Anyone that follows CFB (or sport for that matter) understand that it’s just business. One party is going to feel like they are on the short end of the stick. It is what it is. But while some are upset by Smith’s leaving, I believe it has less to do with losing him as a coach and more to do with HOW he left. Zero remorse. Zero words on the difficulty of leaving his Alma mater that gave him a chance as a walk on and as a first time head coach. He doesn’t owe OSU anything. But if legacy and/or OSU mattered to him, he tainted it forever, and it could have been avoided. How you go about things MATTERS.
He DOES owe OSU a decent exit. He DID owe OSU a way better Civil War performance. That was inexcusable that he didn't put his head and heart into that game for his players. I'll never forget or forgive him for that.
I don't agree that he owes OSU nothing. He doesn't legally and he's under no obligation. However, for the reasons you provided, he owes the OSU community ethically and morally. The way he left really was horrible, and as a human being, who worked with and for many amazing people and plied his craft in front of tens of thousands of loyal fans, he does owe something. An apology. Preferably full of sincerity and contrition.
Hey John, I’ve thought about this a lot. I grew up watching Oregon football, my Dad was a groundskeeper at Oregon when I was born and my first public event (outside of church) was a football game at Hayward field. We had family plan tickets for all the years I was growing up after they were first introduced at Autzen and we went to games during the Fouts/Moore days and when Norval Turner played after Fouts (my friends and I called him Norval “Turnover”). In the early seventies you could run up and down the bleachers during the game in the corners because the seats were so empty. We were in the west end zone as an extended family with my uncles and cousins when Kenny Wheaton got his famous interception against the Huskies. Iwas proud of the Ducks when they stuck with Rich Brooks even though he didn’t go to his first bowl game until over 10 years as being a coach. I loved the fact Mike Bellotti stayed with the Ducks even when USC and others came calling.
I miss those days, they were my Ducks. Now I can only afford to go to one game a year and usually for a lesser non-conference game. Going to the lengths they have to win has cost a lot in many ways….
Don’t get me wrong, I love how they are doing, and Lanning seems like he’s gonna stay. I like the fact he is bringing in the football players and coaches from previous generations. It’s easier to connect with the team again. He seems to be a genuine guy and I like that…it seems like Oregon I guess.
Still, I miss being able to go the stadium on game days. Just another sign of how much the entire state has changed I guess.
Any, I’m glad I’m a subscriber….this was a good piece.
Bob of it makes you feel better…all programs have lost their way in the same sense. Blame the networks for turning university athletic programs into brands that are valued only for football
Love this tribute to Sen Courtney mixed in with the loyalty theme. He gave his heart and soul to work on behalf of Oregonian’s, for a mere pittance in pay compared to the football coaches in Oregon. He was the epitome of loyal.
As a long-time Oregonian not of Courtney's party, I grew to appreciate his bipartisan approach very much. Peter will be missed, and may he rest in peace and family be comforted. He is one of the greats from the Silent Generation. Up until 2019, I don't think Senate President Courtney ever brought major legislation to a vote without at least some Republican support. This is noteworthy because he did this even when D's had supermajorities. I respected that an awful lot. Kate Brown and Tina Kotek unfortunately tarnished this approach when they told Courtney either leave your job or push through non-bipartisan cap-and-trade taxes. Peter hated that. This was when the R walk out then occurred, and we all were diminished over that. More Courtney's is what we need.
John, excellent and truthful article. As a man who was born into one of the most impoverished areas in the country, West Virginia, and who landed in Oregon by chance in 1968 I am in the court of late Senator Courtney. Coming to Oregon gave me hope that I could escape my probable life of hopelessness. I am loyal to Oregon and what it stands for. Being here around successful people encouraged me to get educated beyond high school, I achieved a graduate degree and have had a life of gratitude. There is something about Oregon and it's people that represents the best of humanity. I'm all in with Oregon.
