Don’t look now, but USC is 9-2, and although it can’t go to a bowl game, it just seriously impacted the BCS picture.
The Trojans went into Autzen Stadium and put on an offensive clinic against Oregon, as Matt Barkley and company carved up the Ducks in a 38-35 USC win. That makes two teams who looked to have a good shot at playing for a national title (Oklahoma State and Oregon) who are now just hoping to win their conference and play in a BCS bowl.
That’s the major story that comes out of this weekend, that the BCS was shaken to its core, and Alabama’s path to a rematch just got a lot more clear. But maybe, just maybe, we should look a little at how good USC actually is.
This is a team that took Andrew Luck and Stanford to multiple overtimes. That went into South Bend and beat up on Notre Dame. And now, despite NCAA sanctions and not having a full complement of scholarships, the Trojans are coming together and looking like a top 10 team. Yes, top 10.
Matt Barkley is the real deal, and the team that loses the Andrew Luck sweepstakes should not be disappointed in having to “settle” for Barkley. His receivers, namely Robert Woods and Marquise Lee, are spectacular, and despite very little depth on the offensive line, the Trojans have put together a solid run game.
I realize nobody wants to admit this, and believe me, I’m in that group, but Lane Kiffin is doing one heck of a job right now in Los Angeles. He’s convinced a team with literally nothing but pride to play for that these games matter.
UCLA is the only game left on USC’s schedule, and that should be a win. And, frankly, 10-2 for the Trojans is an incredible accomplishment this year. I’m not sure if this will translate to more success when the Trojans become eligible for bowl games next season, as I’m assuming Barkley is going to jump to the pros. But if he stays, I don’t see why USC can’t compete for a national title next year. Seriously.
Today we learned that the BCS stripped USC of its 2004 national title, vacating the results of the 2005 Orange Bowl where USC crushed Oklahoma. The BCS also vacated the Trojans participation in the 2006 Rose Bowl that decided the national championship for the 2005 season. Remember that game? Vince Young turned in one of the greatest performances in college football history as Texas knocked off USC, 41-38. According to the NCAA and the BCS, that game never happened.
The NCAA has become a joke (the BCS has always been a joke). The entire college football system has been hijacked by big conferences and universities looking to cash in and keep all the money for themselves through the BCS farce, and then you have the NCAA enforcing a code of ethics developed for a society that looks more like 1950s America than the real world of today.
I’m an Ohio State fan, so I’ve never been a fan of USC, but it’s appalling to see this title stripped away. One idiot on the team was taking money, and suddenly the accomplishments of a great team are nullified by the fools running college athletics. USC may have failed to uncover the problem, but it’s not like assistant coaches were handing Reggie Bush thousands of dollars.
You might say that a severe penalty is in order, but why punish all the college kids who played on that team? Why punish the fans? Why stain the memory of a great season, and then a year later a great game where Vince Young and Texas beat a team many considered to be the best of all time until that night?
If you’re looking for a way to punish the crime, why not follow the money? That’s what college football is all about these days. Instead of forfeiting the game, why not have USC forfeit the millions of dollars paid to them by the BCS that year? The kids never saw a dime of that money, yet they’re the ones getting punished. If you want to prevent this behavior, penalties in the millions of dollars will get the attention of the USC athletic department and the University president.
As for the coaches, punish them as well! In the case of USC, perhaps there wasn’t enough evidence to ban Pete Carroll from coaching for several years, but if he or his assistants were directly implicated, then the NCAA could have suspended them and/or fined them. I understand that Pete Carroll left for the NFL, but he could have been prevented from attending any college football games and interacting with any college football program for a number of years.
In the Jim Tressel case, he should be punished going forward so that he can’t cash in at another university, and Ohio State should lose the money it received for the Sugar Bowl.
Money talks. The big schools have pointed to things like tradition and education as reasons we shouldn’t have a playoff system, and then they play musical chairs with conference memberships and add championship games all while throwing tradition out the window. Nothing matters more than the money . . .
