Are we WRONG About Recruiting vs USC?

[Charles Fischer]

Follow me through on this my friends, and I'd love your thoughts on this.  The impact of Riley might be felt much more by OTHER conference members than Oregon?

 

In business...the big companies that ceaselessly market (that would be like Mario relentlessly recruiting) will always get their larger share of the pie.  The majority of top recruits on the West Coast go to USC and Oregon anyway, and the addition of Riley means Oregon will lose some more head-to-head recruiting competitions, but overall...won't Mario "get his market share" anyway?

 

It seems to me that USC will get more initially with the "Riley-Buzz" but with Oregon's success--we will get our Top-10 class anyway?  It might mean fewer SoCal players and more nationally?

 

Wouldn't this mean that with USC getting more than before--that they will take from the other conference members such as Arizona State, UCLA, etc.?

 

It has been a long time since my business marketing and management classes at Oregon; perhaps those who are more versed in this kind of business strategy can chime in?  (Or anyone's opinion is welcome for that matter!)

 

I love to ponder this stuff!

 

[30Duck]

I think you're right, for 9 of the other Pac-12 schools, how USC recruits doesn't affect them. Oregon will be the one directly affected, but not to a damaging degree.

[Charles Fischer]

On 12/2/2021 at 12:57 PM, 30Duck said:

I think you're right, for 9 of the other Pac-12 schools, how USC recruits doesn't affect them. Oregon will be the one directly affected, but not to a damaging degree.

 

Actually...I am wondering the opposite.  Oregon still "gets-theirs," but the other conference members suffer more from Riley's arrival?

[30Duck]

On 12/2/2021 at 1:03 PM, Charles Fischer said:

other conference members suffer more from Riley's arrival?

 

 They would suffer in USC getting better by getting better players. But in recruiting itself, those 9 other teams and USC aren't going after the same players.

[Steven A]

What we do know, is that there will be an impact.

 

Will we lose some recruits that would have chosen us over a Helton U$C? Yes.

 

Might more kids stay on the coast to compete against a deeper Pac 12, with a guaranteed playoff spot?  Maybe, and if so, right now we would be that #2 spot, if not #1 depending upon the position.

 

Do we have a roster advantage right now?  Yes, so if it takes a bit for them to catch up, then some of the Riley/second coming luster may have fallen off.

 

There is still an 85 scholarship limit, so there will not be any U$C monopoly on Pac 12 recruiting. 

[1Ducker1]

Lets not forget that MC has had success in SEC land

[Steven A]

On 12/2/2021 at 1:03 PM, Charles Fischer said:

 

Actually...I am wondering the opposite.  Oregon still "gets-theirs," but the other conference members suffer more from Riley's arrival?

AGREED:

 

uw did not take a step forward in recruiting chops with their hire.  So who in the North is a threat to cut into our recruiting?

 

Whittingham at 62, might only have a couple of years left if rumors are true.  I don't see Utah as a big time destination.

 

ASU, how much longer is Herm going to be there?

 

UCLA, Chip seat is like Helton has been for the last few years.

 

AZ and Colorado are light years off.

 

Stanford seems to have peaked and Cal is a dumpster fire.

[30Duck]

On 12/2/2021 at 1:09 PM, Steven A said:

There is still an 85 scholarship limit

 

 Best thing the NCAA ever did.

[deschutesduck]

I think we'll lose some California recruits to USC now that Riley is there but he also makes the Pac-12 more relevant nationally which could make it easier to recruit players outside of the Pac-12 region.  He'll also land recruits that would have gone east but instead choose to stay closer to home.  Overall probably a wash for us.

 

If the playoff ever gets expanded and a better media deal comes through so we're not starting games at 10:30 PM eastern time the Pac-12 will see a further increase in recruiting.

[Jon Joseph]

On 12/2/2021 at 4:09 PM, Steven A said:

What we do know, is that there will be an impact.

 

Will we lose some recruits that would have chosen us over a Helton U$C? Yes.

 

Might more kids stay on the coast to compete against a deeper Pac 12, with a guaranteed playoff spot?  Maybe, and if so, right now we would be that #2 spot, if not #1 depending upon the position.

 

Do we have a roster advantage right now?  Yes, so if it takes a bit for them to catch up, then some of the Riley/second coming luster may have fallen off.

 

There is still an 85 scholarship limit, so there will not be any U$C monopoly on Pac 12 recruiting. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In 2022 you can go 7 players over the 85 limit. USC just opened the wallet the way a blue blood should. My guess is that there will be many NIL opportunities for SC recruits? It's the SC boosters who made this hire possible.  As to recruiting in general, as Bama has shown in the SEC, a rising Tide lifts all boats. To be relevant nationally the conference needs a competitive SC. A competitive SC is also important for media money. Oregon is not simply competing in the Pac-12 it is also competing against the B1G and the SEC.

