Pete Carroll: Great Coach, Great Recruiter, or a Great Steaming pile of...
Crossposted on my blog Sports Talk with Rob & Leo: A Westcoast Bias.

Photo Credit: snipestreet dot com for that priceless screen cap
College football starts in less than a week! I can't wait! I was out in LA a few weekends ago visiting family and hanging out at some of my old stomping grounds, including the mighty University of California at Los Angeles (First off, please forgive me if this reads as impersonal. I wrote this on my blog and decided to share it with you all. On with the show)!
As I stood there reminiscing on Bruin Walk at about 9pm on a Friday night, with the Bruin Bear in front of me, Ackerman Student Union behind, and the Wooden Center to my right, a nice wonderful breeeze came through - you've got to understand, living in Phoenix, I haven't felt one of those in a while- and Rod, if you're reading, I still hold that the Valley is just as miserable heatwise as Phoenix; a few degrees here or there doesn't make much of a difference! I digress. Ahem (clearing my throat), where was I? Yes, the breeze. Standing on that beautiful campus had me wondering how this school wasn't a powerhouse in ... everything! Lets see. Undergrad education? Check. Graduate schools? Check. School of Engineering? Check. Anderson Business School of Management? Check. School of Law? Check. School of Medicine and the UCLA Medical Center? Check. Perinnial contenders in Softball, Baseball, Track, Golf, Tennis, Gymnastics, Soccer, Rowing, Water Polo, Volleyball, Swimming, Cross Country? Hey, first university to 100 championships- a definite check. Basketball? Check. Football? Che- uh, wait a second, you said football, right? Well, hmm, not really, not anymore. But we used to be dominant, always in the National Championship hunt every year, right? So what happened-or didn't happen? Or better yet, lets look at the flipside of that coin.
How did a "University" that was nestled in the heart of one of LA's worst crime ridden, drug infested areas (was a vibrant area throughout the history of Los Angeles, but since the 70's, has been the poster child for urban decay. The 80's crack epidemic did little to help the situation. Back to my rant.) become such a powerhouse in football, when a University steeped in tradition, offering one of the best educations in the world, sandwiched between some of the best neighborhoods in world- Bel Air, Beverly Hills, West LA, & Brentwood (Even OJ, the most notorious Trojan in the world, made it out to that side of town eventually!) did not. What makes recruits want to go there instead of here? How did the University of South Central, er, that is, the University of Second Choice, oops I did it again, sorry, The University of Spoiled Children (sorry, I couldn't resist!- for those who are not natives and do not know, USC is a private school whose tuition is somewhere in the neighborhood of a trillion dollars has an interesting student body mixture, comprised of rich kids whose parents money was able to get them into schools when their grades could not, smart kids there on scholarship, and athletes), how did USC become such a powerhouse? The answer to that question is quite loaded, so lets just stick to the sports side of things. In short, the answer would seem to be Pete Carroll (more on that in a minute). Watch out for the jump!
Let me first remind everyone that, as an alumni of the only real university in Los Angeles, my opinion might be slightly biased. Now, on with the show. I don't need to remind anyone of all the success that Petey has enjoyed, but I must say, I'm not impressed...well not entirely. While I am impressed with the empire that he has built in such a short period of time, I still say that he has, dare I say it, UNDERACHIEVED! Pete Carroll is a great recruiter, not a great coach...and a little lucky, too. Let's look into his meteoric rise to fame and power in Los Angeles as I attempt to prove my point.
In 2001, Carroll took over an average USC program (they initially tried for Dennis Erickson, Mike Belotti, & Mike Riley, but could not land any of them) that was floundering under the leadership of Paul Hackett. He assembled an excellent coaching staff which included Norm Chow, the former BYU offensive coordinator who was responsible for mentoring college football greats in his earlier years including Steve Young, Robbie Bosco, and Heisman winner Ty Detmer, and in later years, Philip Rivers, and Heisman winners Carson Palmer & Matt Leinart. His record speaks for itself. In addition, Carroll brought with him his affable personality which heightened his amazing talent for recruiting. Having these two weapons on their side (Chow's ability teamed with Carroll's recruiting), USC was poised for greatness. From 2001- 2003, Carroll brought in the likes of Reggie Bush and Tequila swilling LenDale White & Matt Leinart(Carson Palmer was already in the fold). His ability in recruiting speaks for itself. Just take a look at the recruiting classes he has hauled in over the years (according to rivals.com):
#3 in 2003
#1 in 2004
#1 in 2005
#1 in 2006
#2 in 2007
#8 in 2008
#1 in 2009
With classes filled with Blue chippers like these, it is difficult to criticize his mojo in that arena. But with all of that mojo, where are all of the "real" championships?
