Coach Neuheisal Blazing the Recruiting Trail
by BruinFaithful on Jan 16, 2008 1:00 PM PST
Email
PrintWhew!!!! Does this guy have energy or what? After chasing Norton and Chow. Rick waited for the contact period to come and according to Brian Dohn he flew to Texas to meet with none other than Aundre Dean, UCLA's highest and most prized non commited recruit left on the board. According to Dohn, the meeting went well, Dean is warming up to UCLA, and he will have an official visit on Jan. 25. Just recently it was highly speculated that Aundre was done with UCLA and leaning elswhere. I've got a new nickname for Neuheisal, SUNSHINE, and he has sure brought a whole lot of it to the Bruin Faithful. He sure looks a lot like the character from Remember the Titans and has the same moxie. Watch out TrOJies, here comes the PAIN!!!!
On a side note, anybody hear about Coach Walker's son now being a Soft Verbal to UCLA? Apparently he wants to explore his options now that he isn't sure his position coach E Scott will be returning. WTF, I thought we had offered this kid as a favor to Walker in the first place. Now he slaps us in the face with this? So much for Walker's recruiting and retention abilities. How much do you suck if you can't even get your own kid to stay commited? You think maybe he KNOWS his dear old Dad won't be in Westwood too long? Interesting. This and Neuheisal has to go out and clean your mess by re-recruting every kid you and your family swore you had a lock on? Unbelievable.
http://www.insidesocal.com/ucla/
GO SUNSHINE!!!!
GO BRUINS!!!!
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.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Let him go..
By the way, grerat nickname; CRN sure does radiate energy, doen't he? But I am thinking that if the SUNSHINE's in westwood, do the Condoms play where the sun doesn't shine?"
by whp68 on Jan 16, 2008 1:27 PM PST reply actions
That's illegal
by SecondGenBruin on Jan 16, 2008 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
Not that easy whp68
1.) Kevan was initially not seen as a UCLA caliber athlete in a class with limited rides left. We gave him one as a favor to DW.
2.) How does DW tell a kid to honor a commitment to UCLA, when his own kid won't?
3.) How does DW tell a recruit how valuable a UCLA scholie is when his own son won't take one?
4.) What types of conversations are they having at the dinner table. DW to son: "That's ok Kevan. Go where you want to. I won't be here much longer anyway." It's quite possible this happened.
by BruinFaithful on Jan 16, 2008 6:20 PM PST up reply actions
Oops!
by whp68 on Jan 16, 2008 10:31 PM PST up reply actions
Not that big a deal
by Herschy on Jan 17, 2008 1:14 PM PST up reply actions
Recruiting Myth busted
Our high ranking class, IMO was the result of 3 factors.
- They committed very early in the process before they blew up (see Dean)
- Lots of starters graduating so early opportunity to prove yourself.
- Recruits not being academically eligible
But no matter what the facts are, some people still believe A) Firing Dorrell caused the lost recruits and B) Walker cannot be held responsible for anything (including losing his recruits).
How do you evaluate a recruiter
He's only been here two years. This years defensive class looks awesome, regardless of how it shakes out, and lasts years was great too, although small.
I know "some people" just love to hate on DW, but saying he isn't a good recruiter is just not based on fact.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 16, 2008 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
I agree
Is he the only guy that can recruit to UCLA? No. Is he the greatest recruiter ever who is solely responsible for all the recruiting like Dohn made it out to be? No. Is he a very good recruiter? Yes.
Look at the guys we've brought in, who the lead recruiter was and what recruits say about him and there's no doubt he's a good recruiter. It's great to have him on the staff and the inroads he has made in the inner city will benefit the Bruins long after he leaves. That said, it's not as if we won't be able to recruit when he leaves. RN will do a great job recruiting after DW leaves and right now, the RN, DW team will bring us in some MONSTER classes.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 16, 2008 3:10 PM PST up reply actions
He is an above average DC
And we will know how good of DC he really is when he works with a defense that will not have experienced upperclassmen.
2007 defensive recruits
5 star
DT 7 Brian Price
4 Star
SLB 9 Steve Sloan
CB 10 Courtney Viney
DE 12 Akeem Ayers
3 star
S 47 Glenn Love
DE 92 Justin Edison
by silverlakebruin on Jan 16, 2008 3:10 PM PST up reply actions
Out of that list
Clarification...
My point was that that the idea that we would keep all our recruits if we kept Walker has been proven to be incorrect, like Dohn was saying. rye, the point you made was what I was trying to say.
The truth is, we will never know
One more thing...