 

The conference simply has to draw better players. It has to win far more of the OOC games. And it certainly has to produce more than 6 bowl eligible schools. 1 team bowl eligible from CA is a terrible look. The conference will not fill all of its bowl agreements this season.

[C J]

To be honest I have lost some faith that simply recruiting the highest starred players results in direct outcomes on the field. I still think it matters, as obviously many of the best recruiting teams are dominating the playoff landscape.

 

But I don't see our team or USC really benefitting that much more than other teams like Utah, Oregon State, Washington State etc. Now Lincoln Riley might change this, but generally speaking there is decent parity in the Pac 12 even with Oregon and USC out-recruiting everyone else by a long shot.

Edited December 2, 2021 by C J

[Jon Joseph]

On 12/2/2021 at 1:21 PM, C J said:

To be honest I have lost some faith that simply recruiting the highest starred players results in direct outcomes on the field. I still think it matters, as obviously many of the best recruiting teams are dominating the playoff landscape.

 

But I don't see our team or USC really benefitting that much more than other teams like Utah, Oregon State, Washington State etc. Now Lincoln Riley might change this, but generally speaking there is decent parity in the Pac 12 even with Oregon and USC out-recruiting everyone else by a long shot.

 

Great take. But is it parity or parody? 6 bowl eligible teams argues for the latter.

[Haywarduck]

If To'oto'o wanted to come to Oregon, or USC, but there wasn't enough competition the problem would have been help had Lincoln been here. Having DJ at sc instead of Clemson would have helped the league. The problem was the exodus of elite talent because there wasn't enough competition, not because there is too much. 

 

We need to make our overall product more attractive and even Mario's job become easier. He can do just about anything, including playing tosu at the shoe, or Georgia in Atlanta. What he can't do is say players are going to get exposure like the SEC. He can't say the amount of scouts will be at games like the truly competitive teams. 

 

Competition for recruits is a competition, and talent goes to where the talent is, competition is. Never be afraid, just be aware of your weaknesses. Our league and having a weak sc hurts us, and really everyone in the Pac-12. Those who are afraid of Riley should just join the mountain west, actually they would get killed in that league too, right?

 

[Mike West]

Right now, the key to maintaining excellent recruiting is to win the next two games.

 

Two score wins solidify it all the more.

 

I'd do everything in my power to spank Utah.  And I mean Tick them off if necessary( humiliate them like we did two years ago).

 

Follow that with a win versus a likely rematch with Ohio State ( again two score victory) and all this booster about the blue bloods will include the Ducks.

 

Win big.  Now 

 

If there ever was a time MC could alter the discussion about college football, the next two games are the perfect opportunity. 

 

Don't know if MC is ruthless enough. But with all the uncertainty around this changing  landscape ( in college football), impressive wins will raise some eyebrows ( everybody expects Utah to easily win this game, and nobody expects the Ducks to beat anyone in the top ten).  

[Charles Fischer]

On 12/2/2021 at 2:50 PM, Mike West said:

If there ever was a time MC could alter the discussion about college football, the next two games are the perfect opportunity.

 

So very true; could alter the discussion of Oregon AND the conference!

[jrw]

Dilbert used to bang the heads of new employees on his desk; if they gave off a hollow sound, he put them in Marketing.

 

But, marketing a small business was all I did in my so-called career, so if you hear something, it's the echo from my head.

 

What recruiting is, is selling a brand. A college football brand has to be sold to two targets: the recruit and their family, and parts of the public at large.

 

So, you need to know the markets you're going after and what are the needs and wants of your markets. I'd say Oregon is pretty - like really - good at selling the school's brand and assets to recruits and families - winning, facilities, uniforms, academic and personal support, getting to the league - and pretty darn good at marketing to sectors of the public.

 

As long as Oregon can maintain the Nike connection, the Ducks will have access to the design, advertising, marketing, and NIC talent of one of the best companies in world at selling their brand, like Nike or not.

 

So, if the status quo endures, I'm not worried about recruiting to Eugene. Sorry, Scott.

Edited December 3, 2021 by jrw

[Jon Joseph]

On 12/2/2021 at 5:50 PM, Mike West said:

Right now, the key to maintaining excellent recruiting is to win the next two games.

 

Two score wins solidify it all the more.

 

I'd do everything in my power to spank Utah.  And I mean Tick them off if necessary( humiliate them like we did two years ago).

 

Follow that with a win versus a likely rematch with Ohio State ( again two score victory) and all this booster about the blue bloods will include the Ducks.

 

Win big.  Now 

 

If there ever was a time MC could alter the discussion about college football, the next two games are the perfect opportunity. 

 

Don't know if MC is ruthless enough. But with all the uncertainty around this changing  landscape ( in college football), impressive wins will raise some eyebrows ( everybody expects Utah to easily win this game, and nobody expects the Ducks to beat anyone in the top ten).  

