PDA

View Full Version : Carroll leaves before hard work



VTGreg
01-11-2010, 12:10 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=maisel_ivan&id=4815326


Carroll leaves before hard work
Maisel By Ivan Maisel


The Pete Carroll era at USC peaked on the afternoon of Dec. 3, 2005. The top-ranked Trojans not only won their 34th consecutive game by beating archrival UCLA, they humiliated the No. 11 Bruins, 66-19. The victory clinched USC's spot in the Rose Bowl, where the Trojans would play for the national championship.

As soon as the game ended, parents, friends, celebrities and journalists engulfed the Trojans on the field at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. The USC band played "Conquest." Amid the clumps of people, Carroll wandered by alone, the walking definition of delight.

"Why would you want to leave the field right now?" Carroll said. "Where would you go?"

The Trojans never reached that peak again. The first step down came with 19 seconds left in the Rose Bowl, when Texas quarterback Vince Young completed a career night (267 yards passing, 200 rushing) by scoring on a fourth-down run to win the national championship, 41-38.

Believe it or not, that's the last time USC has been No. 1 later than September. That was the last game for Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush, the Heisman twins. The dynasty, at least the national part of it, ended there.

Carroll's Trojans descended the mountain, tentatively at first. This season, they bounded downhill. USC lost four games in 2009 -- four Pacific-10 Conference games.

Carroll may have looked at the top of the mountain and realized he's not on top anymore. He may have peered into the gloaming and seen the NCAA coming, a pitchfork in one hand and pictures of the Bush family manse in the other.

Whatever the reason, Carroll decided to stop climbing, and that's what bothers me. Why would he want to leave the field now?

No one wins every year. The game won't permit it. Between NCAA recruiting limitations, player injury and coaching turnover, it's virtually impossible. Carroll, after going 6-6 in 2001, his first season at USC, embarked on an incredible seven-year run. From '02 to '08, the Trojans went 82-9 (.901), won at least a share of two national championships and nearly won a third.

In 2009, Carroll was sidelined by a talent drain (he ended up starting freshman quarterback Matt Barkley) and a brain drain (offensive coordinator Steve Sarkisian left to become head coach at Washington and took defensive coordinator Nick Holt with him). The Trojans fell to 9-4. It's part of the natural ebb and flow of college football.

But the minute that USC ebbed, Carroll flowed out the door.

His decision to go to the Seattle Seahawks goes against Carroll's fierce competitive nature. He cloaked that will to win in a cool California vibe that took years off his appearance. At times, Carroll seemed so eternally young his middle name could have been Pan.

Carroll refused to display any public negativity. At spring practice in 2006, three months after the last-minute loss to Texas, Carroll described to me in detail how he would not let the heartbreak affect his team; about how close the Trojans came despite Young's performance for the ages.

"All that?" Carroll summed up. "We're up by 12 with a few minutes left and didn't win the game, you know?"

"That's the part that would drive most people nuts," I said.

"So you're saying you can't tell if it is or not, huh?" Carroll replied.

Prior to that, negative events rarely happened. A year earlier, on the morning after USC destroyed Oklahoma 55-19 to win the 2004 BCS Championship in the Orange Bowl, Carroll said of his players and coaches, "I challenged them not to go to sleep last night until the sun came up, and I was right there with them."

Any sleepless nights at USC from here on out won't be because of celebration. At least one Pac-10 head coach thinks Carroll stepped out the back door as the NCAA posse is moving toward the front. Carroll may explain his decision to leave by saying something about new challenges. He may blast the NCAA and its cast of Inspector Javerts for dogging an innocent coach.

Either way, the mess was made on his watch, and he's leaving it for the next guy to clean up.

The aforementioned Pac-10 head coach, asked via text if USC's problems this season could be pinned on a lack of talent or experience, replied, "Young. Fell off at skill positions, though."

You never worried about Carroll's ability to restock the Trojans' shelves. Carroll once dismissed one of the annual rumors about his return to the NFL by asking why he would coach in a league in which you could have only one first-round draft choice a year. At USC, he could sign as many as he wanted.

