Mallett Officially Transferring

by Raisin on Jan 9, 2008 11:02 AM PST Comment 58 comments

His dad says it's official. Mallett hasn't picked a new school yet.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080109/SPORTS06/80109055/1054

Ryan's dad said he's going to visit 3-5 schools and decide from there. Jim Mallett specifically mentioned that his son is considering Texas A&M, Arkansas and UCLA. He also mentioned Tennessee since they are trying to get former Michigan OC Mike DeBord and the QB coach UCLA is also interested in, Scot Loeffler.

EDIT: Brian Dohn says Neuheisel interviewed Scott Loeffler.

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.

0 recs | Comment 58 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Mallett?

Why is everyone so excited for this kid? Is he that good? Just curious. I don't really follow the Lil 10 that closely.

by bruinelder on Jan 9, 2008 11:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

The kid is damn good

He played this season as a true freshman due to injuries suffered by Chad Henne and looked like a freshman. A few great plays followed by a mental error. That said, he has a great future. He's 6'7'' and has an NFL arm already that can make all the throws. While not a burner, he has quick feet and can buy time for himself, even running for a first down if the opportunity presents itself. By all accounts, Mallet is a very bright kid and one NFL scout said "he has the instincts and football savvy of an NFL veteran." Mallett's going to be a hell of a player and getting him would be a great pickup for the Bruins.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 11:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Sounds a bit like Benny O?!?!

by charnaw on Jan 9, 2008 11:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly what I was thinking

I think we owe it to BO to focus our resources on helping him achieve his full potential.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Jan 9, 2008 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

By "helping him achieve his full . . .

potential" do you mean buying him a First Class ticket back to Canada where he did his mission? :) All I can say, after watching us play BYU twice this year and many times prior, it seems that their players seem to return from their two-year stints bigger, stronger and better. BO has a glass body and a whole lotta "potential."

by charnaw on Jan 9, 2008 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Behind that offensive line

even Brett Favre would have a "glass body". Friggin' turnstiles! Not to mention receivers who can't run routes. Still, I have only seen two good games from Olson...against Utah in 2006...Stanford in 2007...that's pretty much it. He may not live up to his hype, but I don't blame the injuries on him.

by tasser10 on Jan 9, 2008 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Both are feasible..

To be honest I don't see why its mutually exclusive. Mallet would sit out next year so it doesn't affect BO at all since hes a senior next year.

Having Mallet come in is no different than bringing a QB in this year and having him redshirt. Its more unfair to Forcier/Crissman.

by kidro2001 on Jan 9, 2008 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

But Mallett

didn't take 2 years off. I think sometimes we forget that Olson went 2 years without playing football and that could kill a career. Norm Chow, who could certainly be considered an expert on this subject after all his time at BYU, said that it's tough for any player to go on a mission and return, but it's even tougher for a quarterback. He said after a mission it's a 50/50 shot that a QB is able to put it all together again.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Somehow BYU Beat Us

and they had a substantial number of players who went on and then returned from missions.

I'll wait to decide how good Ben Olson is until after he's been coached by a real coach and protected by a real line, and asked to execute a real offense.

He may be he biggest victim of the old regime and to take any position on his value or worth, without giving him a real chance, is wrong.

Don't forget, there were many here calling him SPJ. He didn't turn into the devil on his own.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Jan 9, 2008 2:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Mormon missions

We all need to keep our heads straight here. BYU has been sending players on missions for decades and have the system down to a science. I am sure they know which positions make sense to consider returning players for, and which don't make sense. UCLA, on the other hand, has done it once that I know of, in the case of BO. This guy, when signed up by UCLA, was to be the savior of KD. He has, so far, been a bust, and look what happened to KD... out the door. I am sure RN will use him next year if possible, but if I were RN, I would not put all my eggs in his basket as KD did.
Bill

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Jan 9, 2008 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

He's good

He was ranked the #4 overall recruit in 2007 by Rivals.com.

by wizardofoc on Jan 9, 2008 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

6 foot 7?

