ESPN Summarizes the Pac-10
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3152283&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab4pos2
The word that sums up the Pac-10 is "disappointment", which really does describe it perfectly. It was a really bum year for the Pac-10. It's also a good word for UCLA football, which was supposed to be the year the team finally rose up and took its rightful spot among the Pac-10 elite. Instead, it was more miserable, boring, and sloppy football. I am sad to say I bought the hype.
Anyway, they have an all-Pac-10 team on the page. While its no surprise that there are no offensive players from Karl Dorrell and Coordinator #whatever, you would think there would be tons of players on the defensive side. After all, they were led onto the field by God's Gift to UCLA and Defense, DeWayne Walker, and no other team can say that.
Here it is!
Defense
DL Lawrence Jackson, Sr., USC
DL Sedrick Ellis, Sr., USC
DL Nick Reed, Jr., Oregon
DL Dexter Davis, So, Arizona State
LB Keith Rivers, Sr., USC
LB Robert James, Sr., Arizona State
LB Spencer Larson, Sr., Arizona
DB Antoine Cason, Sr., Arizona
DB Terrell Thomas, Sr., USC
DB Patrick Chung, Jr., Oregon
DB Kevin Ellison, Jr., USC
P Keenyn Crier, Fr., Arizona
Wait, what? If God's Gift to UCLA and Defense couldn't lead any players to the All-Pac-10 team, what does that make the guy that led Arizona State's defense? And Arizona's?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
6 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No safeties?
I am not surprised
I don't think many of our players were highly recruited out of high school or were expected to be all conference players
If you have a unit that succeeds despite the fact that the individuals are limited in talent, than I think that says a lot about the job a coach is doing.
SUC's defense is awesome, and it should be, its full of 5 star recruits at every position. Ours isn't full of 5 star recruits. Or even 4 star recruits. I think that makes the job Walker has done with them to be productive as a unit, while limited in talent individually, very good.
Remember last year was Walker's first year of recruiting on defense. So, I look forward to how much better this unit will be if he continues to attract more talented recruits into the program.
Mandatory disclaimer: the fact that I think he is a very good defensive coordinator doesn't mean I think he should be HC. He shouldn't, and he won't. He's more than likely not ready.
But I do think he is a good defensive coordinator. You can think he is a good DC and not the right candidate for the job.
by silverlakebruin on Dec 14, 2007 1:30 PM PST reply actions
I'm generally with you
agreed
Walkers first year of recruiting was good, and if he holds on to the defensive guys he has committed, he will move into a top class recruiter.
You are right though, it is too early to make a definitive statement, but I do like what I have seen thus far. This year was tiny step back though, so I am curious as to what will happen if we retain him next year.
by silverlakebruin on Dec 14, 2007 2:50 PM PST up reply actions
he has potential
If someone displays potential at the office, being successful at the job they are doing, it doesn't mean they are promoted instantly or that hiring decisions about their superiors are run through them. It also doesn't mean they are untouchable. The whole idea is ludicrous.
DeWayne Walker exhibits potential, potential that means he should keep his nose to the grindstone. When he fields every week or almost every week that displays the same fire and tenacity that held USC last year to 9 points. Not a single game in 12 this year had defense like that.
It's all potential.

by 


















