The Coaching Carousel-With sanctions looming , coaching choices narrowed, Garrett hired a guy they knew, Lane Kiffin (2 1/2 years as HC) and associates Ed Ogeron, and father Monte Kiffin. They came up with a plan to separate the ban on bowls from the 3 annual 10 scholarship loss years. Was that smart? IMO it helped save USC from the real depths intended by the NCAA. In 2010 USC was similar to 2009 with an 8-5 record and 5-4 in conference. 2011 saw a marked improvement with 3rd year QB Barkley in a 10-2 year/ 7-2 in conference. They missed a decent bowl but were 3rd in a 10 team conference losing to both Oregon and Stanford ahead of them. In those two years USC stocked up the roster including 28 recruits in 2011. There were 4 Jucos to spread the size of classes. That was wise, but extended the sanction years. Then in 2012 USC went 6-1, before a 1-5 ending including a bad loss to Georgia Tech in a bowl. Besides some bad play calling USC had lost 3/4ths of its starting D-line from 2011. In 2013 they went 3-2/ 0-2 in conference before Kiffin was fired, rather clumsily, by Haden. In stepped Ed Ogeron, the well liked coach who went 5-2 but made the mistake of losing to both rivals, Notre Dame and UCLA. Haden went to the more proven HC in Steve Sarkisian- 5 Years a HC, 34-29/ 29-21 in Conference. It turned into 2 mistakes. Ogeron being passed over, quit before the bowl game, a bad personal move for him, and Sark had problems. Clay Helton took over for the Bowl win.
Sark had a hereto controlled personal problem imbibing. Something accelerated that…maybe a combo of USC Fan ardor and demands, and/or maybe family problems from the move from Washington. It wasn't good for either Sark or USC. In 2014 he went 9-4/6-3, second in the P2 south. 2015 exploded and he also was fired after his 5th game (3-2/ 1-2) after a totally underwhelming offensive game versus Washington at the Coliseum. For the second straight year Clay was called off the bench to run the team and went 5-4/5-2. Beating UCLA 40-21 was enough to hand him the reins for 2016. it started a disastrous 1-3/ 0-2. Changing the QB in game 4, they finished 9-0 with a great come from behind Rose Bowl win. Why the change? Max Browne is a good guy and a good QB, but Sam Darnold is a wunderkind and showed it. His ability to evade tacklers and make quick decisions changed the dynamics of the USC game. In reality 2016 may have been the last effect of the sanction years as discussed below.
The effect from sanctions: USC had 10 less scholarships, or 30 less over 3 years. The reduced class of freshmen started in 2012 and continued through 2015. This meant reduced class sizes starting in the Freshmen year of 2012. and each of the following 2 years with reduced incoming scholarships added to the prior year so that it has the effect of those smaller classes moving up the class ladder. In both 2014 and 2015 three classes were affected, though the freshman were at full strength in 2015. This was mitigated some from transfers like Stevie T and Silas Redd, and high level walk- ons who got a scholarships under full usage of the 75 scholarship limit (part of the 3 year ban). USC learned how to use red shirts, blue shirts and grey shirts pretty fast. USC had to play freshmen from the start, and while that appealed to talented high schoolers it resulted in the team skewing younger and less experienced and the depth chart lower and lower. The fallout is use of starters on special teams (good and bad), less depth (all bad), teaching players multiple positions (good) to cover up any injuries (bad), and in less tackling in practice to protect against injury. USC fielded as little as 48 players in a game (2 deep w/o special teamers is 44). Red-shirting was less used, which affects class distribution, and physical strength.. And let's face it, stability was zip with the coaching carousel. Some of the players worked under 4 different coaches in their tenure. One effect of lack of depth…in 2012 through2015 we lost 9 games in which we were tied or ahead in the 4th quarter. The W-L for 2010-2016 was still 62-30/42-22.
So what now? Are we through sanctions….not fully. But yes in terms of 85 scholarships. But a preferred level of splits might be 25 incoming, then 20 in each of the three higher classes. That will take a little longer. At QB there is a second year starter in Sam Darnold but people already worry about who's next. Think back at the Pete Carroll era…in his era he had Carson Palmer (first year was spent learning a new system) , Matt Leinhart, John David Booty, Mark Sanchez and Matt Barkley as a freshman. Carson starred in 2002, Matt Leinhart was a great college QB, JD Booty was a little above average, Mark Sanchez had 1 year at the helm and Barkley was a true Freshman. Yet the system and coaches got us a pretty consistent period. Sam looked great in the Rose Bowl, particularly in the 4th where he stood in the pocket and chucked first downs on almost every pass in the comeback. The OLine has less depth with 3 departures but the talent depth is there. The receivers include Josh Imatorbhebhe who is said to be better than TE starter Daniel. The running backs look great. The DL has 2 super freshman. The secondary is solid, as is the LBs. Not to forget a solid coaching staff that can teach up on O, D and ST. They also recruit extraordinarily well. Even with our limited 15 scholarships the team ranking was in the top 10, except for one year (at 20). This year USC could well be a final four contender as in days of Pete.
Sark had a hereto controlled personal problem imbibing. Something accelerated that…maybe a combo of USC Fan ardor and demands, and/or maybe family problems from the move from Washington. It wasn't good for either Sark or USC. In 2014 he went 9-4/6-3, second in the P2 south. 2015 exploded and he also was fired after his 5th game (3-2/ 1-2) after a totally underwhelming offensive game versus Washington at the Coliseum. For the second straight year Clay was called off the bench to run the team and went 5-4/5-2. Beating UCLA 40-21 was enough to hand him the reins for 2016. it started a disastrous 1-3/ 0-2. Changing the QB in game 4, they finished 9-0 with a great come from behind Rose Bowl win. Why the change? Max Browne is a good guy and a good QB, but Sam Darnold is a wunderkind and showed it. His ability to evade tacklers and make quick decisions changed the dynamics of the USC game. In reality 2016 may have been the last effect of the sanction years as discussed below.
The effect from sanctions: USC had 10 less scholarships, or 30 less over 3 years. The reduced class of freshmen started in 2012 and continued through 2015. This meant reduced class sizes starting in the Freshmen year of 2012. and each of the following 2 years with reduced incoming scholarships added to the prior year so that it has the effect of those smaller classes moving up the class ladder. In both 2014 and 2015 three classes were affected, though the freshman were at full strength in 2015. This was mitigated some from transfers like Stevie T and Silas Redd, and high level walk- ons who got a scholarships under full usage of the 75 scholarship limit (part of the 3 year ban). USC learned how to use red shirts, blue shirts and grey shirts pretty fast. USC had to play freshmen from the start, and while that appealed to talented high schoolers it resulted in the team skewing younger and less experienced and the depth chart lower and lower. The fallout is use of starters on special teams (good and bad), less depth (all bad), teaching players multiple positions (good) to cover up any injuries (bad), and in less tackling in practice to protect against injury. USC fielded as little as 48 players in a game (2 deep w/o special teamers is 44). Red-shirting was less used, which affects class distribution, and physical strength.. And let's face it, stability was zip with the coaching carousel. Some of the players worked under 4 different coaches in their tenure. One effect of lack of depth…in 2012 through2015 we lost 9 games in which we were tied or ahead in the 4th quarter. The W-L for 2010-2016 was still 62-30/42-22.
So what now? Are we through sanctions….not fully. But yes in terms of 85 scholarships. But a preferred level of splits might be 25 incoming, then 20 in each of the three higher classes. That will take a little longer. At QB there is a second year starter in Sam Darnold but people already worry about who's next. Think back at the Pete Carroll era…in his era he had Carson Palmer (first year was spent learning a new system) , Matt Leinhart, John David Booty, Mark Sanchez and Matt Barkley as a freshman. Carson starred in 2002, Matt Leinhart was a great college QB, JD Booty was a little above average, Mark Sanchez had 1 year at the helm and Barkley was a true Freshman. Yet the system and coaches got us a pretty consistent period. Sam looked great in the Rose Bowl, particularly in the 4th where he stood in the pocket and chucked first downs on almost every pass in the comeback. The OLine has less depth with 3 departures but the talent depth is there. The receivers include Josh Imatorbhebhe who is said to be better than TE starter Daniel. The running backs look great. The DL has 2 super freshman. The secondary is solid, as is the LBs. Not to forget a solid coaching staff that can teach up on O, D and ST. They also recruit extraordinarily well. Even with our limited 15 scholarships the team ranking was in the top 10, except for one year (at 20). This year USC could well be a final four contender as in days of Pete.
