Stallion wrote:Tulsa reportedly just lost their ace recruiter Van Malone formerly at A&M. He is going to Vandy. About 12 commitments in 2 years. He's the type we should be looking for.
Looks like SMU will be waiting until after signing day to make their move.
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
I think the story that nobody is talking about is that so far, Klemm is getting his a** kicked in the Pac-12. When he first got to UCLA, I dont think he had any intention of offering kids like Palacio and Hulick. To be perfectly honest, these are not the type of prospects that are going to help UCLA get to the top of the Pac-12. Granted it is early and he should be judged when he has a full year or two before he can be totally judged, but right now he is going up against guys like Ogereon at USC and Tosh Lupo at Cal.....little different that Conf USA.
Stallion wrote:Tulsa reportedly just lost their ace recruiter Van Malone formerly at A&M. He is going to Vandy. About 12 commitments in 2 years. He's the type we should be looking for.
Looks like SMU will be waiting until after signing day to make their move.
But remember when word got out that Pooh Williamson was coming to the basketball staff it took several more week for an announcement to even be released and hoopmanx was saying that Pooh was kind of recruiting for us even though whole process took so long.
I wonder if something similar is going on here. Again, maybe the hire is done or close to being done but we have to go through whatever channels.
I know it makes our stomach turn because Klemm to UCLA went so fast but his timeline to get on campus may not have been what it appeared either. Back door talks and so forth.
I've already just said screw it to the 2012 class.
While we have lost the high-profile Cali kids, we have some very good commits coming in for 2012. While this may not be a "knock it out of the park" class like we had hoped, it still has some very good players.
Dwan wrote:I think the story that nobody is talking about is that so far, Klemm is getting his a** kicked in the Pac-12. When he first got to UCLA, I dont think he had any intention of offering kids like Palacio and Hulick. To be perfectly honest, these are not the type of prospects that are going to help UCLA get to the top of the Pac-12. Granted it is early and he should be judged when he has a full year or two before he can be totally judged, but right now he is going up against guys like Ogereon at USC and Tosh Lupo at Cal.....little different that Conf USA.
Klemm, Broussard, and Mazzone have only been there for about 2 weeks. Broussard is actually the head guy and recruiting coordinator. Broussard is considered a the best recruiter on staff but give them a year for all 3 of those guys to get rolling and they should be fine.
Here is what one poster on Rivals said:
"UCLA has risen about 8 spots in the recruiting standings since Klemm got there. There seems to be a need for some bitter SMU fans to claim that Klemm is failing at UCLA which is laughable. 5 Commits, 2 Four Stars, 1 US Army Defensive Player of the Game, at least 57 Total offers for commitments-that's pretty good for a few weeks around Dead Periods"
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
Dwan wrote:I think the story that nobody is talking about is that so far, Klemm is getting his a** kicked in the Pac-12. When he first got to UCLA, I dont think he had any intention of offering kids like Palacio and Hulick. To be perfectly honest, these are not the type of prospects that are going to help UCLA get to the top of the Pac-12. Granted it is early and he should be judged when he has a full year or two before he can be totally judged, but right now he is going up against guys like Ogereon at USC and Tosh Lupo at Cal.....little different that Conf USA.
Klemm, Broussard, and Mazzone have only been there for about 2 weeks. Broussard is actually the head guy and recruiting coordinator. Broussard is considered a the best recruiter on staff but give them a year for all 3 of those guys to get rolling and they should be fine.
Here is what one poster on Rivals said:
"UCLA has risen about 8 spots in the recruiting standings since Klemm got there. There seems to be a need for some bitter SMU fans to claim that Klemm is failing at UCLA which is laughable. 5 Commits, 2 Four Stars, 1 US Army Defensive Player of the Game, at least 57 Total offers for commitments-that's pretty good for a few weeks around Dead Periods"
This thread makes me sad. Recruiting is a nebulous thing, 18 year olds change their minds all the time. Who's to say we can't steal equivalent kids from elsewhere? Guys like Marks are big losses, and hopefully we get them in the future, but it's really not the end of the world. We also need to realize that good athletes exist outside of Texas...
whitwiki wrote:This thread makes me sad. Recruiting is a nebulous thing, 18 year olds change their minds all the time. Who's to say we can't steal equivalent kids from elsewhere? Guys like Marks are big losses, and hopefully we get them in the future, but it's really not the end of the world. We also need to realize that good athletes exist outside of Texas...
Agreed.
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
Hey 86, I think you need to consider your source. A UCLA poster on Rivals is not the most objective source
Here is what one poster on Rivals said:
"UCLA has risen about 8 spots in the recruiting standings since Klemm got there. There seems to be a need for some bitter SMU fans to claim that Klemm is failing at UCLA which is laughable. 5 Commits, 2 Four Stars, 1 US Army Defensive Player of the Game, at least 57 Total offers for commitments-that's pretty good for a few weeks around Dead Periods"
This is false. And to attribute UCLA rising in these rankings because of Klemm is false as well. Two four stars have committed to UCLA since Klemm arrived, Rios and Adams. Rios had his offered pulled from Boise State when he visited UCLA. He was considered a UCLA lean for months. Also, Klemm was not recruiting him. Adams is a 4star commit and Klemm was recruiting him with Martin who was at Washington. Klemm offered him at SMU but he at no interest. Martin offered him at Washington and he was considering Washington so he had a much closer relationship with Martin. Adams was also considered a UCLA lean prior to all of this. The only commits who have been 100% Klemm guys are Orjoke, the LB from Georgia and Karl Hulick. Orjoke would have committed to UCLA if Phil Bennet were the coach as it was his dream offer but again, I will give Klemm credit. And Klemm lost Hulick's number when he went to UCLA. He will probably sigh the LB from Serra Pachio as well....but again, he and Hulcik are fringe/last minute offers and not the kind of guys UCLA would normally offer. UCLA does not usually offer guys from So Cal who have offers from Army, Nevada, and SMU or SMU and Washington State.
Dont get me wrong. Klemm is a stud recruiter who I have no doubt will do very well at UCLA and he was a major loss. But his first month on the job has been a major bummer for him and UCLA.
Klemm has even been there a month, Even if he has that is to short a time to say judge. Actually Steve Broussard is considered the best recruited followed by Mazzone. So Klemm is like the 3rd best recruiter on the squad. What did you expect Ed O.? I don't like losing recruits but I don't take joy in bashing AK. If anyone is getting beat it is Broussard not Klemm since Broussard is the recruiting coordinator. But I would not even count his year for UCLA really. They will be fine.
Last edited by SMU 86 on Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