Thats all I need to hear! A qb that can see over the line and fire the ball down field is fine by me. I only watched the Michigan vs. Ohio State game this year and he didn't fair well. I had no idea he was a true freshman. Would be a great fit for UCLA and it puts pressure on the other qb's to step up their game knowing Mallett will be here the following year.

by bruinelder on Jan 9, 2008 12:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Recruiting Rankings

Mallett was rated the 2nd best QB behind Jimmy Clausen nationwide last season and amongst the top 20 recruits nationwide. He's a really good prospect and I think the year of reps while he's not eligible after transferring will be really beneficial for grasping Neuheisel's offense, etc.

by Raisin on Jan 9, 2008 12:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

If he's that good, it means

he's a one-and-done guy, actually a disruptive situations more than a positive one.

by bluegold on Jan 9, 2008 1:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

uh

What? This ain't exactly basketball..

by blinkshot on Jan 9, 2008 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually Correct

I believe the NFL rule is 3 years after your high school class graduates, NOT 3 years in college. Therefore,

This Season '07 = 1st year
Sitting out '08 = 2nd year
Starting QB '09 = 3rd year

And then he will be eligible for the draft.

But 1 and done isn't a bad thing because that will mean he would have been sucessful and we will have Forcier/Crissman behind him getting ready to compete for the '10 season.

by kidro2001 on Jan 9, 2008 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Mallett

I doubt if Neuheisel is going to put much effort into inducing Mallett to come to UCLA. Mallett is a big, immobile guy who is best suited to a pro-style offense. As such, he limits the offense's options. Yes, he has a big arm and will probably eventually be an NFL QB. However, in the college game, QB's that can break contain and get outside the pocket to look downfield are generally more successful. A big, slow-footed QB, that isn't a run threat, is MUCH easier to defend as they are more vulnerable to pressure from the edge...corner blitzes, linebackers coming in obvious passing situations, etc.
I like the fact Mallett is considering UCLA, but considering Crissman's potential, I think I'd rather see a 5* OL or WR give a solid verbal at this point.

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 1:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

You obviously never saw Mallett play

because he isn't immobile. Being a pro-style or pocket passer doesn't make him immobile. He's not Pat White or Dennis Dixon, but he's more mobile than Matt Stafford or Colt McCoy. If you want to look at past national title winners, he's more mobile than Matt Leinart, Chris Leak or Matt Mauck. Mallett can buy time for himself and will take advantage of an open field enough to move the chains.

Would it be better to have a guy who can throw like Mallett and run like Dixon? Yeah but how many guys like that are out there? Tim Tebow can do it, DIxon did it this year, but even Pat White has issues throwing the ball in their losses. Take a look at the top offenses in the nation and they don't all have dual threat QBs. There's Tulsa, Texas Tech, Hawaii, Houston, Missouri, Louisville, Oklahoma St. Kansas, Nebraska. The most mobile QB's in this group are Chase Daniel and Todd Reesing. They can run, but they're not burners. You can score and win with any kind of QB so long as you fit your system to your talent, something RN will do.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 2:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Rye

Well stated. The most important thing is to make your system fit or adapt to your players so you can get the most out of them.

by Raisin on Jan 9, 2008 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Neuheisel hasn't made

any public decisions on what kind of offense he's going to run; it will depend on the OC he brings in and their collaboration and he said his teams will be pounding the ball; that's the only way to beat SC, in the trenches he said.

"Tough times don't last, tough people do"-Rick Neuheisel, December 31st, 2007

by bruin95 on Jan 9, 2008 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I hope he's headed to UCLA

I really wanted him to stay but he had his mind made up that he wouldn't fit into Rodriguez's offense, although he had run it with pro-style QB's before.

by CaliWolverine on Jan 9, 2008 2:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

As I said

I doubt Neuheisel will put much effort into landing Mallett. Ryebread made my argument.

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 2:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Don't you mean

made your argument obsolete? B

ack to the beach ATP.

by Nars on Jan 9, 2008 2:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Why not stay at Michigan?

I think its obvious Mallett doesn't fit the spread option offense Rodriguez plans on installing at Michigan. No doubt, Rodriguez will use Mallett's departure to try and sell his program to Terelle Pryor. Pryor is on record as saying he is only interested in going to school that will run a "run first" spread.
I believe Mallett will end up at Texas Tech.

