In this segment of reader questions, someone asks about the state of USC athletics and wonders if USC can ever be as balanced as Stanford in all sports.
Q: gotroy22 said:
With the sacking of Kennedy Pola during the offseason, will this fine Trojan tradition be no more?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
A: I’m sure Ed Orgeron will be happy to take his shirt off and yell at everyone. But I do think the enthusiasm you see in that video is one of the things Pete Carroll brought to USC and I wonder if Lane Kiffin provides it enough today.
Scott, UCLA baseball keeps winning and SC, well, they’ve been done for a month. With inferior programs now in all the major sports, what’s the vibe like inside SC’s athletic department? And what does Stanford’s continued overall success do to the idea that private schools can’t compete in some of the scholie-restricted sports?
A: I think there is a feeling of guarded optimism. USC is going through a transition phase. Track has a new coach, baseball seems to want a new coach but might just keep Dan Hubbs, men’s and women’s basketball have new coaches. So I guess there is hope though many people I speak to have a lot of doubt regarding football.
I think people feel the basketball programs will turn around and wonder if baseball will ever recover. Track is at a crossroads because of the challenges being a private school, which also affects baseball.
The king is football and some wonder how USC will win 10 games this year if it couldn’t last year.
Stanford is often considered a unique case because it is so attractive to students to play country club sports. I have to say I think USC also benefits to a certain degree from this but it is not considered the Ivy League school of the West like Stanford.
Another unique innovation is that Stanford offers free tuition if your family makes less than $100,000 and free room-and-board if you make less than $60,000.