if you honestly believe that there were more players involved, even after the ncaa spent 4+ years investigating the matter, you have your head up your ass. and before you even start, the ncaa already went to every length possible to paint the picture that USC was a dirty program. they would have exposed it in a heartbeat, if more football players were getting benefits.Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinWolv
recruiting rankings are so hit and miss that they shouldnt be relied upon. clay matthews was a walk-on and is now a top lb in the nfl. bryce brown was the #1 recruit in the country a couple of years ago and is now at a jc. the recruiting sites also tend to reward montster stats, taking little into account of their competition. however, stanford has still averaged a top 25 class these past 4 years, while USC has averaged a top 5. the one negative that i have on pete carroll's time at USC, was that in his later years, the recruiting coordinator relied too much on the recruiting rankings and not enough on actual player evaluation. so even if we did have a top 5 class, we missed a lot more than what he hit. the RC directed the staff and went after "average" 4 and 5*'s rather than the guys who could ball. stanford has relied heavily on player evaluation and size/power, all thanks to harbaugh.