Thanks for the article, John. This topic has been on my mind for awhile. For the past 40 or so summers, I’ve brought college football magazines like Phil Steele. Lindy and Athon. On our annual trip to Sunriver, I would enjoy sitting by the pool, looking at all the Pac 12 teams. As a Beaver Believer I was full of hope for more wins and bowl possibilities. Last week, I was at the supermarket and I saw Lindy’s “Big Ten” magazine on the news stand. I had no interest picking it up, let alone purchasing it. I know my little boycott doesn’t make a dent into the greed of college football but I felt good walking right past it. The last thing I wanted to read about is Rutgers, Maryland and Michigan State…. No thank you. I made a commitment to follow and support the Beavs the next couple of seasons. The current athletes and coaches deserve it.
You would like to think loyalty matters. Most, if not all of us, have been "disloyal" at some point in our lives, either moving on with girl- or boyfriends, or moving up the corporate ladder to advance our careers. I have dumped and I have been dumped. But hopefully, at some point we all find a place or a person worth our loyalty. My wife, the love of my life. Once I found her my days of looking for someone better were over. Best thing that ever happened to me.
The question is too broad. The knee jerk reaction is to be in one of two camps.
The question is more nuanced. I think most all would agree, it would depend on the circumstances and how that move affects the University on a whole. What really matters is how the move affects the players and the future of the university's program.
Acceptable moves: An obvious vertical advancement or that person moving to an Alma Mater / close to home. While all coaching departures hurt the school in the short term, vertical advancements can help the school in the long term. Through connections and prestige. Often coaches that leave will stay in touch with assistant coaches that leave and can give valuable insight of the level above. Also if a school has a history of putting coaches into the NFL, that will make the job more prestigious compared if the school never had.
Then there is moving to your Alma Mater or close to home. Jobs are taken when they are available and when the opportunity presents itself. It may take years or decades before a position someone really desires opens up, or may never open up. Take the opportunity that is open.
Unacceptable Moves: Lateral moves, stripping away the entire coaching staff or those that hurt the University. Lateral moves put a red flag on the university and disrupt developing current players, future recruiting, fanbase involvement, donor excitement, etc. Lateral moves simply destroy the program. The one exception is if there really are deep-seated upper management problems at the school that are kneecapping a program and have no possible forward advancement unless the fanbase is let aware... so the coach is doing to better the environment for the players.
Stripping away the entire coaching staff is putting the school in a hole that is near impossible to recover. I get that coaches build up their own team, but who says they have to follow them all in one year? They could bring the majority of their staff and in a year or two bring over the remaining, giving the new coach time to adjust.
Any other move that damages the university, the players or the program in the long term is simply disgusting. And so how they move, even if it is vertical or for an Alma Mater, can change the move from an acceptable one to unacceptable.
This is why I really would like to revisit the Anderson departure. That one is more complex than we gave it credit in the past. Sure he drove the Beavs program in the ground. However, Anderson was very open that there were systemic problems in the school's leadership that was kneecapping the program, including the complete lack of proper funding and support to the coaches. These are two things Riley complained openly about all the time as well.
When Anderson left he did two things. He put all of OSU upper management problems in the light, and he also left all his millions at OSU. Both things that Smith later capitalized and was allowed to be successful.
Sure Anderson hurt the program, but I wonder if the NET outcome was actually positive.
In any case, a coaches job falls back on that old adage: Leave better than you received it. Anything less should hurt a coaches personal career.
You should probably look more into Andersen’s departure. It was a lot messier than what was presented on the surface. He did not willingly leave money on the table.
Very good article again John. But I think this loyalty business does cut both ways. I hated to see Smith leave and even more so the way he left. But it is a business and people, both coaches and players need to do what is best for them and their families.
But fans can also take some of the heat here. They are loyal only so long as the program is performing as they, in their infinite wisdom, think it should. I live in Boise and have watched Boise State over the years. Chris Peterson had more success at BSU than anyone in recent history. But when he had the audacity to go 11-2 in 2012 and then 8-4 in 2013, the grumbling among the fans could be heard in Houston! How dare he lose a game, much less 4!!! I doubt that factored into his move to UW, but I cannot believe it helped.
Bryan Harsin, who has the personality of a turnip, went 11-3, 10-3 and 12-2 in his last three seasons at BSU. But the fans were delighted when he took the Auburn job. Auburn of course, fired Gus Malzahn when he went 9-4 and 8-4 in his last two seasons, in perhaps the toughest conference in the country.
