Get a motherfucking load of this. The premier dynasty of the 2000's in college football will not extend into the new decade. Goodbye, Pete Carroll, it was fun while it lasted, perhaps now the Big 10 can hold their own in the Rose Bowl without you around. http://www.dailynews.com/usc/ci_14151185 To put it mildly, this is staggering. He already washed out of the NFL once before.
If Carroll does take the job in Seattle, do not think that it will mean an immediate end to USC as a football powerhouse. That article says USC is looking at top coaches to replace Carroll all of whom I am sure could take over without much more than a burp The only thing that could take USC down would be an NCAA suspension. Since I am sure USC brings huge money to the NCAA I would think they would be very reluctant to issue a death penalty to the program. USC is top dog in the Number 2 media market in the country, they have no NFL competition and absolutly dominate Fall media coverage in Southern California. The NCAA is not going to want to lose that. I understand some of USC's starters are leaving early for the NFL. I have no doubt that USC has plenty of underclassmen who are just as good. They also get to sign the best football players in the best High School football area in the country all within 20 miles of their campus. The talent is so good that they do not even recruit outside of that area unless they are sure the player is a sure first round NFL talent. I do not like USC at all, but I sure respect the absolute powerhouse they are. It also makes it all the sweeter when the teams I do enjoy can on the rare occasion knock them on their asses. To all the people who want a 16 team college playoff, do not wish it unless you want USC playing in the championship game 7 out of every 10 years. Probably winning about 5 of those championships every decade. If USC can make the playoffs despite losing their one game a year (in the toughest conference to go undefeated), they will be unstoppable.
There isn't a single program in the country as good as you're insinuating. If the scenario you're talking about was reality they would have had an undefeated season more recently than 6 years ago. Morons like you refuse to acknowledge the randomness of sports. Recruiting is more difficult than you think. There's a large discrepancy between recruiting players with talent and those that have the right attributes. That's why we see so many flops in the NFL, we just don't hear as much about them when they fail in college. Will USC be a good program if Carroll leaves? Absolutely. Will they win half the national titles over the next decade? Not a chance.
By the way in response to saying that Carroll washed out of the NFL. He had a winning record as a coach in the NFL. Although it was only modest he was 33-31 so it wasn't exactly a complete disaster.
So the next question is if USC gets the head coach from Oregon State who goes there? I wonder if Mike Leach from Texas Tech is a possibility. Lots of controversy around him right now but he is one of the greatest offensive minds in college football.
You've got a nice bit of circular logic there. USC can't seem to make it through the conference undefeated, so it must be the hardest conference to go undefeated in. You're ignoring the fact that USC usually picks up their one loss a year by shitting the bed against a bad Pac-10 team. To go undefeated in the SEC or Big-12 you're pretty much going to have to beat at least two top ten teams, plus win a conference title game. Undefeated seasons happen more often in those conferences, but that's because there's more than one team in them with a shot at it.
You don't give the PAC 10 enough credit. There is a lot more parity in the PAC10 now then there has been in the past. Oregon, Oregon State, Cal, and even Stanford has made tremendous strides to catch up with USC and Arizona is right behind them.
So because Florida plays in the SEC, they're allowed to shit the bed at home against a team that finishes second in their division and still play for the championship, but USC shitting the bed on the road to a team that finished second in the conference and they're shit out of luck when it comes to playing for the championship despite having one of the best defenses in college football history. Seems like that logic is just as shitty so fuck the conference comparisons.
Well tough shit. The one loss team from the harder conference gets in first. Don't even try to pretend you don't know the SEC is better than the PAC 10. Florida might have lost to Ole Miss (who was a good team that year btw) but they played a tougher schedule than USC that year.
They may have played a SLIGHTLY tougher schedule, but considering Oregon State and Mississippi ended up about the same rank with identical records, a home loss versus a road loss is the biggest difference between UF and USC that year. Then again, let's just agree to agree that a playoff that year would have been phenomenal with TTU, OU, UT, UF, Utah, Bama, USC and Penn State.
Pretty much, the problem with college football is that you can't load your analysis with how teams have performed against common opponents because there's often only 1-2, or none at all. Maybe deciding which conferences are superior isn't so cut and dry (although I still do think the SEC is the best). I'm fairly confident that they'll eventually implement a playoff system, I just wish I knew how long it's going to take.
Hopefully he can solve the offensive problems we've had in recent years and Monte can pick up where Pete left off on defense.
What the FUCK. Doesn't he realize how many UT athletes are armed and dangerous? One of my friends just told me that a lynch mob is forming outside of Neyland.
Huge blow to UT fans. I really thought he was going to do great things at Tennessee. Given a couple more years he might have been able to give Florida and Alabama a run for their money. I guess USC noticed.
Kiffin coached at USC from 2001-2006. He was offensive coordinator for the last 2 years before he bolted for Oakland, incidentally before they "started having problems" did you both forget about that? Supposedly Chow is coming to work as the OC too. Pete Carroll leaving is looking like it is going to work out pretty good for USC....unfortunately. Who goes to Tenn now? Muschamp?
Muschamp isn't going to leave Texas, not as long as he is still the head coach-designate. Mack has repeatedly said he's only going to be coaching for (ok, more than) a couple years, and Muschamp will step into one of the top 5 programs in the nation. I sincerely doubt he would risk all that to leave for Tennessee.
I think he realized that he was in a real league with real coaches and couldn't just coast on the talent that the school itself brought it. The best players he brought in on his own were kicked off the team. He figured out that in a couple years, he would still be sucking hind teat to coaches like Saban and Meyer and Richt and Mularkey and Miles. No worries, because USC is about to get bitch slapped by the NCAA for McKnight and Reggie Bush. Unless USC reigns in Kiffin like UT did, they'll be on the road to the Death Penalty. I think Pat Forde sums it up in his article on ESPN.com this morning: "His career head-coaching record is 12-21. He's already 0-1 against USC's biggest rival, UCLA. His signature win was a loss -- a two-point defeat at eventual national champion Alabama. Other than that, the best thing the Volunteers did in 2009 was thumping the worst Georgia team in a decade. His team was de-pantsed in the Chick-fil-A Bowl by Virginia Tech, and de-pantsed in Oxford by an underachieving Mississippi. And that's just the on-field stuff. Off the field is where he's really raised doubts, and raised the ire of SEC commissioner Mike Slive. Kiffin has specialized in stupidity." The best line: "Kiffin comes across as a guy who was born on third base and acts as if he hit a triple..."
If you look at his head coaching record in a vacuum of course it looks bad. Usually teams hire a new coach because they're caught in a downward spiral. Bill Belichick couldn't have coached that raider team to a winning record. It's not like he had total freedom to operate either, you've heard of Al Davis right? At Tennessee he didn't have an outstanding season because he lacked the talent. He damn near beat the national champions ('bama) and would have if two key field goals weren't blocked. The Florida game wasn't as close, but nowhere near the blow out people were expecting. Fortunately for him he's getting a job with a program already geared to win. If he was half as bad as the article suggests USC never would have hired him.