"We want to find guys who will be No. 1 draft picks and who can handle it academically and socially," he once told me.

Carroll has developed 14 first-rounders in his nine seasons of coaching the Trojans, with more to come on the current roster. USC remained a cool place for blue-chippers to play. Carroll attached USC to the celebrity culture in Los Angeles so securely that the Trojans sideline needed velvet ropes.

Rappers, TV stars, film stars -- if you saw them on "ET," you'd see them at the Coliseum. USC grad Will Ferrell would show up at practice, dressed as a superhero, and give a mock pep talk. Soul legend Bill Withers would come to a meeting and sing "Lean on Me." Carroll brought that to his team without a loss of discipline or focus. I can't think of another coach who would agree to any of that.

The aura that USC cast over the Pac-10 has gone. Oregon won the Pac-10 this season by two games. The Ducks humiliated the Trojans. So did Stanford. When it came time to dig deeper, to start the climb up the mountain again, Carroll headed out the door.

Maisel was pretty tough on Carroll but he does bring up some valid points. I for one will be happy to see USC slide back into mediocrity.

kimchicowboy
01-11-2010, 01:20 PM
rats. i was waiting to see UCLA humiliate USC again under carroll. haha

Thesifer
01-11-2010, 08:40 PM
Never really liked the guy much anyways. Always seemed kinda slimy.

ShawnLee
01-12-2010, 01:08 AM
rats. i was waiting to see UCLA humiliate USC again under carroll. haha
Aside from Bruin rivalry, I think a lot of what I'm hearing about him leaving is overblown. Let's see. I personally don't see this working out for him either, but I can't knock him to the degree that the author does. I say, Carroll's done everything he ever needed to prove himself at SC, good for you.

ray
01-12-2010, 02:47 AM
Just to caveat this post, since living in Southern California has exposed me to a significant amount of "USC fanatics" as I like to call them: I have no ties to USC and am not a fan of their athletes or teams.

Good for Pete. He's leaving a legacy behind, despite all the **** regarding the NCAA probes (which he probably had nothing to do with in the first place). In response to the writer's accusation that Carroll is leaving as the USC program starts to fade...maybe the program is fading or maybe the team is just young and needed time to work out the problems. Like every high school, NCAA, and professional team there are always peaks and valleys. Take this year's New England Patriots as a perfect example. Just because the timing of Seattle's offer coincides with USC's first "poor" season in the past decade doesn't mean Carroll is bailing on the team. Let's not forget that Carroll took over a team that had combined for a whopping 37-35 record between 1995 and 2000. Carroll's first year with USC in 2001 he ended with a 6-6 record. So to say Carroll is leaving when the program is possibly on the decline is a joke because he inherited the team when they were mediocre at best, and turned it into arguably the best college team in all of NCAA sports the past decade.

Second, despite his poor performance in the NFL in the past, he's getting a lot of control over the hiring of the new GM in Seattle and he's getting paid nearly double what he made at USC (estimates for his payroll at USC are around ~$4M/year). As a career-minded coach, how could anybody turn down such a huge raise and almost complete control over personnel issues with a professional sports team? Maybe he will fail, but maybe he will succeed, but sometimes people just chase the paycheck and the challenge.

Nija
01-12-2010, 03:33 AM
I think he has accomplished enough at USC. I hope this run in the NFL is better than the last time.

VTGreg
01-12-2010, 09:26 AM
Interesting slant to this story. Just heard a segment on Cowherd's show that said that Carroll was really upset with the whole BCS setup in college football and that could have had an impact. Guess he was really upset that USC didn't have a chance for a national title last year.

Thesifer
01-12-2010, 03:26 PM
Interesting slant to this story. Just heard a segment on Cowherd's show that said that Carroll was really upset with the whole BCS setup in college football and that could have had an impact. Guess he was really upset that USC didn't have a chance for a national title last year.