Before we continue our discussion on the legacy and greatness of Mr. Carroll, lets first look back into the NCAA history books. In 1998, a defining moment happened for the NCAA: two national champions were crowned. the Michigan Wolverines were deemed the champs by the Associated press (AP), and Nebraska held the title given by the USA Today/ESPN poll (for the record, Michigan would have won that matchup if it were to have ever happened). As a result of the confusion, the BCS, for better or for worse, was born. It was brought forth to eliminate any and all confusion, so that only one team can call themselves national champions (this was agreed to by all of the major conferences, including the Pac-10) at seasons end. Now back to Pete.
Mr. Carroll began coaching at USC during the 2001 college football season, coming off of two seasons of dormancy because he could not regain employment in the pro arena after a lackluster stint with the New England Patriots during which he was criticized for not working hard enough, at least as far as NFL head coaching is concerned. While he has been amazing at recruiting at SC, his coaching resume remains average. During this time of greatness, a time according to many in the media is unrivaled by any other program in history, USC earned ONE national championship. If you didn't hear me the first time, I'll repeat it for you, ONE national championship! If you let them tell the story, you would think that the Trojans are gearing up for their 8th title defense! Some of you might be saying to yourselves, I'm sure they've won more than that? Well, lets look into the record books, shall we. Here's how the National title count shapes up this decade:
Since 2000, Bob Stoops and Oklahoma have taken home a title, LSU 2, one with Nick Saban and one with Les Miles. Florida and Urban Meyer have 2 BCS trophies to polish when they see fit. Miami & Larry Coker have 1, Ohio State & Jim Tressel have one, Texas has one with Mack Brown (over USC), and yes, USC and Pete Carroll have 1...from 5 seasons ago! In addition, all of these programs are perennially in the Top 10 at seasons beginning and end. So why all of the love for SC & Carroll? Well for starters, despite the agreement with the BCS, USC and their followers have tried to horn in on the parties of both Ohio State (2002 BCS champions- FYI, Ohio State was undefeated while USC had 2 losses) and LSU (2003), despite not actually making it to the BSC National Championship Bowl games in either year. They would have tried the same last year, but certain publications couldn't justify moving them back up to the top of the list after losing to Oregon State and tumbling in the rankings while other heavyweights remained strong. In addition, despite the losses to lesser teams, Pete Carroll & his biased media cronies who have all been drinking that special brand of Jim Jones-flavored Kool-Aid, without fail, proclaim the Trojans as the best team in all the land! Well if all it takes is to simply say it and people believe it to be true, then, UCLA too has been the best program of the decade and we were robbed last year by not getting a shot at the 'chip last season despite our 4-8 record!
Now that we have settled the National Championship discussion, lets delve a bit deeper and dissect that lone championship from the Carroll era, or shall I say, the Norm Chow era. There, I've said it! The cat is out of the bag! In spite of his ability to field a NCAA all-star team year in and year out, Carroll has been unable to take his boys back to the promised land since Norm Chow left town (Carroll's ego got in the way of him giving Chow his due credit). When Pete began at USC in '01, he brought with him one of the greatest offensive minds the game has ever known. Coupled with the recruiting efforts of Pete, the Trojans were able to improve quickly. In just two seasons, they found themselves in the National Championship hunt, and by the 2004-2005 season, they landed in the National Championship game. They quickly disassembled the unsuspecting Sooners en route to a 55-19 drubbing, showcasing the perfect marriage between the playcalling/coaching chops of Norm Chow, and the talent on the field assembled by Carroll. Finally, the Trojans had a Championship that they actually earned (if you discount the fact that Reggie Bush was a professional athlete at the time, making more than some NFL rookies) on the field instead of in the media.