And of course Mike Riley, the winningest coach in OSU history, at a place that is challenging to win at, was pretty much run out of town by the fans after his three final seasons of 9-4, 7-6 and 5-7.
Fans are loyal so long as the coach is winning and they have little patience for the occasional "off year". Against that backdrop, what coach is not looking over his shoulder with one eye and keeping his options open? I would love to see coaches, players and fans show real loyalty, but unfortunately, that's no longer the world in which we live.
I agree with your thoughts on Mike Riley. He would have stayed at OSU forever but he was run off by our fans. Football fans have absolutely no perspective. It’s just what have you done for me lately. Or what have you done for me right this moment.
It was time for Riley to go and not just because of the diminishing win-loss records. Too often near the end, his teams were not ready to play. They lacked anything resembling fire or emotion -- in short, they took on the personality of their coach who had become complacent and was (ironically) TOO loyal to assistants who should have been let go.
Dennis Erickson is a cad. Saying he should have stayed in Corvallis? He said the same thing about Pullman. And Moscow. He missed his calling as a tin pot dictator.
Oregon State hasn't fired a coach since Jerry Pettibone (who technically retired...and STILL gets PERS 25 years later!). That marked the end of two solid decades of losing for Oregon State. Have the Beavers cycled through coaches since? Absolutely. Winning coaches are a hot commodity out there and if there's one in Corvallis, you best believe he's gonna be wooed. It's part of the game.
Did I hope Smith was different? Yes. Did he leave a bad taste in my mouth when he left? Absolutely. WAY worse than Riley or Erickson. In the end though, the guy had aspirations. So will Bray, one day.
Both Oregon schools need to accept with winning comes transient coaches. Otherwise we end up with a whole lotta Rich Brooks (another 20+ year PERS recipient).
Jerry paid into his retirement. He worked for the state long enough to get vested. Why shouldn't he receive PERS? He earned it. And he doesn't make very much, only being a six-year employee who never made more than $90k a year.
Rich Brooks worked for the state of Oregon at OSU and UO for almost 30 years, and paid into the retirement system. He certainly deserves his PERS, just as any other state employee who worked that long.
Leaving is not the problem. It's leaving on a LOW note that is disappointing. A coach doesn't owe his school his/her entire career. They owe them their BEST EFFORT for a reasonable period of time. And they owe their employer a graceful and professional exit. It's never going to go perfectly smooth. But do it with class. As an AD, I would WANT to hire coaches who I know are going to want larger challenges. Unless I'm Alabama, etc., I would expect them to want to pursure greater goals and challenges. Otherwise I'm probably not hiring a premier coach.
Yeah, but… it’s a JOB! And the employer wouldn’t waste a second worrying about the coach’s future if it was time to fire them. Presumably coming off a few seasons of failure, what options are going to be open to them after that? Certainly not a job of their choice. It’s heartwarming to talk about loyalty. And completely naive and petty
Ahem….Mark Few heading into year 26 with an .834 winning percentage. He could have left. He has had outrageous financial offers from Oregon (twice), Stanford, UCLA, Indiana, Michigan, Virginia. Every time he answered with a resounding NO THANKS. When he sells loyalty to a student athlete, they know it to be true.
Peter Courtney would respect coach Few I think. Even though he spurned the university of nike at Eugene.
I hated that Johnathan Smith left OSU.I hated that OSU was in turmoil.I hated that players recruited to play in the Pac-12 for OSU would no longer have that opportunity.I hate the Power 2 ,big tv and bad commissioners and tone deaf school presidents destroyed the Pac-12.I do not hold a grudge against Smith for taking a job that provided a certainty in his and his family’s life….Here is hoping that Sparty does not get demoted in the furtherance of the Power 2.
Anyone that follows CFB (or sport for that matter) understand that it’s just business. One party is going to feel like they are on the short end of the stick. It is what it is. But while some are upset by Smith’s leaving, I believe it has less to do with losing him as a coach and more to do with HOW he left. Zero remorse. Zero words on the difficulty of leaving his Alma mater that gave him a chance as a walk on and as a first time head coach. He doesn’t owe OSU anything. But if legacy and/or OSU mattered to him, he tainted it forever, and it could have been avoided. How you go about things MATTERS.