College football needs a complete overhaul, from a playoff system to an examination of all the idiotic rules governing the conduct of “student athletes.” But it needs to start by going after the money, hitting schools where it hurts, and it needs to stop the absurdity of erasing the past every time some dumb kid gets caught accepting money, cars or tattoos from a booster or agent.
After Lane Kiffin hired Tennessee running backs coach Kennedy Pola to be his new offensive coordinator at USC, Titans’ head coach Jeff Fisher was a little ticked off that Kiffin didn’t call him first.
From ESPN.com:
“I am very disappointed in Lane Kiffin’s approach to this,” Fisher told The Tennessean on Saturday. “Typically speaking, when coaches are interested in hiring or discussing potential employment from coaches on respective staffs there is a courtesy call made from the head coach or athletic director indicating there is an interest in talking to the assistant.
“So I am very disappointed in the lack of professionalism on behalf of Lane, to call me and leave me a voicemail after Kennedy had informed me he had taken the job. It is just a lack of professionalism.”
Kiffin claims it was all a matter of timing.
“We reached out to Kennedy Pola [on Friday] to gauge whether he had any possible interest in returning to USC before we moved forward with the process,” Kiffin said. “Kennedy said he would think about it and get back to us today. Once Kennedy did call back earlier today, out of my great respect for Coach Fisher I immediately reached out to Coach to make him aware of the situation.
“I have spoken with Coach Fisher and he now has an accurate understanding of the timeline of events.
“We realize the timing of this isn’t perfect for all parties, but this is a great opportunity and promotion for Kennedy.”
This wasn’t the first time Kiffin has pissed off a fellow coach and it probably won’t be the last. If it was a matter of timing and therefore, a misunderstanding, then I’m sure Fisher can let the situation go. Then again, Fisher’s main beef was that Kiffin never contacted him when USC was interested in hiring Pola. Kiffin could have picked up the phone as soon as Pola was a serious candidate and this situation could have been avoided.
Either way, this story is sure to get buried soon. Fisher’s probably more upset that he lost his running backs coach one week before training camp starts than he is about Kiffin’s moral compass. Although I would have loved to hear Fisher drop the line, “Lane Kiffin is a guy that would bend you over and not have the courtesy to give you a reach around.” (I cleaned that line up for the kids viewing at home.)
A day after helping Mike Garrett with his retirement decision (that’s a nice way of saying they gave him the boot) and replacing him with new athletic director Pat Haden, USC returned its copy of the Heisman Trophy that former running back Reggie Bush won in 2005.
From ESPN.com:
The university’s incoming president announced an overhaul of the athletic department Tuesday, replacing athletic director Mike Garrett with Pat Haden, ordering the removal of displays honoring Bush’s and Mayo’s accomplishments at USC and returning its copy of Bush’s Heisman.
Haden said the school’s plan to get rid of nearly all references to Bush and Mayo — right down to scrubbing their images from school murals and removing Bush’s No. 5 jersey in its place of honor in the lobby of Heritage Hall — are all part of the NCAA’s directive to disassociate the school from the athletes.
It’s important to note that Bush is still in possession of the original Heisman, which is given out by the Downtown Athletic Club and the Heisman Trust. Outside of the fact that it’s given to a college player, the NCAA has no barring on who receives the award and therefore, whether or not one should be taken away.
Some may question why USC didn’t get rid of O.J. Simpson’s Heisman after he murdered two people all of his legal troubles, but don’t forget that his trial in the early 90s was nearly 30 years after he donned a Trojan uniform. Plus, everything that coconut did after his playing days had no affect on what he did on the field at USC.
Bush, on the other hand, is a different story. He directly played a role in USC receiving a two-year bowl ban and I can’t blame the university for wanting to scrub his name from its memory. Their message is clear: We’re moving on.