It would be nice if teens did have a little tiny bit of wiggle room, to where they could lose 1 game and still make the National Title Game, as that hasn't really been happening in the recent years.

It used to be possible but not really anymore. And eventually their going to screw up and let one of the Mid-Majors in, and we'll all watch them get creamed, because theres no real legitimate way to weed people out.
They could easily do a 'mini-playoff' And only add 2 games to the current list. Or they could expand and allow 16 teams to make it to the post-season, either way. A team would then have to beat 3 Solid teams to be crowned National Champion.

4 BCS Tournament Games 8 Teams
2 BCS Semi-Final Games 4 Teams
1 BCS Title Game for Nat. Champ

VTGreg
01-13-2010, 05:19 AM
It would be nice if teens did have a little tiny bit of wiggle room, to where they could lose 1 game and still make the National Title Game, as that hasn't really been happening in the recent years.

It used to be possible but not really anymore. And eventually their going to screw up and let one of the Mid-Majors in, and we'll all watch them get creamed, because theres no real legitimate way to weed people out.
They could easily do a 'mini-playoff' And only add 2 games to the current list. Or they could expand and allow 16 teams to make it to the post-season, either way. A team would then have to beat 3 Solid teams to be crowned National Champion.

4 BCS Tournament Games 8 Teams
2 BCS Semi-Final Games 4 Teams
1 BCS Title Game for Nat. Champ

The 8 game tournament wouldn't have worked this year. BSU would have been left out and I'd question the validity of any tournament where a team could be undefeated and not qualify. The only way a post season playoff happens is if it goes to 16 teams. That would mean that all 11 conference champions (that's the right, the Sun Belt champion would be part of the playoff) and 5 at larges. I think that dilutes the importance of the regular season and also extends the season an additional 4 games for teams that make it all the way. That's a lot to ask with the demands on these kids already and the fact that those playoffs would almost exclusively occur during finals and their christmas break.

The other consideration is the money. If a 16 team playoff made as much sense to the BCS conferences as the current setup it would already be in place. The fact of the matter is that you couldn't have 4 weeks of neutral site games so at least the first two weeks and very likely the first 3 weeks would need to be at the higher seed's stadium. That means major lost revenue compared to what the bowls currently net and it would also have a significant impact on the local economies where these bowls take place.

Thesifer
01-14-2010, 01:19 AM
The 8 game tournament wouldn't have worked this year. BSU would have been left out and I'd question the validity of any tournament where a team could be undefeated and not qualify. The only way a post season playoff happens is if it goes to 16 teams. That would mean that all 11 conference champions (that's the right, the Sun Belt champion would be part of the playoff) and 5 at larges. I think that dilutes the importance of the regular season and also extends the season an additional 4 games for teams that make it all the way. That's a lot to ask with the demands on these kids already and the fact that those playoffs would almost exclusively occur during finals and their christmas break.

The other consideration is the money. If a 16 team playoff made as much sense to the BCS conferences as the current setup it would already be in place. The fact of the matter is that you couldn't have 4 weeks of neutral site games so at least the first two weeks and very likely the first 3 weeks would need to be at the higher seed's stadium. That means major lost revenue compared to what the bowls currently net and it would also have a significant impact on the local economies where these bowls take place.

Well that's fine and all if you don't want a playoff, thinking that (although the none FBS schools do a playoff) would hurt the students. Then we'll just never had a team like BSU making the National Championship game. If they had their chance to play at least two solid Top teams and won, I'd consider them legit. Otherwise, I feel they'll get there and end up like Cinci this year against Florida. Getting slammed.

Everyone thinks they're some golden because they beat overranked Oklahoma in a BCS bowl. If they had beat Overranked OU and gone on to beat someone else after that, instead of the massive scoring horrible defense game, then I might have agreed they had a right to play for the NT.

ray
01-14-2010, 05:00 AM
Everyone thinks they're some golden because they beat overranked Oklahoma in a BCS bowl. If they had beat Overranked OU and gone on to beat someone else after that, instead of the massive scoring horrible defense game, then I might have agreed they had a right to play for the NT.