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 3:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Mallett

is on record saying he wants to go to a pro-style offense. Texas Tech doesn't fit that mold so I doubt he'll end up there.

Is it possible for you to make a competent argument ATP? You make a ridiculous point based on no fact or even reasonable inference and when proven wrong, ignore it and bring up something completely different.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 3:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Mallett

As I said, I doubt Neuheisel will put much effort into landing Mallett.

And, since Mallett himself has mentioned Texas Tech as a possible transfer spot, I believe I'll take him at his word.

But, hey, it doesn't hurt to make a wish. I understand how the thought of getting Mallett can get you excited. But, don't be too disappointed when he ends up at Tennessee or Texas Tech.

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 3:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Where'd you see Texas Tech?

UCLA, Tennessee, Arkansas and Texas A&M have all been mentioned, but I haven't seen TT named once.

Here'sa quote from Mallett's father:

Mallett said his son also will consider transferring to Texas A&M, Arkansas and UCLA among other schools. After sitting out next season, he will have three years of eligibility.

"Several schools have called and we're still open-minded about any program that runs a pro-style offense," he said. "He's going to enroll this semester, so we've got to get moving."

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 3:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

For the record....

Texas A and M and Texas Tech are in the same state.

by bruinelder on Jan 9, 2008 3:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

How

can you tell?

by Bruinut on Jan 9, 2008 10:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Competent argument?

Ryebread,
Is what you posted earlier supposed to be a competent argument? All you did was post a bunch of obvious facts without making any connection as to how those facts have anything at all to do with Mallett coming to UCLA.

You made my point by saying you can win with any kind of QB. So, why pursue Mallett as if he's the only QB you can win with? A more competent argument would have been to accentuate the need for a solid offensive line and some play making wide receivers.

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 3:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

It was competent

based on your mistaken claim that Mallett was going to Texas Tech. Posting obvious facts helps make arguments valid. Arguing based on your own opinion is talking out of your behind.

by tasser10 on Jan 9, 2008 3:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Let's take a look at your comments

I doubt if Neuheisel is going to put much effort into inducing Mallett to come to UCLA. Mallett is a big, immobile guy who is best suited to a pro-style offense.

Mallett is not immobile, he just wouldn't be considered a dual threat QB. He can buy himself time and pick up a 1st down with his legs if the field opens up. Yes he is best suited to a pro-style offense and coincidentally, that is what RN has run everywhere he's been. I think it's a pretty good fit and RN would in fact put some effort into landing Mallett.

Yes, he has a big arm and will probably eventually be an NFL QB. However, in the college game, QB's that can break contain and get outside the pocket to look downfield are generally more successful. A big, slow-footed QB, that isn't a run threat, is MUCH easier to defend as they are more vulnerable to pressure from the edge.

No doubt a QB who is a dual threat and is both a good passer and good runner is preferable, but how many of them are out there? There's Tim Tebow, Dennis Dixon, Pat White, but there aren't a lot. In fact, if you watched W. Virginia's losses, White did not pass well, however they were able to win in the couple games he did not run well. The point I made was that you can win without a QB who can run so not going hard after Mallett based on his inability to run for 100 yards a game is ridiculous. Georgia won with Matt Stafford, a pocket passer. Texas won with Colt McCoy, a pocker passer. Florida won the title last year with Chris Leak, a pocket passer and SC won a title with Matt Leinart, a pocket passer.

I think that's a pretty competent argument that addresses the points you made and refuted them with facts and historical reference. You try the same now and don't pull stuff our of your ass and call it an argument.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

just a little nit pick...

Colt McCoy is not a pocket passer. Not quite a pat white, but definitely a very mobile quarter back. He actually scrambles quite a bit. Evidenced by his 114 rush attempts and 492 rushing yards. (second leading rusher on the team)

by Bruin Gold on Jan 9, 2008 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I am sorry

Wow, I am very sorry. I guess I am getting old or maybe just tired today. After reading the quote you posted, I remember it was A&M he mentioned and not Texas Tech. I should have gone back and re-read the article I read earlier this morning.

So, I'll tuck my head between my legs and acquiesce to your argument. When someone screws up this badly there is nothing left to do but say I'm sorry and "You're right."

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 3:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

tasser10

I've already heard your ass music regarding Baron Davis. Nuf said.

