USC Coach Lane Kiffin decided not to participate in the USA Today coaches'… (Luis Sinco / Los Angeles…)
Which of the following is the worst?
A. A hapless coach leading a group of very talented USC football players to a 7-5 record and the Cow Chip Bowl.
B. A hopeless coach who sprints 40 yards down the sidelines to call timeout just before his team appears to score a touchdown that they don't get back.
C. A clueless coach who, when short yardage is needed for a first down or touchdown, repeatedly calls for a run directly at a Heisman Trophy candidate.
D. A witless coach who, when he does call a play on forth and goal other than a try up the middle, has the ball thrown to a player who has caught fewer passes in a season than several of the other players on the field catch in a single game.
E. The worst TV sports broadcaster in history mumbling, stumbling and bumbling regarding the SC fiasco on national television.
F. All of the above.
In the immortal words of Karl Rove, "All the results aren't in yet. It's just too close to call."
Monte Kiffin resigned to save his son's job. Lane Kiffin should have resigned to save USC's program.
Despite the interceptions and some miscues, freshman Max Wittek found his rhythm, displayed remarkable resolve under pressure, and played more than "good enough" to defeat Notre Dame. Unfortunately, his coach was not equal to the task.
Imagine my surprise when reading last Monday's "Immaturity costs USC" article and finding it was about the basketball team.
The dismal 2012 USC season is the product of many things, including the lack of proper coaching, inadequate game preparation, total inability to adjust game plans on the fly, lack of a shred of tactical creativity, apparent lack of ability to motivate and or discipline players and last but not least, a season full of consistent bonehead play-calling on both sides of the ball.
How could such a performance and complete misuse of resources deserve anything but immediate dismissal? Retaining Lane Kiffin in 2013 is tantamount to rewarding failure. Does anyone really believe things will change with Kiffin in charge in 2013? It is time for Kiffin to turn in the keys and make room for a real head coach. Jack Del Rio, anyone?
Robert J. Gagliano
I thought Lane Kiffin was supposed to be an offensive genius. Has he convinced himself he is so brilliant that he doesn't even need to look at game film? His brilliant plan with first and goal is to adopt the plan that failed for Stanford? Is there an expiration date on that 150% job guarantee?
Pat Haden was quoted as saying, "Coaches live and die with wins, but athletic directors look at everything."
Does Mr. Haden look at the possibility of declining football revenues that subsidize all USC sports, more 7-5 seasons with second-tier payout bowl appearances, a half-empty '90s-era-like Coliseum, and losing to Notre Dame and UCLA in the same season? If this happens, I wonder how long USC President Nikias will be 150% committed to his athletic director?
Against Notre Dame, Lane Kiffin showed the nation what Trojans fans and alumni had been witnessing all season: He is not head coach material. He is a great recruiter and a good offensive mind but he is not ready for big boy football. At the end of the game, Lane practically ran out the clock with his horrible play-calling and clock management. As in the previous 11 games, he could not make second-half adjustments. He was outcoached in almost all of the games this season, even some of the games he won.
After the Notre Dame victory, I feel compelled to write and express my dissatisfaction. It's one thing to be a disgruntled USC fan, but couldn't you find one thing positive to print about the Fighting Irish? Your articles made it sound like their 12-0 record was pure luck and that they really don't deserve their No. 1 ranking.
Great to see the new BCS playoff system working so well. Alabama and Georgia in one semifinal, Notre Dame in the other. Just not sure who Notre Dame is playing.
T.J. Simers once again embarrassed himself and his newspaper with his conduct at Jim Mora's news conference after UCLA's loss to Stanford last week. He thinks he is cute and edgy, but trying to take over the event because he didn't get the answer he wanted was simply childish. You don't get your own news conference, T.J. Nobody would be interested.
Not gentle on Ben
I'm not saying Ben Howland is a bad coach, but maybe, just maybe, Howland is not the best man to head the prestigious UCLA program. It's obvious that Ben is not recruiting the proper player to fit his unique coaching style. Or that players, once they enroll at UCLA, find Howland's methods, to say the least, odd or peculiar.