Easy solution for BSU. For all the non-conference games, go schedule teams like Ohio State, Florida, Tenny, Texas, OU, VaTech, etc. Playing ranked teams during the regular season is a very easy way to get BCS points up.

VTGreg
01-14-2010, 05:55 AM
Well that's fine and all if you don't want a playoff, thinking that (although the none FBS schools do a playoff) would hurt the students. Then we'll just never had a team like BSU making the National Championship game. If they had their chance to play at least two solid Top teams and won, I'd consider them legit. Otherwise, I feel they'll get there and end up like Cinci this year against Florida. Getting slammed.

Everyone thinks they're some golden because they beat overranked Oklahoma in a BCS bowl. If they had beat Overranked OU and gone on to beat someone else after that, instead of the massive scoring horrible defense game, then I might have agreed they had a right to play for the NT.

BSU is playing Oregon St and VT next season. They'll also have a very high preseason ranking based on their performance this year and the fact they return 21 of 22 starters. If they go undefeated next year they stand a very good chance of playing for the national championship.

Thesifer
01-14-2010, 01:27 PM
Easy solution for BSU. For all the non-conference games, go schedule teams like Ohio State, Florida, Tenny, Texas, OU, VaTech, etc. Playing ranked teams during the regular season is a very easy way to get BCS points up.


Last I heard they were trying, and no 'real' teams would take them.

VT is about the only one on their list next year I consider a worthwhile game. I haven't seen steady strong showing from Oregon State to merit that one. Maybe if it were Oregon they've been decent the last few years. OState has been.. "Ok"

I'm not believing the hype about the nasty blue field team just yet.

Yossarian
01-15-2010, 08:43 PM
Easy solution for BSU. For all the non-conference games, go schedule teams like Ohio State, Florida, Tenny, Texas, OU, VaTech, etc. Playing ranked teams during the regular season is a very easy way to get BCS points up.
theoretically easy solution...most of the powerhouse schools want nothing to do with them for fear of getting beat.

a lot of big school don't play more than one or two 'hard' out of conference teams. hell, pitt/penn state used to be a HUGE rivalry, but JoPa voided the games cause he'd get beat and we miss out. I would have LOVED to see them play this year

VTGreg
01-16-2010, 04:41 AM
theoretically easy solution...most of the powerhouse schools want nothing to do with them for fear of getting beat.

a lot of big school don't play more than one or two 'hard' out of conference teams. hell, pitt/penn state used to be a HUGE rivalry, but JoPa voided the games cause he'd get beat and we miss out. I would have LOVED to see them play this year

PSU has removed any major out of conference game from their schedule over the past few years. There schedule has been laughable in recent years but I have to hand it to them, they have figured out how they can beat no one and still get BCS at large bids.

Some of the schools are more willing to play the up and comers than others. BSU just has to realize that they are going to have to travel to play the major games (Oregon played at BSU this year) and they aren't necessarily going to get a return home visit. BSU could also change their turf from that god-awful blue. Their turf has as much to do with the perception of the program as their play on the field.

Showtime
01-24-2010, 02:19 AM
the 1st time i read that article i lmao. pete took an inconsistant (unless you count underachieving) program and turned it into a powerhouse. i very much remember the 90's and how bad things were. he has nothin left to prove. only urban meyer commands the kind of respect he does. his hands were being tied and garret wasn't doing anything to inspire confidence or loyalty imo. seattles offer was the biggest he ever got and it came at the right time. he's leaving SC with a top 10 qb and 3 years recruits that any school would take.

let's see what he did:
won 2 almost 3 championships.
dominated the pac10 and the SEC for a decade. pac10 is obvious. why bring up the SEC? because they are considered the powerhouse of NCAA football, and SC regularly whupped whatever SEC team was willing to play them. whupped.
dominated both rivals (notre dame/ucla.
made a signature "pro prep" program that has produced more pros than any other school.
3 heisman winners

the importance of SC football to los angeles is huge especially since we don't have a pro team. the rivalry between SC and Ucla is the biggest in So Cal. in LA you choose or are raised to be on one side or the other. even if you go to another college. if you watch college football, come game day, you root for SC or Ulca. as far as i'm concerned this is the only true sports rivalry in los angeles.

it was a great run and it remains to be seen what the new coach can do with all that talent. pete doesn't owe SC anything. i wish him all the best.

