Anyone else surprised by USC hiring Steve Sarkesian?
- Thread starter smellmyfinger
- Start date
They keep getting in their own way. I remember hearing Pat Haden on DPS after Kiffen was fired and Dan asked "Does he have to be a USC guy?" Haden said "no". BS, Haden.
Although, I guess after Sumlin turned them down it was time to wrap it up.
Although, I guess after Sumlin turned them down it was time to wrap it up.
Uninspiring considering it's USC.
USC hired Dan Mullen. He is 34-29 in his five years at Washington.
<tbody>
</tbody>
USC hired Dan Mullen. He is 34-29 in his five years at Washington.
| 2009 | Washington | 5–7 | 4–5 | 7th | |||
| 2010 | Washington | 7–6 | 5–4 | T–3rd | W Holiday | ||
| 2011 | Washington | 7–6 | 5–4 | 3rd <small>(North)</small> | L Alamo | ||
| 2012 | Washington | 7–6 | 5–4 | 4th <small>(North)</small> | L Maaco | ||
| 2013 | Washington | 8–4 | 5–4 | 3rd <small>(North)</small> |
<tbody>
</tbody>
I'm not sure Mullen isn't better than him. Same record but Mullen is above our historic win percentage but Sark is about 10% less than Washington's. Odd to hire a guy that is in the negative to that school. Would be like Alabama hiring Mullen except they can a least point to the fact that Mullen is to the positive against our history.
I'm no fan of Coach O but he had a better body of work the last half of the season. I would think O would not like this hire at all and is hoping for a Head Coaching Job. Better send his resume to Washington.
I agree with your post but record wise - he is 1 game worse than Dan Mullen. Just a weak hire by USC.
I agree. Weak for that school. Honestly, they hired a guy that if he had lost their game to Washington State would have had a pretty warm seat this off season. Franklin, Sumlin, even Del Rio would have been better hires. They are so stuck with trying to recreate Carroll off of his coaching tree. If your going that route I would have made a big run at Fisher, Smith and Del Rio.
Actually, Sarkisian is arguably the most effective hire the Trojans have made since Larry Smith in '87 but it could have been better.
Who have they hired?
John McKay promoted from being an assistant to be head coach beginning in 1960.
John Robinson was running backs coach for the Oakland Raiders before being USC's coach for the '76 season.
Ted Tollner was USC's offensive coordinator for a season before being promoted for the '83 season.
Larry Smith was head coach at Tulane and then Arizona (going 66-55-3) and three bowls (one at Tulane) before being USC's coach in '87.
John Robinson coached the Rams after leaving USC before returning in '93.
Paul Hackett was formerly head coach at Pitt and then the Chiefs OC before being head coach in '98.
Pete Carroll was an okay head coach with the Jets and Patriots.
Lane Kiffin was a failure at the Raiders who burned his bridges at Tennessee.
Who have they hired?
John McKay promoted from being an assistant to be head coach beginning in 1960.
John Robinson was running backs coach for the Oakland Raiders before being USC's coach for the '76 season.
Ted Tollner was USC's offensive coordinator for a season before being promoted for the '83 season.
Larry Smith was head coach at Tulane and then Arizona (going 66-55-3) and three bowls (one at Tulane) before being USC's coach in '87.
John Robinson coached the Rams after leaving USC before returning in '93.
Paul Hackett was formerly head coach at Pitt and then the Chiefs OC before being head coach in '98.
Pete Carroll was an okay head coach with the Jets and Patriots.
Lane Kiffin was a failure at the Raiders who burned his bridges at Tennessee.
I'm not surprised. They have a history of hiring people that they are comfortable with, essentially known entities. However, in this case, Sark's body of work as a head coach is pretty poor in a relatively weak conference. While the current talent at and recruiting for the future will be easier at USC, they play in a traditionally weaker conference that is on the rise. Teams like Stanford and Oregon are dominant with UCLA, Oregon State, and Arizona on the rise. Don't forget about the pirate at WSU. There were innumerable better hires available, but surprised about their pick....No.
The comparisons to Mullen is quite comical as Washington and the PAC 12 aren't comparable to the SEC in a one-to-one basis. This is probably the best year in awhile for the PAC-12 as far as mid-tier teams playing better football. The SEC has an all-time record of 111-76-10 (152-107-13 when you add MU-CU) and a winning percentage of .589 in head-to-head matchups against Pac-12 teams. The most successful PAC-12 team against the SEC is USC. However, the last 7-10 years have been arguably the most dominant years of the SEC in terms of conference strength overall. I wonder what Sark's record at a mid-tier SEC school such as MSU, Ole Miss or Vandy would have been if he had to coach in the SEC. I believe that it would have been substanitally worse. Of course, that's simply speculation.
The comparisons to Mullen is quite comical as Washington and the PAC 12 aren't comparable to the SEC in a one-to-one basis. This is probably the best year in awhile for the PAC-12 as far as mid-tier teams playing better football. The SEC has an all-time record of 111-76-10 (152-107-13 when you add MU-CU) and a winning percentage of .589 in head-to-head matchups against Pac-12 teams. The most successful PAC-12 team against the SEC is USC. However, the last 7-10 years have been arguably the most dominant years of the SEC in terms of conference strength overall. I wonder what Sark's record at a mid-tier SEC school such as MSU, Ole Miss or Vandy would have been if he had to coach in the SEC. I believe that it would have been substanitally worse. Of course, that's simply speculation.
On further reflection, I think its a good hire.
USC does not need some sort of super innovative "system" head coach. They have the recruiting network to get great players and the resources to get great coaches. They need a CEO coach like Saban who will run the program and play a pro-style system and can work with QB's. That is Sarkesian. Don't get too caught up in the records. Saban's record when he was hired by LSU was similar as was Les Miles's. I actually think Sumlin would have been a mistake for USC and may not really be the long term answer for A&M.
They know more about Sarkesian there than we do. They may know that he'd be a good guy to run that program, and I can't really second guess them.
USC does not need some sort of super innovative "system" head coach. They have the recruiting network to get great players and the resources to get great coaches. They need a CEO coach like Saban who will run the program and play a pro-style system and can work with QB's. That is Sarkesian. Don't get too caught up in the records. Saban's record when he was hired by LSU was similar as was Les Miles's. I actually think Sumlin would have been a mistake for USC and may not really be the long term answer for A&M.
They know more about Sarkesian there than we do. They may know that he'd be a good guy to run that program, and I can't really second guess them.