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 3:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Whats ass music?

Seriously.

by bruinelder on Jan 9, 2008 4:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Congrats

I've never seen someone piss off so many respected members of this community so fast.

You want to make a joke about Fox's mom next?

by uclaw1 on Jan 9, 2008 4:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

me or ATP?

by bruinelder on Jan 9, 2008 4:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ATP

don't worry elder, you're all good.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 4:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

Fox's mom? Should I know her?

by ATP on Jan 9, 2008 4:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Warning

You're getting very close to being banned. If you have something (not obviously incorrect like re Texas Tech) to post, without insulting long time members of this community, fine. If not, you will be gone. Thanks.

by Menelaus on Jan 9, 2008 4:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Beat me to it

by Tydides on Jan 9, 2008 4:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And

if you are indeed here to have a rational discussion rather than the flamebaiting you've been doing thus far, I humbly suggest that you use the "Reply to this" feature as a courtesy to your fellow posters.

by Tydides on Jan 9, 2008 4:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

But..

The article said that his mom, "offered only a few hints, saying he will not be going to UCLA -- which was reported by one newspaper last week".

So UCLA is out?

by dproduct on Jan 9, 2008 4:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Mom and Dad Not on the Same Page

His mom said that but MSN has a quote from his dad which mentions UCLA as an option (rye posted the link a few comments up).

by Raisin on Jan 9, 2008 4:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well then,

let's hope that Dad is right :)

by dproduct on Jan 9, 2008 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought the quote from his mom was...

More along the lines of he hasn't decided if he's transferring yet. So the rumors he had already decided to go to UCLA were wrong.

That was before he had officially decided to leave.

Kyle Bown Class of 2007

by Bruinbown on Jan 9, 2008 5:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

How will he avoid the obvious nickname

"Croquet" Mallet?

by Fox 71 on Jan 9, 2008 6:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

AU leading ASU by a touchdown at the half

28-21

by charnaw on Jan 9, 2008 7:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Forgot it was a Wednesday game

good catch

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 7:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

UA-ASU: Overtime

55-all

by bruinhoo on Jan 9, 2008 8:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If ASU pulls this one out

and the students storm the court, I'm going to crack up. You get the feeling watching the game that they might, but seriously....Arizona's the 5th or 6th best team in the conference.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 8:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Damn

Harden is one hell of a player. I saw him play twice early in the season and his development and maturity from November to now is amazing.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 8:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ASU- 64, UofA- 59 FINAL

That was a hell of a game. A real treat to watch. UofA led 59-58 with about a minute to go, Harden scored and ASU got a stop. Next time down, Harden missed but Pendergraph put the rebound in to give ASU a 62-59 lead. Budinger tried a wild 3 with 2 seconds left and missed. Pendergraph got fouled with a second left and hit 2 free throws to ice it.

Surprise, surprise ASU celebrates beating a mediocre Arizona team by storming the court. Remember when storming the court used to mean something?

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 8:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ok I take back my storming the court comment

yes I think storming the court is getting old because it happens with every mediocre win and yes Arizona is only the 5th or 6th best team in the conference, but this win came after 12 straight losses to their arch rival.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jan 9, 2008 8:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Can't say much re. storming the court

My junior year @ UCLA/Lavin's final season, a large portion of the students stormed the court after beating UW (I think. It was one of the Washington schools) to clinch a berth (#8 seed) in the Pac-10 tournament.

After seeing that, I can no longer criticize any other student body for storming the court, for any reason.

by bruinhoo on Jan 9, 2008 8:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Here's hoping

Warriors game is preempting coverage in NorCal (Like the Sharks have for every UCLA game since I've been back there), so can't see it unfold. The mere thought of an ASU victory is crazy. Especially w/o Bayless, UA is well outside the top tier of the Pac-10 (UCLA, WSU, ..., Stanford).

by bruinhoo on Jan 9, 2008 8:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Arizona crashing

They still have a lot of talent on that team, but that program is in serious danger of sliding into irrelevance. Now that Olson's not there, I don't care as much...I'd almost rather have a competent team that makes the conference competitive and still gets beat by UCLA :)

by tasser10 on Jan 10, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs