USC News and Notes for 7/26
by Paragon SC on Jul 26, 2010 6:00 AM PDT
in Quick Hits
Email
Print
Just some links to start the week.
Some of these are from Friday...
- LenDale weighs in on Reggie's vanishing Heisman. If anyone has an opinion that is worth something on this it is LenDale White, after all he was the other part of the tandem.
- Here is the Daily News and LA Times take on the hiring of Kennedy Pola.
- The LAT's David Wharton offers his take on Pat Haden's hiring as USC's AD.
- Tim Floyd takes 'high road' in reacting to Garrett's ouster.I think it is pretty safe to assume that Floyd just wants to move on and really doesn't want to pile on. The fact that it was never substantiated that Floyd passed Guillory a bag of cash is probably enough for FLoyd to let sleeping dogs lie.
- Here is nice story on Chris Fischer and his dream job as he takes over for the late Rory Markas as the voice of USC basketball.
- Sam Farmer of the LAT wonders if the NFL can do anything about the rogue agent issue that is all of a sudden in the spotlight...does the NFL even care?
- Reign of Troy looks at the Pac-10's conference expansion. The university presidents are meet Friday to try and figure out how to divide the conferences.
- Here is an interesting take from CGB on Pete Carroll's hiring in Seattle. I personally think it is cheap shot because all Carroll did was simply interview and accept the job. If the Seahawks didn't follow proper protocol that is on them...not Pete Carroll. I think Twist makes some decent points but his cheap shot of Carroll as the source of the Seahawks skirting the Rooney rule is BS...and its disappointing. Too bad...I lost a little respect for Twist on this one, but to each his own.
- Here is another article calling out Nick Saban and his "pimp" comment. I think the term was unfortunate but I understand where Saban is coming from. It just seems a little self serving for Saban to be the point man on this when you consider his history of jumping jobs. Saban was not the first guy to bring this issue up...it was Pete Carroll but because so many simply wanted to beleive that USC cheated the didn't see the forest through the trees. Now that another prominent coach brings it up people get religion...
We will have more later today.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don't get those in favor of the zipper
If the purpose is to accommodate the desire to play in LA every year and it doesn’t do that, why go with a system that has already been show to be a disaster? The NW schools are demanding a trip to LA, as are the Zona and new schools. The Cali schools are demanding to play each other every year. Something has got to give and more than a few schools will be unhappy. On a side note, why do some think the new schools will get to vote, aren’t they still members of other conferences?
As a newcomer...
…Colorado should not hve been offered a spot with the LA schools. From a rivalry standpoint, it makes the most sense to split the Pac-10 North/South, with the California and Arizona schools in the South, and the NW schools and newcomers in the North.
Given that each school would play 4 games per year against the other division schools, USC and UCLA would play a combined 8 games per year, half of which (4) would be in LA. The 6 teams in the North division would get 4 games/year in LA, meaning a trip to LA 2 out of every 3 years. They’d also get to go to the Bay area every 2 out of 3 years. Every year they’d come to California. 1 out of 3 years they’d come twice (LA and Bay area). Even in those years (1 out of 3) that they don’t travel to LA, they’d have the opportuhity to host at least one LA school. And what true Duck wouldn’t rather play USC at Autzen, annyway?
Currently, Colorado and Utah have no rivalry with any Pac-10 schools. Geographically and culturally, they are well-suited to develop rivalries with eachother and the NW schools, who already enjoy healthy rivalries with eachother.
From a scheduling standpoint, it will be much simpler if each school’s principle rivals are in their division, thus automatically securing a spot on their schedule. Placing schools in conferences that are relatively devoid of their rivals (like the zipper) creates the potential for more obligatory low energy matchups, and makes it more difficult to work in critical games like those against their rivals, and games played in LA…all within the framework of a rational and equitable rotation.
To be clear, no matter what the format, each school will play 5 games/year against their own division, and 4 of the 6 teams form the other division. Everyone will miss 2 Pac-10 teams per year. It will be better for everyone if those 2 Pac-10 teams are (on average) geographically remote, on the other end of conference, rather than in regional proximity.
If everyone wants to play in LA
Can’t we just play all home games and have every team come visit us?
(only mostly kidding)
this is my signature! there are many like it but this one is mine!
that's how the SEC rolls
come on down App State!
by NordeezyU on Jul 26, 2010 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That's the best 10-word sentence. . . .
. . . .I"ve read in a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG TIME!
That’s a rec! (For: Absolute Truism!)
"As for being a Raiders fan, I wouldn't wish that fucking shit on anybody." [the venerable OTS at Roll Bama Roll}
by BixBeiderbecke on Jul 26, 2010 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions
The problem is they all want to come to LA
No matter what plan is picked, either north/south or the zipper, a few teams are not. You just can’t get around that fact. I did notice it seems UW is willing to trade the north south split for equal revenue sharing. Make you wonder since as it stands now UW actually would lose money on that deal. However they have to be thinking it works if the split keeps them from games with the LA schools anyway. If the Cali schools vote in a block, there will be some interesting deals being made. Keep in mind, the Zona schools will likely vote with them. The dynamics are interesting.
I think it will be East/West
The “north” division would be too weak with Oregons, Washingtons, and newbies. Really need to include the NorCal schools with Oregons and Washingtons for competitive balance. Otherwise, Utah may dominate the North, and that would be embarrassing and a weakness for P12 marketing.
I still like the zipper. The “because it doesn’t work in the ACC” argument doesn’t satisfy me. I find the possibility of USC/UCLA or USC/Kal P12 championship games enticing. No zipper, no chance for an epic, record Pac TV audience, USC/UCLA championship game some day.
Of course, UCLA would actually have to field a strong team for a change. But, it does seem to happen once a decade or so.
Death to the NCAA!!!
Part of this doesn't make sense
That means either we’re not going to play UCLA every year or a USC/UCLA championship game would be a guaranteed rematch, either of which is not desirable for us.
this is my signature! there are many like it but this one is mine!
Exactly
So USC beats UCLA in the season final, and the bruins still make it to the CCG. Must watch TV it’s not. Utah is not going to dominate anything. They are a good program but they will do the same thing ASU did, migrate to a natural level in the conference. They lack advantages many of the other Pac10 schools have, it will be a obstacle to them which will be hard to overcome. It’s one thing to beat a Pac10 team, it’s another to play in the conference. You have to look at the reasons behind the zipper failing with the ACC to see the numerous parallels with the Pac10. Sure it could work, but there is no reason to believe so at this point.
Why is The ACC such a failure?
I know it is only five years in, but both divisions have been very competitive so far; Miami, Clemson, and Fl. St. respectively have had a lot more talent then the rest and have collectively been in two CCG—teams with more talent should win and they have not so far and this is all their fault. The Big 12 has been around since 96 and since 99, Okl. or Texas has been South champion, have won 8 of the 11 CCG, and the recruiting gap between Texas and Oklahoma and the rest has gotten to a ridiculous level. I think Fl St. and Miami should not play each other every year—your first two sentences sums it up well. If they did not, they could end up playing in CCG more often—maybe like Fl and Alabama in SEC—have played in 8 of the 18 CCG. They do play each other in the rotation schedule also—this year and next year.
It's not as if the ACC as a whole is failing
It’s just the fact that its conference title game has failed to generate the desired revenue/interest it was expected to. The play of the ACC is fine, but expanding to 12 teams has not created this monster east coast conference that has been a ratings bonanza like many expected it to become.
Follow me on twitter @Joey_Kaufman
by Joey Kaufman on Jul 26, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree on CCG
The games have been competitive, but I think moving it outside of Florida is a good thing; Charlotte is a lot more in the center of ACC. If Miami, Florida State, and Clemson had dominated like they should have been doing with respectively a lot more blue chip players than the rest, then it would be more of a monster; Fl. St. should never lose very often to Wake Forest, but they have including a 30-0 pounding in Tallahassee in 06. This would be like if SC began to lose to Wash St. all the time—this should never happen with the gap in recruiting, tradition, and fan interests that exist between the two schools. Things maybe will be more to form in the ACC in the near future with Fl St. beginning to widen the already large gap in recruiting, but their coach has not coached a game yet. Miami is starting to look more to form over the last couple of years. Time will tell.
Agree 100%
Parity has been the biggest problem for the ACC, and nobody likes parity. Every sport, every league needs its top dogs to perform. MLB needs the Yankees/Red Sox to be competitive. The NBA needs the Lakers/Celtics to be good. The Pac-10 needs its brand schools USC, and to a lesser extent Washington/Oregon/Cal, to be at the top of the conference as well. It doesn’t help the ACC when Wake Forest and Boston College are winning conference titles. That doesn’t help them. What they need is for the historical powerhouses Miami and FSU to be at the top while schools like Va Tech, North Carolina, and Clemson, all compete as well.
Follow me on twitter @Joey_Kaufman
by Joey Kaufman on Jul 26, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly and the zipper has been part of the problem
When the ACC was formed, it was suppose to rival the SEC. Instead the only thing it’s rivaled is the Big East. The Zipper has kept natural rivals from meeting and forcing others into unnatural rivalries. It’s has also keep the out of conference fan from having more interests since they don’t know who is where. There is little logic in the parings, so much so even the ACC wants to change them. Clearly the zipper is not the whole reason the ACC is having issues, however it is part of the problem
But, rematches are possible in every conference championship
just the nature of the beast. why does playing your arch rival two times in one year devalue the games? we sometimes play 3 times per year in basketball.
Death to the NCAA!!!
It devalues the rivalry game
It’s the reason Ohio State and Michigan will be in the same division, they loath the idea of a rematch. So you play the rivalry game with all it’s bragging rights on the line only to play a rematch the following week. The fact you make this point, just makes me hate the idea of the zipper even more. Honestly I didn’t even think of this as a reason against it even though I had read about the OSU/UM issue before. As to basketball, I don’t think the analogy is great. Fact is the basketball regular season is pretty meaningless, only a few games are important. Football is the opposite, just about every game is critical.
by ev on Jul 26, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
OSU/UM is interesting, was not aware
How is the B10 going to do it….East/West, I presume? Does that mean Mich St will be in with Mich and OSU too? Where does perennial good team Wisc go? And, Nebraska? And Iowa? Without referring to my map, I don’t immediately see a geographic split that provided an equitable balance for the two divisions.
Kind of like the PacX, as I just don’t see the Oregons and Washingtons as strong enough to carry their own division. How much does it hurt us if the P12 turns into the B12, with a dominant South and a weak sister North?
Death to the NCAA!!!
A lot if we ever become Texas 2008
this is my signature! there are many like it but this one is mine!
The split hasn't been decided yet
All I really know is Michigan and OSU have demanded they be in the same division. They don’t want to devalue their rivalry match-up. I’ve heard that Penn State will be in the other division, it will be mostly geographic. I agree Oregon will never be consistently strong enough to carry a division, but there is no reason to think that won’t be true about UW in the future. They are one of the three traditional Pac10 powers. As with the Big12, when you have three, you can never truly have balance, so why try? Remember the Big12 north use to dominate the Big12 at one point.
by ev on Jul 27, 2010 4:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I think the problem for UW...
is the same problem Nebraska had: recruiting. Everyone knows that for The Pac 10, California is where the vast majority of blue chip players are—my perception is that the majority of California blue chip players are in the South (L.A., S.D. among other cities) which would be even worse for North schools. I could be wrong on this, but regardless, I don’t see UW or any of the North schools getting enough of these players to keep a balance in regard to recruiting, and Washington and the surrounding states have not traditionally been fertile recruiting ground. It would not surprise me if the North schools became like the North schools in The Big 12 in a decade as the gap in recruiting continues to grow. Tradition is a good thing, but you need the players to compete consistently. I really think for the most part, kids want to stay close to home if they have the choice—blue chippers always have the choice. Most of the Texas talent is going to Austin, but a lot are going to Oklahoma—a lot of tradition and very close to home where Nebraska has a lot of tradition, but is getting farther away. Nebraska and the surrounding states are not traditionally fertile recruiting ground either. For The Big 10, Ohio and Pennsylvania are where the majority of the blue chip players are. UM, OSU, and PSU are all right there, so, there are many combinations that can work as long as those three are not in one division. I think more of an East West split would make sense with Mich, Mich St., Wisc., Minn., Neb., and NU in the West and OSU, PSU, Iowa, Ind, Purdue, and Illin. in East would work fine. UM and OSU would need to get over the rematch thing, but I think PSU has shown it can hold its own—not to mention Wisc, Iowa, and Nebraska are very solid programs that can create even more balance between the divisions.
Yah what ever happen to Nor-Cal HS football
So Fight On USC followers and Don’t worry WE Will Still Play on Saturdays and Bowls will come later, for WE ARE SC not That other Softball University. Oh and don’t say you now have a baseball team, it’s not Real Baseball unless you use Wooden Bats
by so.cal.native1952 on Jul 28, 2010 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions
I still feel that USC should just turn independent and then they can be the Pac-11, which in that group ucla could win someday.
So Fight On USC followers and Don’t worry WE Will Still Play on Saturdays and Bowls will come later, for WE ARE SC not That other Softball University. Oh and don’t say you now have a baseball team, it’s not Real Baseball unless you use Wooden Bats
Oh and when in Alabama just run over those Crosses
by so.cal.native1952 on Jul 26, 2010 10:27 AM PDT reply actions
Saban's history of job jumping
Is actually pretty good compared to a lot of coaches. Brian Kelly coached 3 years at Central Michigan and left for Cincy, coached 4 years there and bolted for Notre Dame. Mac Brown coached Ap. State for a single year and Tulane for just 3. Dennis Franchione should really be the poser child for skipping town. He left 3 schools after just two years and another after 3. And of course Lane Kiffin left UT after 1 year.
I just find it weird that Saban gets the rep for being this guy that ditches programs left and right when he’s basically your average college coach in that regard. I think it just goes back to his unfortunate decision to answer the “are you going to Alabama” question. The media loves a villain, so they take cheap shots whenever they can.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
You can see why we're a little defensive about. . . . .
. . . .Coach Carroll and his way of doing things, eh?
USC and ‘Bama are not that different currently or historically- as it pertains to football. And, without question- you Zoltar have been one of the more cooler heads over at RBR. But, now I’m asking this first and foremost as a friend- why is it such a compulsion for those over at RBR (or in the SEC for that matter) to hate USC and Coach Carroll so much and so openly.
You can see he tried to run as clean a program as possible? (that thing they’re calling ‘access’- didn’t ONCE promote agent/player contact nor criminality). You see that the mainstream-media build up to tear down and demonize quality personalities and successful leaders of programs?
Before all this Bush-gate/COI sanctions- you would read hardly a blip about Crimson Tide schadenfreude. Now that you guys have posted all that you guys have done over at RBR- game on! In my ideal world, we Trojans and Tide fans would be brothers in arms. We share one of the greatest (if not 3) games of college football together. I never thought it would be so freaking difficult.
Pete and Kleph over at RBR think they’re gods or something. They have this idea that we CAN’T DEFEND ourselves against allegations brought forth by Lake and Johnson. When we’ve attempted to, they remark that we’re stupid for doing so. When they say they warned us about the NCAA, they say we were too arrogant to take their advice? What the fuck is that supposed to mean? It’s not like we’re Mike Garrett, for crying out loud.
Worse of it all: class! Even if we were all that they say we were or are, what does it say about them to have to continue to publicly assault us and the purported reputation we have when they’ve written 5 “Told You So” articles post-sanctions. Even OTS got in on the act!
Reading RBR these days is like reading Track ’Em Tigers.
At least, through all this- we here at Conquest Chronicles haven’t turned into Bruins Nation.
Class. Perception. Please understand those two words and get a memo out to the RBR brethren.
"As for being a Raiders fan, I wouldn't wish that fucking shit on anybody." [the venerable OTS at Roll Bama Roll}
by BixBeiderbecke on Jul 26, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Well I still like those guys, so I’m not going to trash them or anything. But I think it probably has something to do with the NCAA making alabama its whipping boy over the past 20 years, which makes the whole thing a sore subject. I guess you could say we have Post-Probation-Stress-Syndrome.
I mean, you had the NCAA with the assistance of Roy Cramer letting Tennessee off the hook in exchange for their snitching on Alabama, then Auburn commits academic fraud to keep athletes eligible with their BS “independent study” classes and gets off scott free because of a loophole… I think a lot of bama fans were sick of seeing others slide bye.