Well said, Quinn. I also realize that college football is now a big business. But even a good businessman has scruples.
He DOES owe OSU a decent exit. He DID owe OSU a way better Civil War performance. That was inexcusable that he didn't put his head and heart into that game for his players. I'll never forget or forgive him for that.
I don't agree that he owes OSU nothing. He doesn't legally and he's under no obligation. However, for the reasons you provided, he owes the OSU community ethically and morally. The way he left really was horrible, and as a human being, who worked with and for many amazing people and plied his craft in front of tens of thousands of loyal fans, he does owe something. An apology. Preferably full of sincerity and contrition.
Agree - and I have the right to root against MSU for as long as he’s their coach 😀
1000%...no respect for the exit strategy and no respect for not fighting onward (and then if it doesn't pan out, leave for higher ground).
Hey John, I’ve thought about this a lot. I grew up watching Oregon football, my Dad was a groundskeeper at Oregon when I was born and my first public event (outside of church) was a football game at Hayward field. We had family plan tickets for all the years I was growing up after they were first introduced at Autzen and we went to games during the Fouts/Moore days and when Norval Turner played after Fouts (my friends and I called him Norval “Turnover”). In the early seventies you could run up and down the bleachers during the game in the corners because the seats were so empty. We were in the west end zone as an extended family with my uncles and cousins when Kenny Wheaton got his famous interception against the Huskies. Iwas proud of the Ducks when they stuck with Rich Brooks even though he didn’t go to his first bowl game until over 10 years as being a coach. I loved the fact Mike Bellotti stayed with the Ducks even when USC and others came calling.
I miss those days, they were my Ducks. Now I can only afford to go to one game a year and usually for a lesser non-conference game. Going to the lengths they have to win has cost a lot in many ways….
Don’t get me wrong, I love how they are doing, and Lanning seems like he’s gonna stay. I like the fact he is bringing in the football players and coaches from previous generations. It’s easier to connect with the team again. He seems to be a genuine guy and I like that…it seems like Oregon I guess.
Still, I miss being able to go the stadium on game days. Just another sign of how much the entire state has changed I guess.
Any, I’m glad I’m a subscriber….this was a good piece.
Bob of it makes you feel better…all programs have lost their way in the same sense. Blame the networks for turning university athletic programs into brands that are valued only for football
So true! I’m a die hard Husky and I feel the same way about our program.
Another of your best, John. Thanks.
Love this tribute to Sen Courtney mixed in with the loyalty theme. He gave his heart and soul to work on behalf of Oregonian’s, for a mere pittance in pay compared to the football coaches in Oregon. He was the epitome of loyal.
As a long-time Oregonian not of Courtney's party, I grew to appreciate his bipartisan approach very much. Peter will be missed, and may he rest in peace and family be comforted. He is one of the greats from the Silent Generation. Up until 2019, I don't think Senate President Courtney ever brought major legislation to a vote without at least some Republican support. This is noteworthy because he did this even when D's had supermajorities. I respected that an awful lot. Kate Brown and Tina Kotek unfortunately tarnished this approach when they told Courtney either leave your job or push through non-bipartisan cap-and-trade taxes. Peter hated that. This was when the R walk out then occurred, and we all were diminished over that. More Courtney's is what we need.
Kate and Tina are embarrassments to all Oregonians, irregardless of affiliation
Indeed, it’s what is missing in today’s landscape. He did a wonderful job bridging the divide.
John, excellent and truthful article. As a man who was born into one of the most impoverished areas in the country, West Virginia, and who landed in Oregon by chance in 1968 I am in the court of late Senator Courtney. Coming to Oregon gave me hope that I could escape my probable life of hopelessness. I am loyal to Oregon and what it stands for. Being here around successful people encouraged me to get educated beyond high school, I achieved a graduate degree and have had a life of gratitude. There is something about Oregon and it's people that represents the best of humanity. I'm all in with Oregon.
I don't know the man and am not commenting on him personally. But no one should spend 38 years in the state legislature.
