In Reply to: This Has Gotta Be At Least A Dozen Of The Same Threads You Have posted by NYBruin on October 20, 2024 at 14:42:13
If you object to me making posts on this topic, I suggest you just don't respond to them. And you exaggerate. Since the season started two months ago, I've only started seven threads on this subject.
I've already explained this multiple times but you keep ignoring these facts. That's why I have to repeat them. I wouldn't have to if your argument wasn't so flawed and superficial. Simply comparing national rankings proves little and is misleading. They are dependent on many factors including team personnel and the opponents and are totally irrelevant if both teams have mostly new players.
In 2022, after UCLA lost DC Bill McGovern, they went without a DC and gave up an average of 472 yards per game after he stepped aside, vastly inflating their season average and ranking.
Latu was coming off two medical redshirt seasons, Muasau and the twins had just transferred from less competitive conferences and were still adjusting. Yet they were already accomplished players when Lynn inherited them, all having been named to the Pro Football Focus All-Conference team. They would naturally step up their level of play with that year under their belts. He also added Ramsey who was still in high school.
USC's defense actually improved in the games after Grinch got fired during 2023 before Lynn was hired.
You can't compare the rankings from last year to this year because UCLA's Strength of Schedule is so much greater than last season.
You also can't compare the rankings this season because the strength of schedules between the schools aren't comparable. USC faced several teams with backup QB's while UCLA faced two of the best offenses in the nation. Of course UCLA dropped their ranking because they lost all those players to the NFL (and one to USC) and USC got better, in part because they got new players. USC's defense still isn't very good and getting worse. When you compare results of common opponents UCLA has done much better.
But you seem to be missing my main point. I'm not denying Lynn did a good job for us and that he is certainly an upgrade for USC (which isn't a very high bar to clear), but he's not a miracle worker. On the other hand, we aren't missing him much at all. He's easily replaceable. In Malloe's six years at Washington, he also had top-10 defenses several times, not just one good year like Lynn. Both can only do so much with the hand they are dealt.
It is highly unlikely that Lynn ever gets the USC defense to be nearly as good as what he did last year . . . that is, unless the school spends a humongous amount of money buying him players.
It is also highly unlikely that Malloe ever gets the UCLA defense to be nearly as good as it was last year . . . that is, unless the school spends a humongous amount of money buying him players.
That is the state of college football. Buy players, not coaches.