6 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
SCOTT SMITH's avatar

You honestly don't think USC can compete with Rutgers, Indiana, Purdue, Iowa, Maryland, et.al.? No, because they have big stadiums? I grant you, USC has to get better but they had to anyway to win consistently in the Pac-12. I don't have to tell you it's all about the HC at any school, and they've made a significant improvement there. If what you say is true--that they always recruit well--I see them positioned better in the Big10 for potential upside.

Expand full comment
Jack Bird's avatar

Perhaps, but it's not the Rutgers crowd I or anyone else in that Conference is worried about.

In the 10 years prior to Carroll's arrival at USC, USC had the 5th best overall record in the Conference and in the time since Carroll's departure, the 4th best, despite having the first or second best recruiting class in the conference every year from 2010 - 2018 along with 5 top 5 classes during that time period.

The reality for USC is that other than during the Pete Carroll era, they've been an above average team at best for three decades, despite the constant haul of talent.

As for Riley, he consistently had the best talent by far in the Big 12 and won, but he barely slipped by a number of teams in both 2019 and 2021, including Nebraska by 7, W. Va by 3, K State by 6 and Iowa State by a TD in 2021.

There was a perception that he had the talent but was often outcoached.

I've lived in Dallas since 1985 and there was plenty of grumbling from Oklahoma fans that he was not that good of a coach and that the quality of the program was sliding in comparison to the talent he inherited and recruited.

Riley also lost the 3 big bowl games he coached and in two he was wiped out, with Oklahoma not even looking competitive on the National stage, which did not go over that well, as you might imagine.

I'm well aware he had very very good records, but he always felt like Mark Helfrich to me before the bottom fell out in 2016.

Expand full comment
MarcTheDuck's avatar

Good insight, and I agree that USC has for quite a long time looked like a team of only 3 star players while always having a Top10 recruiting classes - except for when Pete Carroll was there. As they say, USC is where 5 Star careers go to die.... contrast that with Utah that really is made up of only 3 star talent and crushed Oregon twice in a row last year. Great recruiting doesn't always mean great coaching, which can mean mediocre results but with outstanding talent.

I hadn't followed OU close enough to notice some of the things you pointed out and I had thought that Lincoln Riley was coming into the Pac12 with a stronger resume for winning than he apparently had there... insomuch as he had talent that should have led to more victories against the other teams with big talent. I expect USC to do better than UCLA in B1G (that's a no brainer) but I actually don't expect USC to do all that well there. They should beat the low end of the B1G but I think it will get harder for them against the middle of the pack. The 2nd from top quartile (Iowa for instance) may be a big bite for USC if the game is later in the season because Iowa is one of those big, strong teams that B1G is known for and they'll probably be in better shape for a slugfest with USC than USC will be in by that point in the year. If USC plays a team like Iowa early in the year they could probably beat them... I think. It's hard to know until you've seen USC operate there for an extended period of time. But I don't see USC challenging for the B1G conference title or appearing in the their championship game for quite a long time and not before they completely change who they are to be more like Ohio State - bigger, stronger and better coached. Truthfully my gut says USC is right in the middle of the B1G when they have to play those teams every week. Until they recruit bigger, stronger (and often slower) big guys, the other B1G teams' game plans will be "beat them up"... the Mario Cristobal game plan (which was, frankly, kind of boring to watch). But... maybe Lincoln Riley will be the answer and they'll really go in there and be a major player in that conference. We'll see when we see I guess.

Expand full comment
Jack Bird's avatar

Thanks.

Riley won a lot of games and on paper looks amazing, until you start looking at the number of close games against average opponents, even where he won.

There was a real perception last year that Oklahoma was lucky it didn't lose 4 or 5 games, most against mediocre teams.

I think he is a great person but he was no Bob Stoops. He was completely outcoached in the Bowl Games that mattered and looked lost at times against a weak conference schedule.

Expand full comment
SCOTT SMITH's avatar

OK, fair enough--appreciate the thorough response. No doubt the jury is still out with Riley. I've followed USC for 60 years and watched many a coach fail. What I do know though is when they succeed, they succeed big--National Championship big. Riley knows this and it's why he took the job. Recruits know it, too, and it's why they sign. The Big 10 knows it, as well. We'll see how far Riley's reach is, but one thing we can both agree on: he's a vast improvement on Clay Helton! (btw, even a coach as bad as him finished #3 just 5 years ago.) Enjoyed the dialogue--CFB's the best, isn't it?

Expand full comment
Jack Bird's avatar

Good post. I liked Helton as a person, but never understood his selection.

CFB is the best and I am looking forward to games this Fall.

Expand full comment