Shortly after that victory though, because of irreconcilable differences, Pete & Chow divorced. Chow took the brilliance with him, but Pete kept the kids. The following season, with Chow's holdovers (he coached them and taught them everything that they knew, though they were Pete's recruits), despite the Bush-Push fiasco, the Trojans made it back to the National Championship battlefield, but this time, without General Chow (is anyone else getting hungry?!). In the Rose Bowl, just miles away from their home, in a stadium they supposedly own, the Trojans were neither able to come up with an answer for slowing down Vince Young, nor a drive in response to his game winning touchdown. In just one year, they go from a 55-19 victory against Oklahoma on the other side of the country (Miami, Florida), to a 38-41 loss to Texas in their own backyard. Difference? Chow.
Since his departure, the Trojans have tried hard fouling up every National Championship opportunity they've had, losing to lesser teams every year (didn't Dorrell lose his job for the same reason?)- Oregon State & UCLA in '06, Oregon & Stanford in '07, & Oregon State in '08 (both Oregon schools had great seasons during the year of their respective victories, but comparing the talent level, neither should have been competition). And of course, at season's end, Pete Carroll and the local LA media crown the Trojans as the best team in the land, despite having 2 losses on their record in two of those seasons. Hmmm, I wonder what happens this season after 3 losses (Ohio State, Notre Dame, Cal)?! I'm sure Pete & Plaschke will find some way to spin it.
So where is Mr. Norm Chow now you ask? He's back home in Los Angeles where he belongs, along side a gregarious young head coach with a propensity for recruiting, a talented young quarterback at the helm (Kevin Prince), and a versatile, dynamic, lightning fast running back in Jonathan Franklin. Sound familiar? Not at all. This head guy is capable as both a coach and recruiter, and would never let pride get in the way because he understands the importance/greatness of the Chow. With the new regime in LA, the sky is the limit. Maybe there will be real championships in LA afterall!
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
5 recs |
32 comments
Comments
What's the link to your blog?
Can you share that with us?
by Nestor on Aug 30, 2009 11:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Perfect picture & Poll
That picture you added is classic and pretty much sums up the entire post without having to read it! The blog I have was just started about two months ago with a friend of mine, and talks about anything related to sports (any of my Bruin stuff, I bring over here). My handle is “robbstarzz”. Feel free to check it out.
by westwood78 on Aug 30, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cool
Are you planning to write a lot of UCLA stuff on it? If you are let me know. Happy to put Bruin related blogs on our blogroll of course. The more Bruin voices are out there in the blogosphere, the better.
by Nestor on Aug 30, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
definitely skewed towards the bruin side of things...
My first post there was the highly hopeful 8-4 post. More will come throughout the football and basketball seasons.
by westwood78 on Aug 30, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good read.
I argued the same point on my Myspace CFB group. But the fanboys are simply too enamored with South Central’s overinflated Rose Bowl Victories. Which is sad. They (Spoiled Children) are seriously counting the Rose Bowls as huge accomplishments to be considered on par with National Championships. Sad what a little bit of that kool aid will do to you if you’re not careful.
A coach is someone who can give correction without causing resentment. John Wooden
by MexiBruin on Aug 30, 2009 11:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
I had been arguing myself for years and finally decided to put it on paper to see how it looks. Turns out, its not that impressive. Good, but definitely not great. And if you factor in all of the scandals and cheating, is it even good?
by westwood78 on Aug 30, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jim Jones and his crew
used Flavor-Aid. It’s funny how it has become “Kool-Aid” over the years. Makes sense though because Kool-Aid is better known.
Troy will fall.
by Bruins102NCAA on Aug 30, 2009 1:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
interesting fact
flavor-aid huh? Nice to know.
by westwood78 on Aug 30, 2009 9:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I need some help
I see the national championship debate differently, but I’m willing to reconsider with a fact based argument.
First, everything I’ve read about the BCS since its inception is that it is a system to TRY and match the two best teams in the nation, through a formula whose output is the Final BCS Standings. That doesn’t mean it has chosen the best team in the nation.
Second, the only thing I’ve seen that gives it legitimacy as a “national championship” game is that the Coach’s Poll is obligated to make the winner of this game its “national champion.” The AP doesn’t automatically crown the winner of this game as their “national champion.” It seems to me that unless the NCAA commits to this game as the national championship game or, at the least, both major polls consider it the national championship game, then it’s not THE national championship game.