As far as Kevan Walker and other recruits, I don't know what's going on. I can't blame the kids for "keeping their options open" though. If I was being recruited by various schools, I'd want to make sure I looked at each school as thoroughly as I could before I committed. Afterall, this is a 4 year committment (minimum) AND a MAJOR decision in their young lives.
I somewhat Disagree
You have to admit, these recent recruiting developments are quite troubling. I never said Walker couldn't recruit, just that the contention placed out there by everybody (The Media, Walker's Camp, and even some of the recruits) led us all (Even Geurrero and Neuheisal) to believe that retaining Walker would shore up the majority of this class. Seriously, it looks like this class is falling APART. I can't ever remember so many kids turning into Soft Verbals. I mean we now have, to my count, a whopping 15 kids who have gone from solid commits to either no longer commited or Soft Commits. That is HUGE.
List of kids that have gone Soft or Completely Decommited:
1.) Rahim Moore S
2.) Aundre Dean RB
3.) Uona Kaveinga LB
4.) EJ Woods S
5.) Anthony Dye CB
6.) Aaron Hester CB
7.) Datonte Jones DE
8.) Milton Knox RB
9.) Nelson Rosario WR
10.) Hamani Stevens OL
11.) Donovan Carter LB
12.) Johnathan Franklin RB
13.) Jerry Johnson WR
14.) Johnathan Martin OL
15.) Kevan Walker WR
This is almost the WHOLE recruiting class. I never remember this happening under Toledo. I remember Toldeo telling kids that if they decommited or turned soft, that was it. We would not honor they're commitment or save them a spot if they decided to return later. I liked that aspect of his recruiting policy. Kids need to learn what COMMITMENT means. If UCLA gets a better athlete at your position, we don't suddenly take the offer away from you and give it to the next guy. That would be severely frowned upon. Right? Funny thing about COMMITMENT is it works both ways. These kids don't seem to understand that. The parents are a part of the problem too.
"Walker's Recruits"
Many of us didn't believe that crap when it was being used to argue for his retention as a DC.
And, now it is clear that it was crap.
Many of us didn't believe that only Walker could recruit in or retain "inner city" kids. We thought it was crap.
I thought it was dealing the race card against RN.
And, then we learn that RN coached at and built solid relationships with high school players from an inner city school.
Ironic, it's now up to RN to save this class. If it can be done, I'm confident he will do it.
Amen
by BruinFaithful on Jan 16, 2008 7:42 PM PST up reply actions
Walker =antichrist
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 8:45 AM PST up reply actions
No -- You Don't Have A Clue
The target is all of the Walkeristas and Chicken Little's who:
- Told us the only way to hold this "stellar" recruiting class was to either make DW HC or keep him as DC; and/or,
- Continually played the race card by creating a class of recruits labeled "inner city" (a weak synonym for people of color) -- and claiming that only a person of color could recruit them.
We are calling out those people, not Walker.
We have called out Walker and continue to call out Walker as a DC. Whatever all of you say, the numbers show him as average, in our peer group, at best.
Sorry, but many of us don't believe he was retained because of his defensive prowess. I think the pressure to keep him was based, in great part, upon the delivery of this "stellar recruiting class" and the clear implications that if he were retained the class would stay intact and come.
And, now that it is coming apart, we are calling Bullshit on all of you who made those arguments.
You may want to defer this as an attack on Walker, if you made those arguments about recruiting, it is an attack on you. If you didn't, it is aimed at those who did.
by Class of 66 on Jan 17, 2008 10:08 AM PST up reply actions
please see various posts
You don't believe he was retained for his defensive prowess? So was RN lying when he said he had done a great job? Unless you believe he really is "slick rick" I would take him at his word. RN is smart enough to see what a great coordinator he is, regardless of the blind devotion some put into the idea of his not being any good. I guess that's why Charlie Weiss, Ty Willingham and others have tried to hire him, because he stinks. That's also why he has never been unemployed in his 18 years of coaching, and has always moved up to better and more significant coaching duties.
What other DC was out there to hire who was better than DW? Norton with his two years of experience? another position coach who was a gamble? Unless you have a more credible candidate, I don't see how you can think RN retained for him any other reason he was the best person available for the job.
The numbers don't show he is average. You can believe that, with your belief in secret motivations, and secret pressure on RN, UFOs, the earth being flat, racist Walker supports, and whatever else you want, but its simply not true.
Who are these "Walkeristas" you keep railing against in every post? Why do you feel the need to keep bringing up this straw man that doesn't exist. Every post you write has some sort of anti-walker dig in it. He's the DC next year, so get behind him and support him.