VTGreg
01-24-2010, 04:52 AM
the 1st time i read that article i lmao. pete took an inconsistant (unless you count underachieving) program and turned it into a powerhouse. i very much remember the 90's and how bad things were. he has nothin left to prove. only urban meyer commands the kind of respect he does. his hands were being tied and garret wasn't doing anything to inspire confidence or loyalty imo. seattles offer was the biggest he ever got and it came at the right time. he's leaving SC with a top 10 qb and 3 years recruits that any school would take.

let's see what he did:
won 2 almost 3 championships.
dominated the pac10 and the SEC for a decade. pac10 is obvious. why bring up the SEC? because they are considered the powerhouse of NCAA football, and SC regularly whupped whatever SEC team was willing to play them. whupped.
dominated both rivals (notre dame/ucla.
made a signature "pro prep" program that has produced more pros than any other school.
3 heisman winners

the importance of SC football to los angeles is huge especially since we don't have a pro team. the rivalry between SC and Ucla is the biggest in So Cal. in LA you choose or are raised to be on one side or the other. even if you go to another college. if you watch college football, come game day, you root for SC or Ulca. as far as i'm concerned this is the only true sports rivalry in los angeles.

it was a great run and it remains to be seen what the new coach can do with all that talent. pete doesn't owe SC anything. i wish him all the best.

I don't think anyone doesn't respect what Carroll has done for USC or believes that he owes anything to USC. However, I think the fact that there are numerous recruiting violations that are being investigated and he is leaving after the first season in the past 10 where they were not a top 25 team has brought into question motives.

I also think you undersell USC as program. Yes, in the 90's they were a mediocre program but they are on par with an Oklahoma with regards to history and tradition. Add to that the fact that they are located in LA and they have many built in advantages that help make them successful.

And by the way, USC really only won 1 national championship during Carroll's tenure. :) They didn't have an opportunity to play in the BCS in 2004 when the AP voted them #1.

Showtime
01-24-2010, 03:00 PM
I don't think anyone doesn't respect what Carroll has done for USC or believes that he owes anything to USC. However, I think the fact that there are numerous recruiting violations that are being investigated and he is leaving after the first season in the past 10 where they were not a top 25 team has brought into question motives.

I also think you undersell USC as program. Yes, in the 90's they were a mediocre program but they are on par with an Oklahoma with regards to history and tradition. Add to that the fact that they are located in LA and they have many built in advantages that help make them successful.

And by the way, USC really only won 1 national championship during Carroll's tenure. :) They didn't have an opportunity to play in the BCS in 2004 when the AP voted them #1.

Umm programs been under investigation since bush. Most top schools are from time to time. The team wasn't on it's way down. It was getting better. Imo, he should have started Mustain this year, but was setting up for next season.
Top 25 means nothing. Just gotta win games and this team has the talent to do that.

SC sucked ass in the 90's. Had some great talent, but some terrible coaching. It was a mess and history isn't what fixed it, Carrol did.

Check the records. Very few people disagree with the 2 titles. It's mostly folks who are jealous of the success. :)
BCS is broken. If only there was a playoff system... SC would have 1 or 2 more easily. Don't forget all the bowl game blow outs that SC had. Years people wished would have pitted SC against the eventual "BCS champion".

I am not worried about the program. This is no different than when shaq left the lakers. Might take a few seasons and a new coach or things could start clicking. Now back to the nfl playoffs (featuring so many SC players) and the NBA run.