Therefore, since SUC won the national championship according to one of the two major organizations that crown a national champion in 2003, I feel they legitimately earned the title of co-national champion with LSU.
by bornagainbruin on Aug 30, 2009 1:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I have to disagree
The problem here is there hasn’t been a recognized and final authority on who exactly is the national champion. If we take the method they used in the leather helmet days of yore, Princeton and Yale would have, like what, 24 a piece? After that, the Associated Press poll, amongst others, wasn’t much help either: There are more titles claimed by schools than there are years. In other words, in years when there is no consensus champion, some schools do there own thing and count national championships based on winning one of the several polls.
That is what the whole national championship game is about. It is an attempt to resolve most of these problems. u$c* got screwed out of the 2003 game? Well Auburn, who was undefeated that year, got screwed out of the 2004 game. $c* likes to say that they had beat up on Auburn the last time they played but you know what? It changes from year to year and that argument is bunk. They should have played and as someone else pointed out, Peaty wasn’t clamoring for Auburn to play his squad that year. See I don’t believe in momentum as a factor in the NC race. It’s supposed to reward the hypothetical best squad in the country, not the hypothetical best squad at the time of the NC game. To me, they need to look at the whole season. If $c* loses in week 2 to someone weak, they should never get into the game because they were not composed as a champion should be week in and week out.
The fact of the matter is that Cheatie Peatie has only raised that crystal football above his head one time speak volumes about him as a coach. He’s a great recruiter and pretty good at the rah rah crap. That only takes you so far and they always lose one or two games despite being labeled the “greatest team of all time” every freakin year. The 2004 crystal football is in Baton Rogue. They did not make two and give Peatie one. It’s his fault that he can’t let it go and be the bigger man. We know he’s not. If he was so great and had such confidence in his abilities, for Christ’s sake, he has the best talent in the country, why doesn’t he just let that one go and get another one? He’s not going to that’s why and he is a selfish person as we have seen from the Mark Sanchez incident.
Sorry if I sound a bit gruff, this is a sticky subject for me and I don’t mean to sound like a jerk.
Troy will fall.
by Bruins102NCAA on Aug 30, 2009 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The BCS is just an "attempt", as you said, to find a consensus champion
I’ve been convinced for a long time that Peatie is a cheater, a snake and a whiner. So, I totally agree with your comments about him.
However, I’m not convinced that without a playoff system the only legitimate claim to a national championship is a pretty crystal football. You said the BCS is "SUPPOSED to reward the hypothetical best squad in the country." I agree, and it does. The reward is the Coaches’ Poll’s national championship. Take a look at the Crystal Ball Trophy, it says "The Coaches’ Trophy". It does not say "Playoff Champion", or "NCAA Champion" or even "consensus champion," just "Coaches’ Poll National Champion."
Also, you said the BCS system "is an ATTEMPT to resolve MOST of these problems," and I agree. It’s a nice attempt, and it usually works out correctly. However, we are still forced to rely on the TWO legitimate college football polls. The BCS is a nice "attempt" to find a consensus national champion, but that’s all it is, an "attempt".
Hey, I’m willing to be convinced otherwise, but I haven’t seen anything that convinces me that the Coaches’ Poll with it’s pretty trophy is the only legitimate championship.
by bornagainbruin on Aug 31, 2009 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two Polls
Yes and only one of those polls can be relied upon. I don’t trust the Coaches Poll giving all the politicking that can go on. I trust it even less now that Spurier admitted he does not fill it out and leaves that to an assistant. I have my doubts about the AP poll as well—I think that it too is highly politicized. Besides, just think about how the media has inflated $c* over the years. I think a championship game was in order to at least to give the winner a very good claim on the title and should be the end all beat all.
I’m not sure what you are advocating, but I think you would rather have the poll system or a more extensive playoff. However, the problem is that what most bowl organizers point to, that is money. These games bring in a lot of money to the schools and the people who organize them. In addition to that, many people rely on the bowl games to generate dollars in tourism. I think the main concern is losing this if we go to a playoff system.
I also think that the half-measure that is proposed, a bowl plus 1 title game is lacking as well. The major problem with this is that it solves nothing. Take last year for instance, Florida and Utah 1 and 2 respectively, with suc at 3. If we had a plus 1, Florida and Utah play. What happens when Florida blows out Utah? suc screams that they should have been in the game. This was a distinct possibility of happening last year and I think every year.
I have to tell you, I’m in favor of just leaving it the way it is and recognizing the crystal football as the final arbiter. There are too many teams and too many financial interests to think that a massive overhaul of the system is going to take place anytime soon.
Troy will fall.
by Bruins102NCAA on Aug 31, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bruins102NCAA
My point is that the BCS system has done nothing to end the 2 poll system, and therefore, there are still two national champions each year. What the BCS system has done is make it much less likely that the two polls will have different national champions, as evidenced by the fact that the polls have the same national champion in 9 of its first 10 years in existence. Let me further explain.
All the BCS game does is choose the Coaches’ National Champion, and hopefully, through the process, it is able to match up the two best teams in the nation as determined by some mathematical formula that seems to change every year. So, all it really does is choose “a” champion, not “the” champion. As long as we don’t have a playoff system, then we are forced to rely on the polls, and I’ve not seen any evidence that would suggest the Coaches’ Poll is more important or influential than the AP. Heck, even you said you don’t trust the Coaches’ Poll. So, let me ask you this question: why would you consider the “crystal football as the final arbiter” if all it does is decide the winner of a poll that you yourself “don’t trust”???
by bornagainbruin on Aug 31, 2009 8:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I would rather see it settled on the field and not merely by polls. IMO, the BCS is the closest we have to that because it uses the polls (including the AP & the coaches & 5 other reputable computer polls) and combines that with losses and strength of sched to determine which two should battle it out on the field. I agree that a 4 team playoff would be nice (anyone outside the top 4 probably doesn’t have a leg to stand on as far as arguing that they belong in the championship tourney), but at least we have a game that is played that is selected by both the AP & Coaches poll. Besides, I think I trust the coaches poll (despite Spurrier shirking his duties) more than a poll of journalists who have wet dreams of $C. How many votes did Plaschke get?!
by westwood78 on Sep 2, 2009 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Four team playoff
I used to believe, like you, that a four team playoff was sufficient to be legitimate for determining a national champion. But then last year happened. An undefeated Boise State ended up NINTH in the final BCS Poll. This is a problem because I don’t believe a playoff that excludes an undefeated Boise State is really legitimate. Therefore, I dream about either a 16 team playoff or an 8 team playoff that includes undefeateds like Boise State.
by bornagainbruin on Sep 3, 2009 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I used to be in favor of the playoff system
Until the 2005 NFL football season wherein the Pittsburgh Steelers came into the Playoffs as a wild card with a 11-5 record and came in 2nd in the AFC North!
I’m a big fan of the Steelers from my early days as a child watching Mean Joe Greene Coke commercials and watching them beat the LA Rams in the superbowl, but even I had to admit, they were not the best team in the League that year. They essentially won the Superbowl for beating the Indianapolis Colts in the Divisional Playoffs.
The only thing a playoff would determine is the best team at the end of the season. Period. Not to mention that while we currently have debates about the 3rd team in the NC Picture, by extending the playoffs to say 4 teams or 8 teams, all you are really doing is pushing the debate to who got screwed out of the 4th or 8th spot.
Many people feel USC got robbed by being excluded from the 2003 NC game, but few remember that before Cheat Carroll and their rocket like resurrection, USC was known for scheduling patsies for their Out of Conference games. in 2003, it was their strength of schedule that brought them down. They responded by scheduling Virginia Tech the next year, and have miraculously listed at least one large marquee opponent every year since then even though we are told these schedules are made years in advance. Hooey. The day the NCAA slams USC and returns them to mediocrity you will see them return to their ways of scheduling soft OOC opponents to protect their overall historic W-L records.
A coach is someone who can give correction without causing resentment. John Wooden
by MexiBruin on Aug 31, 2009 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what a playoff system and democracy have in common
Winston Churchill once said that “democracy is the worst form of governmet, except all the others that have been tried.” I’d submit the same is true of determining a single champion, and that is that a playoff system is far superior to polls and mathematical formulas. I agree with you, MexiBruin, that it’s a shame a playoff system doesn’t really capture who the best team was all year long, but at least a champion is determined on the field. There’s something about demonstrating what you have on a field, either put up or shut up, that to me makes a playoff system far superior to the crap we have now.