Can we retire the stupid names like "Walkeristas". Its simply a tool used to dismiss people without evaluating their arguements.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 12:13 PM PST up reply actions
The class may not be falling apart
Its not that hard to scroll back on BN and find old posts with clips about how keeping Walker was a key to keeping lot of the defensive recruits intact. That was one of the reason we assume CRN kept Walker on staff. If Walker cannot keep majority of the defensive recruit intact - you know the "Walker recruits" that beat reporters kept talking about - then who else should take the responsibility for not keeping that deal.
And to say that there were no "Walkerists" is a total lie on your part silverlake. Many of us here know you also post on BRO premium and you know damn well how that board was infiltrated with people who wanted Walker over CRN and was going all out to campaign for him following that moral victory against BYU.
The issue of who the head coach should be is dead
There are no "walkeristas" left. They only exist in the minds of people living in the past. If you can point out someone making these arguements now, I will give you credit, but is anyone credible not supporting CRN?
There is no disention, Walker and RN are working together fine, so why the need to bring up all this old nonsense?
Its like being part of a political party, your candidate runs, but whomever wins the nomination is your guy and you get behind him. And that is what people have done with CRN, even if he wasn't their first choice.
On the recruiting thing, if we don't bring in a top notch defensive class, criticize DW all you want. But don't criticize him because some recruting agencies are reporting we have "soft" verbals. That is silly. To date we have lost two recruits, one to grades, one to BYU. We will lose more to grades, but we may add some new ones before its all said and done. Let's see what we end up with before we criticize him for something that hasn't even happened yet.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
So
You hold him accountable for the class
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 1:37 PM PST up reply actions
Ok
Yes, but
But if we lose more than half of the six soft verbals and the overall class isn't improved by doing so, then absolutely I would agree DW made some serious mistakes in recruiting this class.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
We will see on sigining day
Nope
Just this week an article on Moore and his trip to UNC, as well as an article on Jones and his trip to Oregon, were released in the Daily Bruin. In the article they both stated that they were 100% to UCLA. I've also read stuff on EJ Woods, Dye, and Hester in which they say that UCLA is the school for them. This is recent stuff from this past weekend.
The class is NOT falling apart. Rick's got it under control. In fact, Aundre Dean, the guy who was supposedly off the list for good, is back on it after Rick took an in-home visit on Monday. Seriously, you can't tell me that everyone, including yourself, SWORE Dean was off the list, yet now he's back on. How do you explain that? Rick Neuheisel, that's how.
I'm willing to bet that Neuheisel will only only lose 1-2 recruits MAX (as long as academics aren't an issue). But even then, he'll fill the spots with some quality players.
by OutOThsWrld on Jan 16, 2008 11:57 PM PST up reply actions
I really don't get the criticism
If, we don't sign a great defensive class, then they have the right to criticize him, but all this bs about him lying, or he's not a good recruiter, or all this other stuff is not based on facts, his one recruting class is great, and this one is still unknown.
I wish people would wait until signing day before evaluating.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 8:44 AM PST up reply actions
I sure hope you're right
I agree with you on SUNSHINE. He did a great job with Aundre, but Dean is not a done deal. He told Brian Dohn his favorites are Louisville, aTm, and UCLA. I just don't like to be lied to by the likes of DW and his supporters. Maybe Sunshine should have gone in a different direction, now we're stuck with DW for 2 years.
Nice Character assassination
Can you please back up your claim that Walker is a liar with facts.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 8:40 AM PST up reply actions
Still waiting
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 12:14 PM PST up reply actions
There You Go Again
Here's what he actually said
"...lied to by the likes of DW and his supporters."
See -- he's also talking about DW's supporters. Does that include you? I don't know.
But, I do know what was said about DW and his recruits, the certainty with which it was said, and the frequency.
Not one of the Walkeristas ever mentioned that some of "his" recruits were marginal by academic standards. And, not one was honest enough to say that NO ONE could guarantee the class.
Funny, after all the viscious attacks on RN, including the quotes from Walker's family and Dohn, who certainly would not have done it against Walker's will, you all have fallen in line behind RN and now use him to justify the fact that DW is still here.
It is so sweet that RN is probably going to be the force that delivers some of these "soft" recruits -- especially after so many argued, implicitly, that a white coach could not do so.
Let me try one more time: We are not attacking Walker. We are calling BULLSHIT on all of the Walkeristas and Chicken Littles who predicted that only Walker could deliver the recruits. And, if you don't admit that the "his" recruits argument was the main argument for his retention, then you are so disingenuous as to not merit one further response.