Thanks for the article, John. This topic has been on my mind for awhile. For the past 40 or so summers, I’ve brought college football magazines like Phil Steele. Lindy and Athon. On our annual trip to Sunriver, I would enjoy sitting by the pool, looking at all the Pac 12 teams. As a Beaver Believer I was full of hope for more wins and bowl possibilities. Last week, I was at the supermarket and I saw Lindy’s “Big Ten” magazine on the news stand. I had no interest picking it up, let alone purchasing it. I know my little boycott doesn’t make a dent into the greed of college football but I felt good walking right past it. The last thing I wanted to read about is Rutgers, Maryland and Michigan State…. No thank you. I made a commitment to follow and support the Beavs the next couple of seasons. The current athletes and coaches deserve it.
You would like to think loyalty matters. Most, if not all of us, have been "disloyal" at some point in our lives, either moving on with girl- or boyfriends, or moving up the corporate ladder to advance our careers. I have dumped and I have been dumped. But hopefully, at some point we all find a place or a person worth our loyalty. My wife, the love of my life. Once I found her my days of looking for someone better were over. Best thing that ever happened to me.
Nice job. A great tribute to Peter Courtney and thought provoking essay on coach loyalty.
HARRRRRUMPH!!! Well said, Matt!!!
The question is too broad. The knee jerk reaction is to be in one of two camps.
The question is more nuanced. I think most all would agree, it would depend on the circumstances and how that move affects the University on a whole. What really matters is how the move affects the players and the future of the university's program.
Acceptable moves: An obvious vertical advancement or that person moving to an Alma Mater / close to home. While all coaching departures hurt the school in the short term, vertical advancements can help the school in the long term. Through connections and prestige. Often coaches that leave will stay in touch with assistant coaches that leave and can give valuable insight of the level above. Also if a school has a history of putting coaches into the NFL, that will make the job more prestigious compared if the school never had.
Then there is moving to your Alma Mater or close to home. Jobs are taken when they are available and when the opportunity presents itself. It may take years or decades before a position someone really desires opens up, or may never open up. Take the opportunity that is open.
Unacceptable Moves: Lateral moves, stripping away the entire coaching staff or those that hurt the University. Lateral moves put a red flag on the university and disrupt developing current players, future recruiting, fanbase involvement, donor excitement, etc. Lateral moves simply destroy the program. The one exception is if there really are deep-seated upper management problems at the school that are kneecapping a program and have no possible forward advancement unless the fanbase is let aware... so the coach is doing to better the environment for the players.
Stripping away the entire coaching staff is putting the school in a hole that is near impossible to recover. I get that coaches build up their own team, but who says they have to follow them all in one year? They could bring the majority of their staff and in a year or two bring over the remaining, giving the new coach time to adjust.
Any other move that damages the university, the players or the program in the long term is simply disgusting. And so how they move, even if it is vertical or for an Alma Mater, can change the move from an acceptable one to unacceptable.
This is why I really would like to revisit the Anderson departure. That one is more complex than we gave it credit in the past. Sure he drove the Beavs program in the ground. However, Anderson was very open that there were systemic problems in the school's leadership that was kneecapping the program, including the complete lack of proper funding and support to the coaches. These are two things Riley complained openly about all the time as well.
When Anderson left he did two things. He put all of OSU upper management problems in the light, and he also left all his millions at OSU. Both things that Smith later capitalized and was allowed to be successful.
Sure Anderson hurt the program, but I wonder if the NET outcome was actually positive.
In any case, a coaches job falls back on that old adage: Leave better than you received it. Anything less should hurt a coaches personal career.
You should probably look more into Andersen’s departure. It was a lot messier than what was presented on the surface. He did not willingly leave money on the table.
I heard rumors about a cheerleader... Not sure how true that was or people piling on stories
Very good article again John. But I think this loyalty business does cut both ways. I hated to see Smith leave and even more so the way he left. But it is a business and people, both coaches and players need to do what is best for them and their families.
But fans can also take some of the heat here. They are loyal only so long as the program is performing as they, in their infinite wisdom, think it should. I live in Boise and have watched Boise State over the years. Chris Peterson had more success at BSU than anyone in recent history. But when he had the audacity to go 11-2 in 2012 and then 8-4 in 2013, the grumbling among the fans could be heard in Houston! How dare he lose a game, much less 4!!! I doubt that factored into his move to UW, but I cannot believe it helped.
