science, but here you are trying to boil everything down to one factor that means less today than it ever has.

Let’s start with your claim about “every elite program”… Notre Dame and Oklahoma aren’t elite programs? So start by defining what makes a program “elite.”
 
trojanfan12 said:
UCLA sits in the same recruiting grounds as USC and are in a nicer part of the city. Why don't they get the recruits USC does?
Click to expand...
UCLA is a blue blood basketball program. USC is a blue blood football program. What a silly question to ask.
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
Here is from the period of 2000-2020 -- tell me if you can tell what the common denominator is for these schools?

Ohio St.141
Alabama127
LSU126
Miami (FL)119
Florida117
Georgia115
USC112
Florida St.109
Click to expand...

I'll take coaches/programs that get players to the NFL for $500 Alex...thanks for proving my point.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
Why is that? You didn’t even get close to answering his question.

You seem pretty out of your element.
Click to expand...
You do understand that UCLA is a blue blood in basketball and not football right? And USC is a blue blood in football and not basketball right?
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
You do understand that UCLA is a blue blood in basketball and not football right? And USC is a blue blood in football and not basketball right?
Click to expand...
So Blue blood only matters when it fits your argument. LOL.

that 70s show lol GIF by IFC
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
UCLA is a blue blood basketball program. USC is a blue blood football program. What a silly question to ask.
Click to expand...

And? They sit in one of the most talent rich areas in the country, thanks to scholarship limits USC can't sign everyone like they could back in the day...yet kids would rather redshirt a season at USC or go to an out of state school than play immediately at UCLA...and you think it's because of basketball. lol
 
trojanfan12 said:
I'll take coaches/programs that get players to the NFL for $500 Alex...thanks for proving my point.
Click to expand...
THEY ARE ALL LOCATED IN TALENT RICH STATES!!!! Why do you think coaches bounces from school to school until they get to one of the select few? Is it because they coach better at those schools or because.....................THEY CAN SIGN BETTER RECRUITING CLASSES.
 
trojanfan12 said:
And? They sit in one of the most talent rich areas in the country, thanks to scholarship limits USC can't sign everyone like they could back in the day...yet kids would rather redshirt a season at USC than play immediately at UCLA...and you think it's because of basketball. lol
Click to expand...
He admits blue blood matters but then discounts it in all other arguments lol
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
You do understand that UCLA is a blue blood in basketball and not football right? And USC is a blue blood in football and not basketball right?
Click to expand...
You’re pretty much just rephrasing his question. If it’s all about location, why doesn’t UCLA consistently land big recruits like USC? Yes, we all know they are historically a basketball power… the point… keep repeating it, it’s not helping your argument.
 
trojanfan12 said:
And? They sit in one of the most talent rich areas in the country, thanks to scholarship limits USC can't sign everyone like they could back in the day...yet kids would rather redshirt a season at USC than play immediately at UCLA...and you think it's because of basketball. lol
Click to expand...
You grow up a fan of one or the other. If it is football -- i'm guessing majority of the state are USC fans. You dream of going to play for your favorite team. If your favorite team is USC, the last school you want to go to is UCLA.

Again -- this isn't rocket science. It is no different here in Michigan. Most of the state is Michigan fans. If a kid grew up a Michigan fan -- the last school, outside of Ohio State, they'd want to go is Michigan State.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
EVERY ELITE PROGRAM!

Shit… wait… not Oklahoma and Notre Dame tho… what are we talking about again?
Click to expand...
LOL at the end of the day a program like nebraska that is a blue blood and willing to invest everything necessary to succeed is what makes the difference. Sure we've fallen on hard (really really really hard) times, but we can turn it around quicker than a UCLA or a Michigan State with nothing more than a Coach
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
.THEY CAN SIGN BETTER RECRUITING CLASSES.
Click to expand...

BECAUSE THEY SEND MORE PLAYERS TO THE NFL. lol

Btw, Auburn is sitting in the same talent rich area as Alabama, they're not a basketball blue blood...yet vastly different recruiting classes and football results.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
You’re pretty much just rephrasing his question. If it’s all about location, why doesn’t UCLA consistently land big recruits like USC? Yes, we all know they are historically a basketball power… the point… keep repeating it, it’s not helping your argument.
Click to expand...
Obviously, you have to be a big time program as well as where you are located. I'd think that was common sense.

Using your logic -- every school in a talent rich state would be dominant. I'd think on a college football board it wouldn't have to be explain the select few schools who can be elite.
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
You grow up a fan of one or the other. If it is football -- i'm guessing majority of the state are USC fans. You dream of going to play for your favorite team. If your favorite team is USC, the last school you want to go to is UCLA.

Again -- this isn't rocket science. It is no different here in Michigan. Most of the state is Michigan fans. If a kid grew up a Michigan fan -- the last school, outside of Ohio State, they'd want to go is Michigan State.
Click to expand...
There it is… nothing matters but location, and what team you grew up rooting for.

You’ve truly gone all the way full ridiculous mode one this one.
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
Obviously, you have to be a big time program as well as where you are located. I'd think that was common sense.

Using your logic -- every school in a talent rich state would be dominant. I'd think on a college football board it wouldn't have to be explain the select few schools who can be elite.
Click to expand...
No… that’s using your logic bud…

:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top