 

Could not agree more my friend. But will it happen? Never know which Oregon team will step on the field? The Ohio State Ducks team or the team that was blown out in SLC?

[Duck 1972]

It definitely won't be the team from tOSU. 8 starters who played in that game are out

[30Duck]

On 12/2/2021 at 1:09 PM, Steven A said:

UCLA, Chip seat is like Helton has been for the last few years.

 

 It's sad that UCLA doesn't care enough about football for Chip's seat to ever get warm. UCLA Football is C List in LA. 

[Dr Hilarius]

imho licoln riley is a big name w not a lot of results or grit (see the pout-fest at the end of the baylor game). yes, OK has been to the cfp recently, but it has gotten spanked. 

 

i think he is PERFECT for usc, where he will attract similar players—big names, no results. so yes, usc’s recruiting rankings will 100% go up, which will be great for the pac. but it will all be cosmetic.

 

mc prob wouldn’t have landed pittman against riley. is that such a bad thing?

[Washington Waddler]

On 12/2/2021 at 12:50 PM, Charles Fischer said:

In business...the big companies that ceaselessly market (that would be like Mario relentlessly recruiting) will always get their larger share of the pie

 

     It is also a business adage (at least in retail) that competition is good for business, which is why you often see similar businesses grouped within blocks of each other, or in malls. The reason is it brings in more shoppers than any stand alone could possibly attract. 

 

     The same wisdom applies to recruits and the health of conferences.  Recruits are not only attracted by specific programs, but by the competitiveness within the conference that can promote and display them. Without that competition, there is no stage, and without that stage a conference slips into mediocrity.

 

     As good as Oregon can potentially be, it can’t make it as a stand alone. It needs the USC’s. Where do you think Alabama would be without the SEC? Competition is good for business.

 

     So, enough knashing of teeth and pulling of hair over Riley’s recruiting threat. It helps us. Anyway, we’re Ducks — we’ve been here before, and we know how to weather storms.

 

[1Ducker1]

I remember when Pete Carol took a #2 USC to Resser"s and Lost to an unranked Beavis team--Lincoln Riley will feel the same pain sooner than later.

[Duck 1972]

The leveler of talent is experience. The more experience you have the easier it is to win on the road, deal with adversity and deal with the unbelievable pressure. Remember these are still kids not men.

 

Experience and talent is when you get dominance. How many teams are undefeated this year? 2 out of what, 128 teams across the country. That's about what it is every year. 

 

CK was winning, in fact he had the best run in history since start of the BCS system and still struggled to recruit top talent to Eugene. Without USC having a good coach. The top recruits still went there.

 

I believe it's a mistake to believe we are going to be able to stay at the level we have had and will slide back to the Belotti times of only having a good club when we were experienced.

[Jon Joseph]

On 12/3/2021 at 12:35 AM, 1Ducker1 said:

I remember when Pete Carol took a #2 USC to Resser"s and Lost to an unranked Beavis team--Lincoln Riley will feel the same pain sooner than later.

 

I was at that game. USC's 1L of the season on the road to a Beavs team that defeated Pitt in its bowl game and finished in the top 25. Meanwhile 1L OK lost to TX at a neutral site and Timmy's Florida team lost at home to Ole Miss. Guess which of the 3 was left out of the BCS champ game? Like the Ducks was hosed over when Nebraska played Miami in the Rose Bowl. The BCS and the BCS x 2 have been a boon for the SEC and a cancer for the Pac-12.

 

 

[Washington Waddler]

On 12/3/2021 at 8:11 AM, Duck 1972 said:

CK was winning, in fact he had the best run in history since start of the BCS system and still struggled to recruit top talent to Eugene. Without USC having a good coach. The top recruits still went there.

 

     I’d agree that it’s hard to stay elite, but Chip was his own worst enemy when it came to recruiting.  Not only did he have an aversion for it, but his original offensive approach played right into the hands of opposing recruiters who’d say it won’t prepare you for the NFL, and his tempo will breakdown bodies rather than build them.

[Duck 1972]

I just heard a podcast from andrewnemic.com I believe that's the link but this phone is so difficult to manage.

 

Anyway he's the top recruiting anylist for 247sports in our region and he has a take on Riley. Also thoughts on the 22 class of recruits

[fred flintstone]

Once the country sees the poor defense Riley puts on, Oregon will continue to do well. 

[Charles Fischer]

Fred....good to see you for the first time since March.  You are a USC fan, thus so we all know--I changed your avatar to reflect that.

  

You have one of the best DCs in the country in Alex Grinch; he beat us with Washington State talent for a number of years, and with Trojan recruiting--what he can do now?  Whew!

[Jon Sousa]

On 12/2/2021 at 2:50 PM, Mike West said:

I'd do everything in my power to spank Utah.  And I mean Tick them off if necessary( humiliate them like we did two years ago).

...or like they did two weeks ago.)