Bryan Harsin, who has the personality of a turnip, went 11-3, 10-3 and 12-2 in his last three seasons at BSU. But the fans were delighted when he took the Auburn job. Auburn of course, fired Gus Malzahn when he went 9-4 and 8-4 in his last two seasons, in perhaps the toughest conference in the country.
And of course Mike Riley, the winningest coach in OSU history, at a place that is challenging to win at, was pretty much run out of town by the fans after his three final seasons of 9-4, 7-6 and 5-7.
Fans are loyal so long as the coach is winning and they have little patience for the occasional "off year". Against that backdrop, what coach is not looking over his shoulder with one eye and keeping his options open? I would love to see coaches, players and fans show real loyalty, but unfortunately, that's no longer the world in which we live.
I agree with your thoughts on Mike Riley. He would have stayed at OSU forever but he was run off by our fans. Football fans have absolutely no perspective. It’s just what have you done for me lately. Or what have you done for me right this moment.
It was time for Riley to go and not just because of the diminishing win-loss records. Too often near the end, his teams were not ready to play. They lacked anything resembling fire or emotion -- in short, they took on the personality of their coach who had become complacent and was (ironically) TOO loyal to assistants who should have been let go.
And, nearly every coach at your favorite school left someone else's favorite school to take the job at yours.
Dennis Erickson is a cad. Saying he should have stayed in Corvallis? He said the same thing about Pullman. And Moscow. He missed his calling as a tin pot dictator.
Oregon State hasn't fired a coach since Jerry Pettibone (who technically retired...and STILL gets PERS 25 years later!). That marked the end of two solid decades of losing for Oregon State. Have the Beavers cycled through coaches since? Absolutely. Winning coaches are a hot commodity out there and if there's one in Corvallis, you best believe he's gonna be wooed. It's part of the game.
Did I hope Smith was different? Yes. Did he leave a bad taste in my mouth when he left? Absolutely. WAY worse than Riley or Erickson. In the end though, the guy had aspirations. So will Bray, one day.
Both Oregon schools need to accept with winning comes transient coaches. Otherwise we end up with a whole lotta Rich Brooks (another 20+ year PERS recipient).
Jerry paid into his retirement. He worked for the state long enough to get vested. Why shouldn't he receive PERS? He earned it. And he doesn't make very much, only being a six-year employee who never made more than $90k a year.
Rich Brooks worked for the state of Oregon at OSU and UO for almost 30 years, and paid into the retirement system. He certainly deserves his PERS, just as any other state employee who worked that long.
If it was because of aspirations, he would have waited for a better job than Michigan State.
Leaving is not the problem. It's leaving on a LOW note that is disappointing. A coach doesn't owe his school his/her entire career. They owe them their BEST EFFORT for a reasonable period of time. And they owe their employer a graceful and professional exit. It's never going to go perfectly smooth. But do it with class. As an AD, I would WANT to hire coaches who I know are going to want larger challenges. Unless I'm Alabama, etc., I would expect them to want to pursure greater goals and challenges. Otherwise I'm probably not hiring a premier coach.
Yeah, but… it’s a JOB! And the employer wouldn’t waste a second worrying about the coach’s future if it was time to fire them. Presumably coming off a few seasons of failure, what options are going to be open to them after that? Certainly not a job of their choice. It’s heartwarming to talk about loyalty. And completely naive and petty
Ahem….Mark Few heading into year 26 with an .834 winning percentage. He could have left. He has had outrageous financial offers from Oregon (twice), Stanford, UCLA, Indiana, Michigan, Virginia. Every time he answered with a resounding NO THANKS. When he sells loyalty to a student athlete, they know it to be true.
Peter Courtney would respect coach Few I think. Even though he spurned the university of nike at Eugene.
Just made the same comment before I saw yours. 👏
I hated that Johnathan Smith left OSU.I hated that OSU was in turmoil.I hated that players recruited to play in the Pac-12 for OSU would no longer have that opportunity.I hate the Power 2 ,big tv and bad commissioners and tone deaf school presidents destroyed the Pac-12.I do not hold a grudge against Smith for taking a job that provided a certainty in his and his family’s life….Here is hoping that Sparty does not get demoted in the furtherance of the Power 2.