Are you serious?
"lied to by the like of DWs supporters"
If he meant either of them, he would say
"lied to by the like of DW or his supporters,"
but he said
"Lied to by the like of DW AND his supporters"
That means he was lied to be DW and lied to by his supporters. That means he is calling DW a liar. And if he is doing so, he should produce proof that DW is a liar or retract his statement.
I've addressed the rest of your redundent arguement you've made over and over again in numerous posts further up in the thread. Feel free to read them again.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 2:06 PM PST up reply actions
silverlake
not everyone thinks DW is above average
"We have called out Walker and continue to call out Walker as a DC. Whatever all of you say, the numbers show him as average, in our peer group, at best."
I am fine with saying he is good, and greatness would be proven by taking the next step, but I think it is disengenous to say he is at best average, meaning he is either below average or average.
I would love to advance the discussion, but when I write something, such as DW was retained because he was the best available DC. My evidence is:
RN said DW did a great job
and
Nobody can name a better DC candidate who was available
And the response doesn't address any of the points I raised.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 2:57 PM PST up reply actions
Walker
Beyond that, it's interesting to see how you're trying to change the debate.
Let me respond to your points head on.
First off, I would have loved it if the discussion at the time Neu was choosing a DC was about who the best available candidate was. But, that didn't happen. Why? In my humble opinion, it was because the Walker promoters had already successfully convinced many, including DG, that Walker was the second coming, both as a coach and a "holder" of the recruits. We'll never know how much recruiting versus coaching weighed on DG's mind, but it would be silly to argue that it wasn't a significant part of the expressed justification for keeping Walker.
So, we never really got to the discussion of who would be "best." After Walker was, thankfully, not hired as HC, most of us (myself included) were just so relieved that he wasn't hired for the top job, that I wasn't that invested in the DC decision. And, frankly, any debate wouldn't have mattered much, as the momentum to keep DW, in good part because of the recruits, was already so strong.
I'm sure the coach-niks could list any number of qualified potential DC candidates, many of whom either had better college records, or impressive NFL pedigrees. Again, unfortunately perhaps, we never had that debate.
Which brings me to your second point. Yes, Neu has been supportive. The question on my mind is whether Neu genuinely wanted him back, or if he was forced, or at least strongly encouraged, to retain DW by DG, either because of his coaching abilities, alleged recruiting stranglehold or, simply, to avoid a Bruin "civil war" of sorts. If it's the former, then great. If it's the later, we should have had the debate.
Also, if it was the later, we still should be examining whether the claims DW supporters made about his ability to deliver the recruiting class were accurate. If you look back, in the joint Neu/DW Walker announcement on the night he was retained, Neu specifically mentioned the importance of Walker's ties to the recruits. Specifically, Neu said:
If part of Neu's decision making was driven by any representations about Walker's ability to deliver the recruiting class, then, yes, it damn well matters what happens now (though I agree that we need to wait to see how things shake out before making any judgments).
And, finally, whether Neu hiring of DW was forced/encourage/fully voluntary, what do you expect the guy to say? If it's the fully voluntary, then your point has some substance, but I don't know if we'll ever know that.
Good points
The spread vs pro-style: First, its tough to categorize. Some teams run a spread, some run a pro-style, some run a hybrid. In generel, in college, a spread puts more points on the board, which is why it is becoming more popular, just as what happened with the WCO in the NFL two decades ago. When evaluating how DW defenses do against a particular team, I think the best measure is to compare the points the defense gives up compared to the avg. points scored by that offense. When you do that in his first two year DW teams have done well against most teams they played and held them under their averages. I have an old post on their somewhere. The big disappointments are Utah and WSU.
On to the retention and what not, I think you are right. We will never know what motivations RN has other than those he made public. We won't know what pressure he was under. However, if he didn't want DW, he could have had him let him go to UW and blamed it on DW. On recruiting, RN has been around the block enough times in college to make a determination of how valuable DW was as a recruiter and as a DC. I don't think he would get hoodwinked after 8 years as HC at major D1 programs. I'm sure he made an accurate assessment of what DW had to offer. Further, DW had a credible 2 year offer from UW, and my guess is that if DW didn't feel wanted, he would have left. So, I don't see any direct, and very little circumstantial evidence that DW wasn't RNs first choice, or that RN wasn't savvy enough to figure out DWs true value, or that DW has any problems working under RN as his DC.
