re: The Insecurities of the Alabama Fanbase are an Embarrassment to the SEC

So after losing the SEC Championship and getting taken down by Utah and then their emergence in 2009, there's no doubt scholarship reductions and bowl bans gave Alabama an edge moving forward. A lot of recruits want to play for NCs.

"It was also banned from bowl games in both 2010 and 2011 and was docked 30 scholarships over three years."

So you are telling me the bowl bans and 30 scholarship reductions over 3 years had no impact on USC's stability / allowing for a program like Alabama to have a major advantage in recruiting? Okay then! I'm not saying Alabama's 2009 season didn't play a hand, but there's no doubt the punishments handed down to USC put them at a major disadvantage compared to other elite programs around the country.

quote:

---

So you are telling me the bowl bans and 30 scholarship reductions over 3 years had no impact on USC's stability / allowing for a program like Alabama to have a major advantage in recruiting? Okay then! I'm not saying Alabama's 2009 season didn't play a hand, but there's no doubt the punishments handed down to USC put them at a major disadvantage compared to other elite programs around the country.

---

Sound to me like West coast schools squandered a good opportunity. Ucla or Oregon should've stepped up. We were getting our kids from the South and East coast. At must, you could say we had one less obstacle for dominance.

quote:

---

So you are telling me the bowl bans and 30 scholarship reductions over 3 years had no impact on USC's stability / allowing for a program like Alabama to have a major advantage in recruiting?

---

Alabama and Southern Cal would rarely be competing for the same kids. Alabama's roster is made up of kids that are almost 95% from the South, Texas and the East Coast. We sign a few highly regarded California kids (Blake Barnett, Jonah Williams, a few jucos) but for the most part we don't compete on the West Coast (California, Nevada, Washington).

So no, I doubt it would have had much effect on us. Oregon, UCLA, Washington, Stanford? Yes.

Besides, it isn't like USC's issues since 2008 have been recruiting. Sure they lost scholarships, but what that effected was their depth. Their top level talent NEVER subsided.

2010 - #3 (4 5-stars, 12 4-stars)
2011 - #3 (1 5-star, 14 4-stars)
2012 - #9 (1 5-star, 10 4-stars)
2013 - #13 (4 5-stars, 8 4-stars)
2014 - #10 (2 5-stars, 8 4-stars)
2015 - #2 (3 5-stars, 15 4-stars)
2016 - #10 (2 5-stars, 12 4-stars)

And on top of all that, Pete Carroll left for the Seahawks before the NCAA dropped any penalties. So even if the NCAA had decided to not drop the hammer, Lane Kiffin is the coach and Pete is gone.

quote:

---

Can't wait to see how texag7

---

quote:

---

LelandSU

---

Seems like your typical Aggie to me

quote:

---

Does Alabama recruit out of Florida? Let me know on that one. USC is known for grabbing out-of-state kids. Thanks for providing those numbers by the way. I checked them myself and it's amazing they were able to remain competitive in both recruiting and wins. I wonder how much better it would have been less 2 bowl bans and 30 scholarship reductions.

---

Again, we'd probably seriously compete (like be in the last 2-3) for a couple of kids each cycle. Southern Cal might have ended up being an obstacle to beat in a championship game, but other than that our programs really don't butt heads too often. We can both be really really good at the same time pretty easily.

Southern Cal losing scholarships opened the door for UCLA to start snagging more kids, specifically.

Also, like I said above, Pete was already gone. He was gone even if the sanctions never showed up.

I have a gift for you

I'm sorry for degrading the aTm fanbase with my trolling. They don't deserve what I do.

How long does it generally take to get banned around here? I wouldn't know since I'm not an alter.