13LikesMariucci is the hot press rumor...
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
He was there for all of one year without any of his own recruits, so I think you are overvaluing that. Even Pete Carroll was a .500 coach in his first season and lost the Vegas Bowl to Utah.Originally Posted by El Cochino
The one thing the guy brings is instant credibility to the program. Recruits will buy what he's selling, and God knows we could definitely do better in that department. Dorrell's recruiting was unimpressive on both sides of the ball--undersized linemen, undersized linebackers, unimpressive running backs and quarterbacks, etc.
If he's the guy, I'm stoked. I'm really not sure what more you could want in a head coach.
JB. Clearly I don't follow UCLA football. They were talking about replacing Dorell and mentioned he had a great recruiting class coming in next year. Like one of the best in the nation.
Do they keep him to get those recruits in then fire him after next season? if they cut him no they can decommitt and UCLA could lose all those sought after players(4-6). Almost sounds like it would be worth keeping him and fire him mid season to get these kids in
Jbruin and I were talking about something similar to this situation and he made a ton of sense saying
"New head coach for the future>than one year of recruits"
If they do your plan who knows who they would hire, and it certainly doens't look good for next year's recruiting class. How many would transfer, how many of the next class wouldn't bother looking at UCLA because the program would certainly look at turmoil.
If they have a chance to bring in Marciucci now, you do it. You don't play games, and let Dorrell coach half a season and then fire him. Things don't work like that in the real world.
A bunch of those commits are now wavering (we already lost a stud WR to ASU who was a previous commit) anyway because of how poorly the team has played and the subsequent coaching uncertainty. Also, that recruiting class ranking is a bit specious because LOIs aren't signed until February I believe and there are still quite a few blue chippers out there.
A lot of these kids chose UCLA because they simply loved the school, and quite a few have said they would stay with their UCLA commitment regardless of who the new head coach is.
In simple terms, the longer you put it off "until next year" is just another year you're setting yourself back. Dorrell is not going to cut it anymore. I'd rather have five years with a good coach who will be a better recruiter than Dorrell than keep putting it off because we're scared about one season just for ~5 unproven freshmen. Next season is going to be rough anyway because we are losing 18-20 senior starters. Time to start fresh.
jb, I think I am now convinced on Mooch. I agree with your assessment on KD's recruits. No passion, no size, lots of speed but no ability to hit and hurt.
It is ironic. On Friday I was watching the replay of the 1993 game on ESPN Classic and I was watching our defense. Man was that a big team. Strong, hit like a ton, etc. Granted I think they lost that game to 'SC (I couldn't watch to the end of the replay) but I felt a lot better about the team then I do now.
Can KD, today, and go after Mooch. If you lose recruits, so be it. Live with one year (and it will be bad with all the graduating seniors, regardless). Give Mooch a four year deal and see what he can do with his own recruits. I just wonder if he would want the job. Seems more like a Bay-area guy. But he sure could develop the QB's!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