If this is USC’s way of embarrassing Bush, then so be it. He deserves it. I realize he was only a kid and kids are easily persuaded, but he still knew right from wrong. He still made the conscious decision to put himself ahead of the program.
It’s hard to blame Seantrel Henderson for getting out of his letter of intent at USC to join another program like Miami, Ohio State or Minnesota (which were three schools, along with USC, that he was reportedly interested in). Thanks to the fairly recent sanctions handed down by the NCAA, the Trojans won’t be able to compete in a bowl game over the next two years and obviously that’s important to a player like Henderson, who was considered the second best recruit from the class of 2010 according to Rivals.com.
But will Henderson inevitably miss out in the long run?
The 6’7”, 295-pound offensive lineman, who played for Cretin-Derham High School in Minnesota, committed to USC in February before waiting to sign his letter of intent with the Trojans until the NCAA had wrapped up its investigation. Then, after reportedly meeting with Miami head coach Randy Shannon over the weekend, Henderson wanted to opt out of his commitment to USC, which Lane Kiffin and the Trojans granted by releasing him from his LOI with zero penalties or restrictions. (If USC wanted to, they could have made Henderson sit out an entire year before transferring because he had already signed with the program.)
On the surface, it appears as though Henderson is making the right decision. After all, what blue chipper would want to go through the next two seasons without the opportunity to play in a bowl game or perhaps a national title? It couldn’t have been a hard sell for someone like Shannon to sit the young man down and say, “Come to Miami and have the opportunity to play in four postseason games over the next two years, or go to USC and be limited to two.”
But let’s keep in mind that USC is a NFL-producing factory. Last year, the Trojans sent seven players to the NFL, while in 2009 they sent 11 and in 2008 there were 10 USC players drafted.
USC has appealed the NCAA’s sanctions that prohibits them from playing in any postseason games over the next to years and has asked that the ban be reduced to only one year.
From ESPN.com:
USC appealed only certain aspects of this month’s ruling. Among the penalties were a two-year bowl ban, four years of probation, scholarship losses and removal of several victories. The school will accept a bowl ban for the upcoming season and certain scholarship penalties in football, but believes the full sanctions were unduly harsh.
USC asked for the two-year postseason ban to be reduced to one year. The school also wants the NCAA’s scholarship reductions in football from 2011 to 2013 to be reduced to five lost scholarships in each season, rather than 10.
“We disagree with many of the findings in the report from the NCAA Committee on Infractions and assert that the penalties imposed are too severe for the violations identified and are inconsistent with precedent in similar cases,” said Todd Dickey, USC’s senior vice president for administration.
USC already announced it would appeal immediately after the sanctions were handed down June 10. The NCAA’s appeal process typically takes at least several months, and Dickey said the Trojans might get an answer by spring only in a best-case scenario.
If the NCAA wants to make an example out of USC, then there’s little hope that the ban will be reduced. This situation could serve warning to all programs that if they’re caught breaking rules, that they could be punished as severely as the Trojans were.
That said, considering those that were at fault (ahem, Reggie Bush, Pete Carroll, etc.) for the ban aren’t involved with the program anymore, one can make the argument (and many certainly have) that the NCAA was too harsh in its ruling.
In what could wind up being a massive blow to USC’s football program, the NCAA has ruled that juniors and seniors to-be can transfer to other FBS programs without having to sit out a season.
ESPN.com has the details.
“The second school would have to submit a waiver asking to waive the year in residence, but NCAA rules allow for this waiver to be granted if a student-athlete’s first school has a postseason ban in their sport,” NCAA spokeswoman Stacey Osburn said in an e-mail to ESPN’s Joe Schad.
The rule does not apply to freshman who have signed national letters of intent, however. But schools with an interest in a USC junior or senior are allowed to initiate contact with the player, Osburn said.
Among juniors and seniors whom the transfer rule applies to are quarterback Mitch Mustain, running backs C.J. Gable and Marc Tyler, receiver David Ausberry, cornerback T.J. Bryant, tight end Blake Ayles, safety Drew McAllister and center Michael Reardon.