It’s sort of like politics. Group A will do something and Group B decries it. Then when their positions are switched, the Group B says, “well, since they did it, we can do it” and Group A will then talk about how terrible it is.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
Yeah, and I know 'hate' is such a punkass word, but. . .
. . . .there’s no other metaphor for it.
There may be those who see ‘hatred’ as a justifiable means to an end. Perhaps they hope or think that all this harsh rhetoric towards USC, Reggie Bush, and Coach Carroll will keep even more Trojans in their place. Hatred and the subsequent invectives doesn’t make life harder for Trojans. We’ll always be prideful of our education and pedigree, and if that makes people think we’re arrogant, so be it.
But ‘hate’ just actively degrades our college football discourse and culture, the public square, and whatever kind of democracy is left in sports. (that’s how I see it)
"As for being a Raiders fan, I wouldn't wish that fucking shit on anybody." [the venerable OTS at Roll Bama Roll}
by BixBeiderbecke on Jul 26, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions
oh and as far as caroll goes, I’m in agreement with most of you guys.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
I know Zolt, I've read you true from the beginning- for the most part
You are a good egg and have a great head on your shoulders. You keep coming back and offering your take- even though sometimes we here at CC might not get it. You’re welcome here anytime, any day- in my book.
"As for being a Raiders fan, I wouldn't wish that fucking shit on anybody." [the venerable OTS at Roll Bama Roll}
by BixBeiderbecke on Jul 26, 2010 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it's pretty clear
that Twist was being facetious about Pete Carroll. Obviously, Carroll did not decide who the Seahawks would/wouldn’t interview – that would be quite the feat, the prospective employee deciding who his prospective employer interviews, for the job for which his interviewing. I know you guys are touchy about Pete Carroll, since he skipped town, leaving a scandal/sanction ridden mess, but Twist is just trying to be funny. Lighten up!
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Lighten up?????
It’s not your team that won all those P10 championships (well, maybe 1. . . . as co-champions)
Wink, wink, smile (i’m joking)
"As for being a Raiders fan, I wouldn't wish that fucking shit on anybody." [the venerable OTS at Roll Bama Roll}
by BixBeiderbecke on Jul 26, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Ouch!
Like Barry Bonds and Mark MacGwire?
"As for being a Raiders fan, I wouldn't wish that fucking shit on anybody." [the venerable OTS at Roll Bama Roll}
by BixBeiderbecke on Jul 26, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I think I know Twist pretty well and his brand of humor...
I didn’t read this as such….
Agree or disagree…I could care less.
it doesn’t change my over view of him as still think he’s a great guy I just didn’t this was appropriate.
Like a said t each his own…
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
I didn't think it was particularly funny
but you can’t think Twist honestly believes Pete Carroll is responsible for who the Seahawks interview/don’t interview. That would be insane – the prospective employee deciding who his prospective employer interviews, for the job for which his interviewing. Twist is just making a reference to the fact that there’s a “scandal” up in Seattle about this after the scandals Carroll left at SC. Obviously, Pete Carroll has absolutely no control over the Seahawks interviewing process.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Well, yeah...so why bring it up?
I get the humor thing but pulling any card from the race deck makes many uncomfortable.
he can write anything he wants…doesn’t mean I have to like it…and its not like anyone really cares. i made note of it and have moved on.
I have plenty of issues with some of the moves PC made but I get tired of him being a punching bag for things he isn’t responsible for…
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
fair enough
You have to understand that Twist is a volume comic. He throws everything to the wall and hopes 3-4% of it sticks. You absolutely don’t have to like it (we rarely do!) but don’t mistake his comedy for stupidity. Well, in the case.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
No I don't have to understand it...you guys do...
It’s your site…you are free to do what you want.
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Thank you for this great defense.
“It’s not Twist’s fault! He’s just a verbose idiot! If he’s lucky 3% of it is funny!”
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Jul 26, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Nobody ever accused you of lacking self-awareness.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jul 26, 2010 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow, Pete Carroll dumping USC really stung you guys huh?
by PlayClassyBears on Jul 27, 2010 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Please move it along....
Through thick and thin we will support PC…he wasn’t perfect but he was ours and he did more than the other 9 coaches combined.
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
