Why Ed Orgeron Works For USC Football

BOBBI’ve sometimes made references to the fact a mannequin would do a better job coaching USC than Paul Hackett or Lane Kiffin did. My point is the mannequin might not help but it does not hurt the team.

Ed Orgeron is about as far from a mannequin as you can get with his gruff voice and outgoing demeanor. But he is doing a great job as USC’s coach because he is not imposing his will on the Trojans like Lane Kiffin did. Orgeron is simply letting the Trojans be themselves.

When things went good, Kiffin often went out of his way to mess things up or created a controversy. Orgeron is a healer who thinks of ways to make the players happy. Kiffin made change for the sake of change: Morning practices, closed practices, silver cleats, red socks, etc.

Orgeron orders In-N-Out, delivers guest speakers and returns dessert to the training table. He also knows that sometimes doing nothing is the best course. When Kiffin was the coach, the players walked off the practice field listlessly this season. With Orgeron they bounce off the field.

Now here is the dilemma for Pat Haden: Is Orgeron pushing all the right buttons and doing an excellent job or is some of this a new coach bounce that comes simply by being anyone but Lane Kiffin?

 

 

Facebook Twitter Plusone Reddit Digg Tumblr Email
  • Brad Hutchings

    Nailed it. Another side to the Orgeron dilemma is that Haden would get to pick and tweak the assistant roster for several years. He wouldn’t have that privilege with a “top tier” coach.

    • Independent_George

      That’s an excellent point. Haden can taylor the team to the assistants he wants. The sexy hire will require that his cronies coach. That was an issue with Carroll: Rocky Seto. Jeremy Bates. Yogi Roth. Lane Kiffin.

      • Helen

        Let’s not forget Pete Carroll’s son too.

        • Independent_George

          SPAUDLING!

          • marvgoux1

            Is he even in coaching anymore?

  • ScottWolfSniffsHisOwnFarts

    Nice try.

    You were the fool saying that SC needed to go with alternate unis to draw recruits. Now you have a change of heart and say changing uniforms is a bad thing. Again, no accountability for your words. You just throw out nonsense and hope some of it sticks.

    Kiffin had a different way of operating than Pete Carroll
    or Ed Orgeron. That doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Alabama operates entirely different than USC (closed practices with a disciplinarian HC), and they’ve done quite well. So tell us, if Nick Saban were to be named USC’s HC and he
    operated much as he does at Alabama, are you saying he would fail? Do you not think Saban would impose his will on USC?

    Your problem is that you can’t just accept that Kiffin wasn’t right for USC. You need to labor the point, and make up bull$hit to justify your irrational hate for the man. Get over you detest of Lane Kiffin. He’s no longer at USC. You are acting like a teenage girl that is trying to convince everyone why you hate someone that dumped you like a bad habit. You’re pathetic.

    Finally, your grammar sucks. You should write, “When
    things went WELL…” Not “good.”

    • Brad Hutchings

      “Get over you detest of Lane Kiffin.”

      Speaking of grammar…

      • Trojan Hoarse

        I think we all got his point…….

      • ScottWolfSniffsHisOwnFarts

        A simple mistake. I’m surprised there are not more as I didn’t proofread my comment. Accidentally deleting an “r” is far different than Wolf routinely using poor grammar on his own blog. Still, Wolf’s problems far exceed grammar.

        • Independent_George

          And grammar isn’t one of Scott’s strong suits.

          • Trojan Hoarse

            The English language isn’t one of Scott’s strong suits either…….

        • HeySUCs

          And you exceed the boundaries of civility. You must be from Tixas and raised in an Oil field.

          • TrojanFamily

            Tixas has so many oil fields!

          • sureshot32

            Is Tixas where they farm Stub Hub’s ticket oak?

    • WEB_Dupree

      Now, wait just one minute. Wolf may have favored a change in uniforms to get the recruits excited, but he consistently opposed changing the socks! COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

    • Independent_George

      BTW: Wolf posts about Lane Liffin because it is what creates hits. There are 19 reply to a post that is essentially a “duh” post: Lane Kiffin is not a good head coach. Duh.

      • Trojan Hoarse

        You’re darn right it creates hits….. in fact, everytime I read the crap he writes, I hit my forehead with the palm of my hand….

      • marvgoux1

        That’s right the Sunshine Pumpers who are still upset that Lane Kiffin was fired come running like guppies to the fish food.

        • TrojanFamily

          preach on rah rah!