But you are right, we don't know other than what is publically stated. So, I will choose to be positive about the situation until there is evidence to the contrary.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 5:06 PM PST up reply actions
Silver, don't forget the important part - coaching
In my opinion, as I have pointed out elsewhere, the numbers point to Coach Walker being good but not great. Overall record - 13-13. Roughly at the top of the second quartile in terms of stats. Had David Copperfield ability to make his team totally disappear against Utah and Wazzou.
To me, it's just an average performance by a guy who has a better PR machine than coaching resume. Maybe he has absolutely nothing to do with the hype that got generated (which means his brother was a lone assassin on the website). I don't know for sure, but I know what it looks like from where I sit. Nonetheless, high school kids will do what they're going to do. Some "soft verbals" from elsewhere may end up coming to UCLA. My guess is that we will get the same kind of pledge class that we have managed to get every other year.
The bigger question to me is whether Coach Walker will be able to turn them into an offense eating machine. In my opinion, he hasn't shown the aptitude for that in the past. But - here comes the surprise, and Silver, you better sit down - I think he will turn things up a notch or two and become not just a good defensive coach, but a great defensive coach. I have two reasons - first and foremost is the absence of CTS, who in my opinion could turn the Patriots into an average team just by letting his shadow fall across their logo. Second is our new coach. Coach Neuheisel knows how to coach, which means he knows how to coach and motivate his coaches.
I wanted the Augean Stables totally cleaned. Coach Neuheisel said no. So I think Coach Neuheisel will turn Coach Walker into a monster, and I think it will happen next year.
I Agree
Initially, I thought Leach would be a great HC under whom DW would learn to stop the new spread offenses. I have the same confidence in RN.
Every spring, when it appeared we had a Monster D, many of us were worried that it only looked good when playing our O. Those fears turned out to be well founded.
And, we all agreed that it was hard for a D to grow when it practiced against an O that regressed.
I also went on record as saying that if RN wanted DW I wanted DW.
And, I've said consistently that no coach can promise to deliver a class of recruits.
I'm enjoying the revisionist history as many in the msm and a few around here scramble to distance themselves from the rhetoric they used in opposing RN and supporting DW.
you said in your post yesterday
What changed? What made him good today?
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 3:31 PM PST up reply actions
Nothing Changed
He should get better under RN.
Do you need me to use smaller words so that you can understand?
I'm replying to Fox, not you
You may want to make sure you are following a thread correctly before offering the use of smaller words to benefit my intellectual shortcomings.
by silverlakebruin on Jan 17, 2008 3:52 PM PST up reply actions
Sil -take a look at old posts
His score as a coach is not so good. Look at the drive log in the W S U game and the Ute game and you will see what I mean. His guys do not play hard in each game, it seems to me. Or on each play. His guys have ups and downs, not all the same each time.
His wins and losses are the same. His stats show he is OK - not great as some (you) have said. Not real bad, just not real good. He would get a solid C for a grade. The stats show that. No tap dance or spin can change what the stats show.
I think he will will be more than good next year, but he has not done more than good in that past. More than good next year will be thanks to Rick.
Now show this to a grown up to read the rest. (Explain to Silverlake that I used all one syllable words so he might get it. I know that the concept of someone disagreeing with him is upsetting, but suggest to him (in one syllable words, or course) that simply making the same argument over and over does not make the argument better and better. See if you can explain what "always in error, but never in doubt" means. And good luck. It isn't easy to convey thoughts using only one syllable words.)
Soft Verbals
The others are right...the recruiting services always say a player is a soft verbal if he goes to visit another school. On the national top 100 lists, a soft verbal is listed as having an open recruitment on Scout.com but if you click the UCLA recruit list, these same players are "soft verbals." Often times, they're just going to visit for the benefits of visiting even though they are 100% committed to their school. Yes, it's more than normal but this class is also bigger than normal, we had more early verbals than normal AND the coaching change gave an easy option to go visit other schools. Kids do take trips this late. I'm not too concerned with losing more than 2-3 more in the end (unless academics becomes an issue).
Decommits? UCLA has had 2...Bateman and Kaveinga. Plus RN has UCLA in the mix for other guys like S Herman Davidson and OL Zebrie Sanders and Dean back in the running.
There are reasons to be critical of DeWayne Walker but I don't think recruiting is one...at least not yet.
Decommits
by SuperBruinMan on Jan 17, 2008 5:39 PM PST up reply actions
Relax
If Dohn is accurate, we'll lose some of our recruits. However, CRN will add other names to the list (ie Julio Jones).
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