I’d like to see a 16 team playoff system. Sure, the 17th team will bitch and moan about not getting in the mix, but I don’t think the 17th team would ever have an argument that they were the best team in the nation. If you look at the NCAA tourney, the 66th team always bitches and moans about not being in the mix, but notice they never bitch and moan about being the best team in the country. What’s my point? Someone’s always going to bitch and moan, but that doesn’t mean it’s a legitimate flaw in determining the national champion. If we went by the Final BCS Standings, then an undefeated team (Boise) would have been left out of a 8 team playoff, which is honestly why I dream of a 16 team playoff system.
by bornagainbruin on Aug 31, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Churchill was wrong.
in that he was incapable of experiencing every form of government ever used by mankind. He could only ever be aware of those forms of governments studied in Euro-Centric Western traditions. I submit that human civilization was perfected in Native American societies. Which BTW contained elements of Anarchy, Democracy, Communism, and Theocracy; and worked. No other form of government has ever produced the same amount of Citizen Involvement AND did not tax or imprison it’s people to do so.
As for the playoffs, the college football season is one long playoff. There is nothing like the ‘king of the hill’ nature of College Football wherein as soon as a team loses, they know their chances of playing much less winning a Championship is hanging by a thread. And, a second loss cements that fact. At the end of the day the only thing a playoff system accomplishes is give the best teams in the country a second shot.
The two fixes the BCS system needs is a way to extend the undefeated Utahs, TCUs and Boise States a shot at the Brass Ring. And, better match ups outside the NC game. Everybody in the country wanted to see Georgia square up against South Central last year (2007?) and instead they fed Hawaii to UGA and Illinois to SC.
A coach is someone who can give correction without causing resentment. John Wooden
by MexiBruin on Sep 1, 2009 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In that case
there should be a rule that teams like Florida should never be allowed, ever again, to play teams like The Citadel. That is a mockery. Or if they play them, it should not count, it should be like an exhibition game.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Sep 2, 2009 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What the goal here?
Isn’t the goal to determine the best team at the end of the season?
by 10amla on Sep 7, 2009 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The goal is to generate revenue
I have no evidence here, just assumptions. There is a lot of money being generated the way the system is now. I assume that enough of the institutions who pull money out of this revenue-generating machine (which is not limited to schools) have determined that their share of the pie will be smaller with a play-off.
Just my opinion. No evidence. My opinion is supported by the fact that certain institutions appear to be able to buy off discipline. If they can buy off discipline, they can buy out of a playoff, which I assume they won’t want because it gives them more opportunities to lose.
by Fox 71 on Sep 7, 2009 9:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Garbage
As I said in the post, ALL of the major conferences signed and agreed to the BCS formula/Bowl system, with the winner of the National Champion game being crowned the champs. The Pac-10 agreed and all of the teams in the Pac agreed as well. That is the end of the story. Seriously. Besides, USC had ample opportunity to dispute the merits of the system back in 1998…and, I have yet to see the footage of Petey throwing his crystal ball to the ground and denouncing the trophy, the game, and the BCS as a whole as a fraud. When you come across that Youtube clip, please forward it to me; I’d love to see it. But instead, we see Petey mugging for the camera & crying with Leinart like it was their first championship or something. Oh wait…
The BCS. Is it the best system in the world. No. Its what we have, and until it changes, we’ll keep dealing with it and keep recognizing the winner as the champs. If you think you truly deserve to be in the game, don’t lose. It’s as simple as that. If you give them ammunition and let the arguement boil down to whose loss was worse or which loss came latest, then you have to deal with the consequences. Period. It’s one of the many things that make college football so much better than the NFL. Every game counts. There’s no “we’ll get em next week”, or “wait until playoffs”. The chase for the title is worlds longest single elimination tourney. It’s why we’ve been frothing at the mouth since before National signing day in February. We can’t wait to see how much closer our boys have come to being a part of that chase once again. So, I’m wondering if your logic can also crown the Patriots as Superbowl champs last year, because many publications believe that they were the best team last year and had they been in the NFC, they would have gone all the way. Imperfect system I guess. But it’s the only one we’ve got, so its the one I’ll honor until a better one comes along.
by westwood78 on Aug 30, 2009 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Call it what you like, but you are far from convincing
All the major conferences did agree to the BCS formula/bowl system, as you pointed out. However, the major conferences did not agree that the winner would be recognized as their national champion, as you first sentence may or may not be saying. What gives the BCS legitimacy as a national championship game is that the Coaches Poll (one of two major college football polls) agreed to make the winner of that game their national champion. It’s not THE national champion. This is why the Crystal football trophy says "THE COACHES’ TROPHY" on it. The game itself only determines the national champion according the The Coaches’ Poll (of course, the outcome also influences the AP Poll).