  • Samtheman

    Why shouldn’t a coach get to pick his assistants? He’s the one that has to work with them daily? It’s his neck on the line, why should you give him the opportunity to blame it on the assts you impose on him? Pete had every right to pick who he wanted. He earned that. Toward the end, people disagreed with his choices (Bates), but you take the good with the bad. You don’t want to pick a coach because he’s a push-over…(not saying Coach O is…but that shouldn’t be a focal point).

  • Saul Goodman

    In dealing with today’s generation of students/players, the bulk of research is suggesting that what makes for an effective teacher has less to do with what the teacher knows and has more to do with who the teacher is. The contrast between Kiffin and Orgeron’s styles of coaching is a very good illustration of that. The players seem to be responding to CEO basically because they like who he is. Kiffin on the other hand, thought that his knowledge of the game (or perceived knowledge of the game) would trump all the other aspects of what constitutes a successful head coach.

    • EncinitasBruin

      +1. As a dad of four kids (18, 15, 12, 10), I can tell you that it’s not about the information you have, but about the passion and care you show this generation.

  • Samtheman

    Re. Saul…the other ingredient is actually winning! Above all else, you have to win. You can hate Tom Coughlin all you want, but if he gets SuperBowls…it’s hard to argue against that. The whole perception thing only gets you so far (Mike Riley). I hope Coach O can combine the charisma with more wins. I’ll leave the psycho-dissecting for others after more titles…

    • Saul Goodman

      Very true. Ultimately, you have to know what you are doing. However, CEO shows how far a motivation, charisma, and passion can take you. Kiffin also shows how counterproductive the lack of the above can be. As you implied above, tactical competence is also necessary to sustain what O has done. I for one, would like to see if he’s got it

  • Cheap seats

    Wolf needs to post more often about Lane Kiffin.

    • Trojan Hoarse

      I agree…. Whatever happened to Kiffin, BTW?……LOL

      • Helen

        An unnamed source tells me Kiffin is writing a book about Scott Wolf.

        • marvgoux1

          I heard you are writing the foreword.

          • Helen

            Oh, I’d love to!

  • ProbationU

    Kiffin was playing “not to lose” his job. Ed O is playing to win the job. He has no downside because expectations were at an all time low thanks to LK. He has done a great job. You could tell that the win over Stanford was cathartic for those in attendance as they stormed the field. A win over Stanford would normally be business as usual…but after Wash St and ASU, the team and the fans were in the dump. Ed O brought them back.

    Is he the right man for the job long term? Hard to argue against him at this point. Does he need to win out? What are the other options?

    • FIGHTONtoVICTORY

      That’s what most people don’t understand. The storming of the field wasn’t simply for beating Stanford. It was relief, that maybe USC is finally past the dark days. People love Coach O and it was a very emotional night for everybody.

      • ProbationU

        Bruin fans understand the feeling…trust me. We have been so bad for so long. It may be a sore subject…and not trying to rub it in…but the win over SC was the same for us last year. It didn’t matter that SC was having a bad year because we had lost 50-0 the year before and the program was garbage. It merely showed incremental progress.

        Ed O has brought SC back better than most Trojans and Bruins thought possible at the time. Very impressive. Doesn’t mean that we fear SC, but most of us respect what Ed has done.

        • marvgoux1

          You should fear SC, you haven’t beat us at the Coliseum in 16 years and now we are a team of destiny that will win out and deliver the head coaching job to Ed.

          • EncinitasBruin

            Neuheisel teams feared SC. Mora teams don’t fear anyone. That is not disrespect, but a visceral change on game day, on the practice field, and around campus. The UCLA team that takes the field on 11/30 in the Colliseum is 180 degrees different in terms of attitude, toughness, and focus than the one that was clown stomped two years ago. I’m not guaranteeing a win, just a better, hungrier, tougher football team.

      • TrojanFamily

        One other factor–I was and am a huge Pete fan because of how he carries himself professionally. He was a great representative of the university. Kiffin’s arrogance, his sarcastic attitude, and his sense of entitlement reflected poorly on USC. Orgeron’s excitement level reflects very well.

        Plus if Orgeron is offered the job, he retires a Trojan. If Sumlin takes it, he holds it for a few years until the NFL comes calling. Same with del Rio, and even the guy I’ve been promoting, Gruden. I think something is to be said for a guy who would look to make USC his permanent home.