First-year coach Lane Kiffin said Thursday he hadn’t heard from any schools with possible interest in a USC player.
When asked if he’s concerned about some of his juniors and seniors transferring, Kiffin said, “If someone wants to leave the best place in the country to play football, we won’t stop them.”
Lane Kiffin has quite the situation on his hands. For the next two seasons, his program won’t be competing for the chance to play in the postseason and he’ll also lose 30 scholarships over the next three years. He also has the daunting task of recruiting players who know that the Trojans won’t be playing in a bowl game until 2012 and now his juniors and seniors can transfer without fear of sitting out a full year.
It’s unfair to the current Trojans players that because two sports marketers pampered Reggie Bush, they won’t have the opportunity to play in a bowl game over the next two years. I wouldn’t blame any of them for wanting to jump ship and start fresh elsewhere, although I’m sure Kiffin is doing all he can to keep them right where they’re at. If he doesn’t, who knows what kind of a team he’ll be able to field over the next two seasons.
This video was taken before Lane Kiffin sat down to speak to the Knoxville media about his decision to leave Tennessee to take the USC job. One television reporter (or producer?) doesn’t want to agree to Kiffin’s terms. It’s pretty funny to watch thirty people trip over each other trying to get a stupid press conference started.
According to SI.com, USC will be without three of their players for the Emerald Bowl because of academic issues. Tailback Joe McKnight will also miss the game due to an investigation.
“He has some paperwork he needs to do and it’s best for him to stay in LA so he can be available to finish it,” Trojans coach Pete Carroll said.
Carroll did not have a timetable for McKnight’s return.
“We don’t know right now how long this will take,” he said.
USC has previously said it was said it was investigating whether McKnight used an SUV registered to a Los Angeles businessman. The Trojans also declared three players academically ineligible on Monday.
Tight end Anthony McCoy and tackle Tyron Smith, both starters, and defensive end Averell Spicer, a key reserve, will not play Dec. 26 in San Francisco.
What a nightmare of a season for USC. It’s bad enough that they find themselves playing in the Emerald Bowl at this time of year, but to have three of their players become illegible and one more under investigation is embarrassing.
Pete Carroll is already viewing this as the “forgotten” season.
USC’s Pete Carroll says he’s over Stanford head coach John Harbaugh going for two when the Cardinal were already up 48-21 in the second half of their victory over the Trojans last Saturday. But Carroll also said that he wouldn’t forget about the play either.
MASON: What do you think, now a couple of days removed, of Harbaugh going for the two-point conversion?
CARROLL: Well, really, even since the time that it happened, you know, I haven’t bothered with it, and I know everybody else has and taken a lot of time to kinda discuss it and all. I think, you know, it is what you think it is, you know, it’s a statement that you can take away that maybe they were trying to accomplish something that seems out of the ordinary, you know, I don’t really care, to tell you the truth, it doesn’t matter.
And when you look at it like, uh, they’re ahead in the game and they’re in command of it, they really get to do whatever they want to do, and it doesn’t bother me to worry about it anymore, you know what I mean? Jim came out and said what he wanted to say, you know, a couple different times about it and, you know, to me it’s dropped, I don’t care.
Will I forget it? No, I’m not forgetting it. But uh, you know, to me, it’s in the past.
What’s funny is that everyone is concentrating on how Stanford went for two to make a statement to USC, but what Carroll and everyone needs to focus on is that the Cardinal whipped the Trojans’ ass for four quarters. It wasn’t just one play; Stanford owned USC on the Trojans’ home field for 60 minutes. That’s the bigger deal.
So Carroll truly does need to forget about the one play (albeit, an embarrassing play) and concentrate on what has happened this year to his program. To hell with the two-point conversation: How does that once stout USC defense allow 36 (Oregon State), 47 (Oregon) and 55 (Stanford) points over the course of a four game span?