So, if you want to make the argument that The Coaches’ Poll is the only national champion that counts, then it seems you should make the argument that the Coaches’ Poll is more legitimate than the AP Poll.
I, for one, think both polls are equally legitimate. If I had to pick one, though, I’d say the AP is more legitimate. Why? Because the Coaches’ poll can’t choose the team they feel is the best team. They are contractually obligated to pick the winner of a game that may or may not have their top team playing in that game. As we all know, it is a game whose participants are decided by a formula, not a playoff system. Obviously, the base assumption here is that there is no post-season playoff system. In fact, that base assumption to all this is so obvious that I’m surprised you thought the Patriots/NFL was a good analogy. It isn’t.
Look you can call my comments "garbage" if you like, but please back it up with some convincing data instead of just referring to an opinion of yours from an earlier post.
by bornagainbruin on Aug 31, 2009 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't mean to offend you but...
the agruement that you use as far as what words are printed on the trophy and which one of the two polls is the most legitimate sounds to me that you have taken one too many of Dr. Anderson’s Sociology courses! Let’s call it “The Deconstruction on the Myth of a National Champion”. The bottom line to me as far as Pete goes is, he won the trophy the following year and he embraced that as a championship because he won that trophy. He did not win it the year previous. Done.
But wait, theres more. Every coach and every player at big name programs have been busting their asses since January to gear up for the season that might land them in that game. The goal of EVERYONE in college football is to get into THAT GAME and the polls, as they currently stand, are only a means of getting there (they are factored into the equation, afterall). No one says, we need to be at the top of the AP poll by seasons end, they say, we need to get into the BCS title game in January. The Ap arguement is an afterthought after you haven’t landed your team into the game of choice. I guarantee you, before the season started, Carroll wasn’t thinking, “Screw the BCS, I just want to be #1 in the AP!” Not likely. EVERYONE wants to be in that game. They train all year to be in that game. They work long hours while their wives and children are at home to get their team to that game. They go through two-a-days in the hot, sweltering August sun, away from their parents to be in that game. They forgo their senior years in high school, skipping prom to make it to spring ball for a chance of getting their team to that game. If the actions & efforts of every college football player and coach in the NCAA don’t help to legitimize the system in your eyes, I don’t think anything will. Just my two cents.
by westwood78 on Aug 31, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no idea who Dr Anderson is, so congrats, you got me on that one
You say your “bottom line” is that that the Coaches’ trophy is legitimate because Cheatie “embraced that as a championship because he won that trophy.” True, but Cheatie also embraced the AP championship trophy the same year he won the Coaches’ trophy. So, using your “bottom line” logic, both polls are worthy.
But wait, there’s more. Of course, everyone wants to play in the BCS Title game. Afterall, you can’t be the Coaches’ National Champion or be a consensus national champion without winning in that game. So, just because everyone is striving to be in that game and win it doesn’t in itself give the Coaches’ Poll sole legitimacy in determining a national champion, nor does it make it even more relevant than the AP. Obviously, it does make it the most important game of the year.
And of course, nobody says they “just want to be #1 in the AP!” Then again, nobody says they “just want to be #1 in the Coaches’ Poll,” either. I’m sure LSU would have wanted be #1 in the AP that year, too.
by bornagainbruin on Aug 31, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Further illustration of Carroll incompetence...
this post was left by a friend of mine on my blog:
“Let’s not forget that Carroll’s coaching directly cost them that Rose Bowl to Texas. Not having Bush on the field on 4th and 1 is unforgivable. And why on Earth was no linebacker ever assigned to shadow Vince Young? Incompetence!
You point out that the Trojans of this decade should be thought of like the late 80s Mets and Oakland As: we should all be lamenting that they did not become dynasties. You are right: that is not how it is portrayed in the media.