        • rusoviet

          You’re right TF – Haden doesn’t want a revolving door – someone staying for the life of the contract and then moving on for the NFL. That is his biggest concern – it is what sold him on Enfield as the new mens head BB coach. For Enfield this is the challenge he’s after – he’s already a success in the business world what he wants is to be seen as one who took a moribund program out of a coffin and made it into a perennial national contender.

          Ed wants this job and Ed has no interest in going anywhere else – he wants this job. The conumdrum for Haden is ‘will’ this be the fit he so desires – 1. a great coach and 2. content to stay ‘and’ never forget he (Ed) is the coach – he IS NOT the school (Joe Pa’ et. al.).

          • marvgoux1

            SC baketball is perceived by coaches as a mid-major program. For Enfield he can’t lose. He is using us as a stepping stone to a top program if he succeeds. If he fails nobody will blame him since it’s been 60 years since we’ve been to a Final Four.

          • TrojanFamily

            Agreed. USC would do well to get a riser as a BB coach, since they just fired a coach that was the “Hey SUCs” of basketball coaches, Kevin O’Neill. I hope Enfield is so successful at USC that a top BB school grabs him. That would mean he had a heck of a run.

    • Scott

      Agree with just about everything ProbU says. Answer to question “Should SC hire Coach O?” is……who else wants the job? If Sumlin or a handful of other proven college winners who can recruit want it, would be hard to give it to O.

      But if those guys don’t show, go with O! Del Rio is not one of those guys. I think there are only 3 or 4 who might be interested, interesting to see what happens. Heard informed prognosticators say that the new guy (or O, as the case may be) will be on board by Dec. 5.

      Interesting times, Fight On, let’s keep it going for 2 more games!

  • rusoviet

    Wolf isn’t totally wrong here . Look Kiffin had already had a chance with both an NFL team and an SEC team as head coach. That was the problem – 1+ yrs. w. the Raiders and a full year at TN – nothing learned. Contrast with Orgeron – three yrs. at MS and lost woefully (I believe 3 conf. wins in that period) ‘but’ Coach O learned! He understood where he was lousy and what needed to change.

    Kiffin was never going to change – former USC/NFL head coach John Robinson made note of what he sensed when he walked on to Howard Jones Field “….I could see he (Kiffin) had no idea of how to be or act as a head coach.” This was Kiffin’s third HC assignment – his dream job. The one he’d been preparing all his life (what 32 yrs.?) for.

    Yes Scott can ease off on the ‘told you so’ but lest we forget (sadly forpoor Kiffin) what an emotionless, too tightly wound, out of his league, incompetent and overwhelmed he was in every aspect of his 3+ years here.

    hat photo of his at the Sun Bowl peeking over the top of the menu and shrouded in that cowl-hood is what defined him – not ready for prime time and sadly never will be.

    I don’t believe Sarkisian is much better – they both owe their promotions per assistants with Pete Carroll and PC sure didn’t think to take them on nor that other dolt Nick Holt.

  • Joe H

    As far as I can tell, for SC to win the Pac-12 South, it must win out (Colorado and UCLA) and Arizona State must lose out (UCLA and Arizona). Will anyone confirm? Thanks. Any other scenario puts ASU or UCLA in the title game.

    • EncinitasBruin

      That’s correct. And just like the 2002 UCLA-WSU game, USC fans might show up in the Rose Bowl this Saturday to cheer for a Bruin victory over the Sundevils. I was at that ’02 game, and it was surreal to see several hundred SC fans cheering for UCLA. If ASU defeats UCLA, they win the Pac-12 South–even if they lose to Arizona. If UCLA beats ASU (Bruins have won 10 in a row against P12S opponents, are 5-0 this year in the Rose Bowl, and 10-2 under Mora in the Arroyo Seco), the Trojans must defeat UCLA on 11/30, and hope the Wildcats defeat ASU when they play 11/30 at 6:30 in Tempe. I think the Bruins under Mora will take care of business this Saturday, setting up a classic crosstown rivarly game….

      • TrojanFamily

        I am not rooting for UCLA. Had ASU lost to Oregon State, I would have been the biggest Bruin fan. But I don’t see any chance ASU loses to Arizona this year. And I would much prefer ASU v Oregon than UCLA v Oregon.

        • EncinitasBruin

          I get it. But, if UCLA loses to ASU, that sends ASU to the P12 championship, and ends any chance of SC making it…. Do most of your SC friends feel the same way (prefer UCLA lose to ASU, even if it means no shot at the Rose Bowl Game for SC)?

