Lord Vader
V,B
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 12,113
- Likes
- 0
Posted by a USC insider on Rivals:
Fallout from NCAA penalties
9:55AM ET
USC Trojans
Top Email
There are two immediate areas of concern for USC given the two-year bowl ban and the loss of at least 20 scholarships. First, as Scott Wolf of the Los Angeles Daily News reminds us, the NCAA could allow players with two or fewer years of eligibility remaining (i.e., those who would never get another chance to play in a bowl) to transfer and be eligible immediately. Wolf says he doesn't think too many Trojans will take the NCAA up on that offer, writing: "Why bother transferring if you are already a starter and start over at another school?"
(Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times wonders if Washington coach Steve Sarkisian may have any interest in some guys he used to coach -- although Condotta points out that Sarkisian and Lane Kiffin are good friends and it's not clear that Sarkisian would be willing to go down this road.)
The loss of scholarships will present a bigger problem. When Washington was given a similar penalty in the early 1990s, it was docked 10 per year over a two-year period. If that's the case here, then USC essentially would be faced with only being able to sign about 10 prospects in each of the next two Februarys. We've seen how big a hole Tennessee is in, even though the Vols are only 10 under the NCAA max of 85. Imagine the Trojans' being 20 under -- that's essentially losing an entire recruiting class.
Kiffin & Co. already have seven commits for 2011, which means if the reduction is enforced, they may only have room for another three or so. Would this mean that they pull their offer to QB Cody Kessler, given that they already have a QB in Max Wittek? Unlikely, but you can see the dilemma that this presents.
One thing likely to happen: Guys who don't play won't be welcomed back for their fifth year on campus, which should free up a few scholarships.
Fallout from NCAA penalties
9:55AM ET
USC Trojans
Top Email
There are two immediate areas of concern for USC given the two-year bowl ban and the loss of at least 20 scholarships. First, as Scott Wolf of the Los Angeles Daily News reminds us, the NCAA could allow players with two or fewer years of eligibility remaining (i.e., those who would never get another chance to play in a bowl) to transfer and be eligible immediately. Wolf says he doesn't think too many Trojans will take the NCAA up on that offer, writing: "Why bother transferring if you are already a starter and start over at another school?"
(Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times wonders if Washington coach Steve Sarkisian may have any interest in some guys he used to coach -- although Condotta points out that Sarkisian and Lane Kiffin are good friends and it's not clear that Sarkisian would be willing to go down this road.)
The loss of scholarships will present a bigger problem. When Washington was given a similar penalty in the early 1990s, it was docked 10 per year over a two-year period. If that's the case here, then USC essentially would be faced with only being able to sign about 10 prospects in each of the next two Februarys. We've seen how big a hole Tennessee is in, even though the Vols are only 10 under the NCAA max of 85. Imagine the Trojans' being 20 under -- that's essentially losing an entire recruiting class.
Kiffin & Co. already have seven commits for 2011, which means if the reduction is enforced, they may only have room for another three or so. Would this mean that they pull their offer to QB Cody Kessler, given that they already have a QB in Max Wittek? Unlikely, but you can see the dilemma that this presents.
One thing likely to happen: Guys who don't play won't be welcomed back for their fifth year on campus, which should free up a few scholarships.