My ND alum brother must be salivating at the thought of a true freshman Trojan quarterback. He remembers well how Jimmy Claussen did right out the gate."
by westwood78 on Aug 30, 2009 9:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Am I missing Something Here
There are a lot of things we can bash the u$c for, but their coach’s capabilities is definitely not one.
I am not sure we can knock another coach that has won 1 BCS and 1 AP championship, 7 Pac10 titles in a row, contless Rose Bowls and had 2 Heisman trophy winners, not to mention all the coaches he has placed around the league.
Let;s stop being ridiculous and hope our team takes care of our business this year so we can have some similar success in the near future.
by Bruin4Ev on Aug 31, 2009 4:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't get me wrong
I don’t think he’s a bad coach, I just don’t think he is a great coach. My reasons are simple: The first being that I hate that football team. I mean, I don’t really expect a Trojan to come here and say “Well sir, you changed my mind with your arguments.” This isn’t going to happen nor do I expect it to. However, my arguments are based on an alternate reality than those—especially of the media—that constantly anoint them the “greatest team of all time” seemingly every year. That being said, I appreciate this debate immensely and if I sound disrespectful to anyone, I apologize.
As far as a more analytical arguments are concerned, I would point to Peatie’s record. Year after year they have had loses that defy logic. As Westwood78 points out, there have been calls made by Peatie that have been baffling to the causal observer. I can point to the recent Oregon St. game where Peatie really did not stop Rodgers even though he had one of the best defense ever. That is not arguable given that so many of these players are now in the pros. Also, “going for it” on every 4th and short opportunity either shows incredible arrogance or stupidity. Not sure how this breaks down statistically but I feel that anytime you go for it and don’t make it, you are diminishing the confidence your offense has. I have noticed in recent years “big-balls (on chin)” Peat has cut back on going for it on 4th down.
The next analytical argument, and the most telling in my mind, would be that Peat has had the best talent in the game but still has only won one BCS trophy. Year in and year out, he has had the best recruiting classes. Peat sits right smack in the middle of the greatest area of raw football talent in the nation and for years hasn’t had much competition for recruits. I don’t think that Florida has had even near this amount of talent and they have won 2 NCs in 4 years. That’ s great coaching.
Lastly, I point to his playing hard and fast with the rules. It is quite obvious that he pushes the rules of the game in order to win. He even admitted this himself. Also, look at all the SCandals and in particular the Reggie Bu$h SCandal. It’s a definite advantage when you don’t have to comply with the rules and your team runs wild. Do we honestly think that their academic standards are all that high or enforced on the team? I don’t think so. Not having to worrying about making the grade would take a heap of anxiety off any student athlete. I do not factor this into the calculus that would make him a great coach for purely ethical reasons.
If he was truly a great coach, and I mean this in a “Xs and Os” way, he would have been better then he was in the pros. He was a mediocre pro coach. That’s because pro coaches do not have to worry about recruits and really don’t have to motivate professionals. That is the nature of being a professional, you shouldn’t have to be motivated because you are being paid to be your best.
What makes him good? He’s a good recruiter. He can motivate his team (although I have noticed that his teams lose focus an awful lot throughout the season). These are highly important to the college game, I will grant that. But as I have said before, he is sitting right atop the greatest amount of talent in the country and was, for many years, king of the roost. Why shouldn’t he have been able to assemble the talent that he had? Let’s see how he does with CRN giving him the precious competition that he speaks of. As we have seen with the Peat’s Poodle incident, he resents it greatly.
Bottom-line for me on Peat’s grades as coach:
Recruiter: B+
Motivator: A
X and O coach: B-
Troy will fall.
by Bruins102NCAA on Aug 31, 2009 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does crime pay?
Let’s hope it’s only for a short while longer. Speaking of which, where can I find the link to the history of U$C infractions during the course of the Petey era?
by DoubleTroubleBruin on Sep 1, 2009 9:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you Double Trouble
The Steaming Pile of $hit part is the criminal enterprise that Cheatey Petey heads. I would be ashamed to root for a program that engages in, even encourages, this type of behavior. What a travesty.
by waters96 on Sep 12, 2009 9:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 



