          • Trojan Hoarse

            The more that is at stake in this game, the better…..

          • EncinitasBruin

            I am seriously worried about 11/30. If the game were played today, with SC’s current level of play, momentum, etc, it’d to be very tough for UCLA to win. Definitely a “twelfth man” with that exuberant crowd v. Stanford.

          • marvgoux1

            We will storm the field like ’99 whenwe knock you guys out!

          • EncinitasBruin

            Well, the prospect of SC storming the field by beating UCLA tells me that, perhaps, the rivarly has been restored. During the “14 years of mediocrity,” nobody was storming anything when they beat the Bruins.

          • TrojanFamily

            I disagree. I don’t think a single fan storms the field if USC wins (and I hope not). It’s one thing to knock off a team with a 4 game winning streak vs USC and a #4 ranking. It’s another to beat a 10-15th ranked team (if they beat ASU) that they routinely beat.

          • Joe H

            I’d rather SC at least have the chance of knocking UCLA out of contention. If UCLA beats ASU, SC can knock them out of the Pac-12 championship game, whether or not ASU wins or loses to Arizona.

          • TrojanFamily

            Most USC fans would rather choke on their own bile than root for UCLA :) The rivalry exceeds rational rooting.

          • EncinitasBruin

            Ha. The feeling is mutual :)

        • marvgoux1

          Never count out Arizona in a rivalry game with ASU especially with Kadeem Carey running the ball. ASU seems to choke every time they experience some success.

  • The Capper

    Anyone else find it disturbing that Wolfy has a Lane Kiffin bobble-head doll?

    • HeySUCs

      I’m highly disturbed with your pix. Looks like your mommy dressed you for Halloween and couldn’t resist snapping a cheesey pix of her little SUC ruffian.

      • TrojanFamily

        Pix is actually plural….it would be some cheesy pix (cheesy is spelled with just the 2 Es, not a third). Pic is the online singular abbreviation for picture. Other than that, your post is pretty meaningless. Stop committing crimes against my language!

        Go to bed!

      • The Capper

        I see you have a strong command of the Engrish language. That high school education is serving you well.

  • TrojanFamily

    His point, poorly expressed, is wondering if Kiffin’s toxic personality was so bad for the team that anyone stepping in would do well. It’s actually a really good question.

    Of course, one of the key reasons why USC has been so good since Kiffin left is because the talent level, regardless of scholarship restrictions, was so high. A lot of what Orgeron and the rest of the coaching staff is doing is getting out the way and letting USC’s superior athletes take over. (That slant to Lee on 4th and 2 was a classic example–don’t do anything fancy, just let Lee’s size and hands carry the team to the first down and to victory). Oregon recruited a lot of these kids. So the high talent level is, in large part, Orgeron’s doing. We know if USC hires Orgeron, recruiting will be high. Heck, he even stole Michael Oher away from Tennessee and got him to Mississippi, so its not about USC recruiting itself (by the way, research that issue–the movie made is sound like Oher was delivered to Orgeron–so not true. Orgeron came to the home and literally stole that big boy out from Phil Fullmer’s grasp).

    Orgeron also has a great sense to let a great set of assistants do their job. Helton and Predergast deserve a lot of credit for how this team is doing as well. A sign of a great coach is the ability to manage a staff. Orgeron is proving that.

    So Scott’s question is a good question but the answer is a lot more complex than he suggests. Orgeron is not just the anti-Kiffin. He has done exactly what the team needed to win (and seemed to learn from all of Kiffin’s mistakes, which is another sign of a great coach).

    • rusoviet

      I think Coach O learned more from his own mistakes which he candidly admits is the case – Kiffin just reminded him i.e. “Opps yeah I did that…uh huh that was another of my bonehead moves….Whoa! I never did that!”

      • TrojanFamily

        Agreed but it makes the same point–the man learns from his mistakes. Kiffin, not so much. it’s something Kiffin and Wolf both have in common.

  • peter

    One thing Coach O is not, is a con man or Carney performer,he truly has the love of his players and he loves them like a father. he brings out the passion in players, students and fans alike. a true leader grows and learns from his mistakes.O learned in retrospect what went wrong at Ole Miss,. He’s ready to excel, only Gruden should be offered if We win next two games.and O offered a huge package to stay on staff if Gruden takes job

  • B.Miller

    Let me understand this.. you just wrote a whole sch-peel about how Coach O works for USC because he’s not a mannequin?