USC RB Emmanuel Moody to transfer

Post #1 » by **PhilipNelsonFan** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 7:56 am

The depth chart suddenly thins.

Christ, if you're a prep running back, you'd have to be out of your damn mind to want to go to USC. The depth chart is nine players deep--nine!--and their defensive skilled positions are better than you would be.

Any news on where he's going?

Monkeyfeng06 · Post #2 » by **Monkeyfeng06** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:25 am

why is he tranfering? doesn't he want a chance to play in the rose bowl or championship game? huh?

Post #3 » by **GYBE** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:01 pm

Because as PNF said, the depth chart is insane. 9-deep, all 5-star recruits.

I never know how they get so many elite kids at the same position. Can't they look at it logically and realize their chances of playing time are slim? I guess the best athletes just think they can beat out anyone.

treyZz · Post #4 » by **treyZz** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 5:43 pm

I think it's the USC women.

Post #5 » by **FNQ** » Sat Aug 18, 2007 12:27 am

I think its a way to cripple his draft stock.

Personally, as someone who just loves the bottom line, here's mine on Moody: Afraid of a challenge.

Yes, there's a good chance he wasnt going to be the starting tailback. So he transfers? Unless Carroll walked right up to him and said "Look, you aren't going to start this year, let me help you go somewhere else", I'd cross his name off the list right here and now. I can't stand that type of mentality.

SwiLL2432 · Post #6 » by **SwiLL2432** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:58 pm

This is really going to put a hurtin to USC's running game.....NOT! This means nothing to them. They have Chauncey Washington and they signed the number 1 back in the last this year.

I hope Moody goes FCS so he doesnt have to sit out.

Monkeyfeng06 · Post #7 » by **Monkeyfeng06** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 1:42 am

^ i thought washington sucks?

Post #8 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:04 am

I'm glad, because I want to see Joe McKnight play(even if he is a traitor to the state!!)

Monkeyfeng06 · Post #9 » by **Monkeyfeng06** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:22 am

NO-KG-AI wrote:I'm glad, because I want to see Joe McKnight play(even if he is a traitor to the state!!)

yes! hate reggie bush for that!!

Post #10 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:48 am

Monkeyfeng06 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

yes! hate reggie bush for that!!

I dunno how a kid can grow up in southern Louisiana and choose USC over LSU.

Still, he's an unreal talent, and I just want to watch him play, even if it is for a team I hate.

Post #11 » by **PhilipNelsonFan** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:40 am

510Reggae wrote:I think its a way to cripple his draft stock.

Personally, as someone who just loves the bottom line, here's mine on Moody: Afraid of a challenge.

Yes, there's a good chance he wasnt going to be the starting tailback. So he transfers? Unless Carroll walked right up to him and said "Look, you aren't going to start this year, let me help you go somewhere else", I'd cross his name off the list right here and now. I can't stand that type of mentality.

To an extent I disagree.

In college football, it's not just a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately environment, but it's a name-recognition environment as well. Emmanuel Moody had put up some OK numbers as a USC back, but then they went out and got Marc Tyler...at the time, a HUGE coup for the program. Then, they went out and got Joe McKnight, who was an even bigger coup.

If you went out to every USC fan and asked who they'd rather have between Moody and McKnight or Moody and Tyler, you'd get the bigger name every time. And for all we know Moody is still a very good RB, but in that environment he'd have to be the best collegiate back of all time, else it would be stiflingly competitive.

Monkeyfeng06 · Post #12 » by **Monkeyfeng06** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:13 am

so where is he going?

(11 posts and no one knows?)

IT'S A BLUFF!!

SheedsWeed · Post #13 » by **SheedsWeed** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:48 pm

PhilipNelsonFan wrote:The depth chart suddenly thins.

Christ, if you're a prep running back, you'd have to be out of your damn mind to want to go to USC. The depth chart is nine players deep--nine!--and their defensive skilled positions are better than you would be.

Any news on where he's going?

Not surprised. USC has so many good running backs, it doesn't matter who they put on the field...crazy.

Post #14 » by **PhilipNelsonFan** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:25 pm

Oklahoma State was listed as a possibility. Moody has a list of schools, he just hasn't acted upon it.

Post #15 » by **GSWbandwagon** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 3:37 am

they're also losing a wr (jamere holland?)

Post #16 » by **PhilipNelsonFan** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:01 pm

GSWbandwagon wrote:they're also losing a wr (jamere holland?)

It is Jamere Holland, and he supposedly will transfer to Oregon. :party:

Nemesis21 · Post #17 » by **Nemesis21** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:01 pm

he's narrowed his list to two schools, UF and UNC

High 5 · Post #18 » by **High 5** » Sun Aug 26, 2007 2:00 am

UF or UNC? :rofl:

No middle ground there.

Anyways, I'm sure USC is heartbroken. Now they only have 12 amazing running backs to choose from.

Post #19 » by **GYBE** » Sun Aug 26, 2007 6:21 am

UNC is actually doing really well in recruiting under Butch Davis. I know they've nabbed a couple prospects Notre Dame was going after.

Post #20 » by **Icness** » Sun Aug 26, 2007 11:50 pm

GYBE wrote:UNC is actually doing really well in recruiting under Butch Davis. I know they've nabbed a couple prospects Notre Dame was going after.

Butch Davis is indeed hitting it hard. The kid who in all likelihood will wind up being Virginia's Mr. Football recently committed to UNC. Another mobile QB with a rifle arm from the Hampton Roads area, can't think of his name off the top of my sunburned head.

I've always maintained Butch Davis is an outstanding college football coach and recruiter. He was simply out of his element in the NFL, though he did get the Browns to the playoffs and a near-win over a very good Steelers team. UNC will be challenging VA Tech and FSU for ACC supremacy sooner than later.