Steve Sarkisian is 34-29 at Washington, 24-21 in Pac-12 games.
22 thoughts on “`Winning’ Apparently Not A Qualification For USC”
This coming from someone that wanted Mike Riley. You really are pathetic Wolfie.
I kind of agree with Wolf on this one. I thought we were a premier job and we settle for Sark????? Are you kidding me. Can someone tell me how he is better than Coach O?
I’d say this was an outgrowth of Coach O and Pat Haden’s ‘tete a tete’ – probably came to a head yesterday at their meeting. Ed realized he was not going to be named the HC but in order to keep him and his documented recruiting skills who would he (Orgeron) be willing to work under?
This is more a move to keep Coach O and limit defections in recruits as well as bring in someone who realizes this is going to be a tough sell but a known quantity, regardless of his record at WA, to see the school through this last year ‘and’ most importantly understand he (Sarkisian) had better have learned from Kiffin what not to do.
Without CEO in the equation, this hire is just odd. I can only imagine that CEO gave his blessing to PH on this, and agreed to stay on (?) The standard for the head coaching job at SC is ALWAYS the ability to win an NC. Even with CEO on board to keep the recruiting going, do you see Sark being “that guy”? He took a deplorable Washington program and brought it some respectability, but not wild success. If you are CEO, don’t you start accepting overtures from other FBS programs to be an HC? Interesting days in the Halls of Troy…
So you think Mora might move his stuff to WA?
I don’t think so–UCLA is young and loaded. Word is that his family loves living in the South Bay and that he wants to continue to build the program, especially with current momentum. However, money talks. We shall see.
Well EB I hope WA hires Mora and UCLA hires Kiffin.
Agreed on all fronts. If Orgeron wants to be a HC again, his stock will never be higher. I could definitely see someone like Illinois hiring him.
And agreed that this hire is a strange one, unless the real key is keeping Orgeron. I think Haden had this one decided during the third quarter of the ASU game. I don’t think Haden considered any other coach all that seriously. It is the safest of all hires (save for giving Orgeron the job) and that disappoints me.
Haden is showing himself to be ultra-conservative with his hires (save for basketball, but there was no risk, as the program has been a joke since Floyd left).
I’m profoundly disappointed in this.
How is this a safe hire? More seasons of 8-4; 9-3 are safe in which sense? The only safe hire would have been Pete Carroll.
Wolf, you are so ignorant. Yes, Sark was only 34-29 at UW.
But, the team was 0-12 in 2008 the year before he took over. Then they went 5-7 the next year, beating #3 USC and playing #11 LSU tough. Then they went 7-6 three years in a row, and then went 8-4 this year.
The theme is improvement. He took a program that was as low as it could possibly be and turned it into a winner, without the advantages of being at a program like USC.
Lane Kiffin ‘improved’ a Tennessee team to 7-6. Guess what happened to him
I’m not sure what your point is – that a track record of improving results at one program doesn’t guarantee winning results at another program? Thanks Captain Obvious.
My point is that Wolf is yet again being lazy and jumping to a firm conclusion without looking at the story behind the evidence he’s presenting.
We all know what Wolf is. He’s not going to change. What’s the point of talking about Wolf.
We were all told we are a top 5 coaching destination. Can you honestly see Alabama or Ohio St. or Texas ever hiring Sark?
What about Sark makes him so suitable for an elite job. How is he more qualified than Kiffin.
Or are we just not an elite program?
I’d much rather appreciate your answers to these questions than your constant berating of Wolf.
That’s fair. No, I don’t see any of those programs hiring Sark because he’s not big enough to hire just based on his name recognition. That doesn’t mean he’s not a good enough coach.
Yes, we are a top 5 coaching destination, but present circumstances have made winning at SC more difficult and our expectations haven’t been lowered, so many coaches might see it as a trap.
I’m not over the moon about the news. However, it can work and he deserves to be supported. I can see the logic behind the hire.
Don’t forget people were pissed when Pete Carroll was announced. 3 Heismans, 2 NCs, 4 Rose Bowl wins and 7 straight conference titles later we can all agree it worked out well.
I remember I was on the OCRegister supporting Lane Kiffin thinking the guy can turn it around. Didn’t happen. Not even close.
Pete Carroll was lightning in a bottle. Not going to happen each time we make a hire.
This is what we know about Sark. He had 5 years to make a 0-12 WA program elite. He was not even close.
Harbaugh took Stanford from the same depths of despair and made them a BCS team.
None of us will ever confuse Harbaugh with Sark. Sark failed his audition and yet we hired him. That disappoints me.
I personally wanted a guy who would bring the “bully” mentality back.
Unfortunately, I feel Sark is too much in the Kiffin mold of a coach: always trying to outSMART the other team rather than outPLAYING them.
I should’ve known that Haden (a former QB) was going to pick an Xs and Os, offensive-minded coach who called his own plays.
I still don’t understand how he is more qualified than Kiffin.
I don’t get it, people were talking NFL talent and elite coaches. Sark is neither of those.
NFL coaches dont know college football / recruiting / dealing with Alum and Boosters.. Problem with NFL coaches is their play book is too complicated.. See Monte Kiffin’s defense
Wolfie must be pissed since he never really broke this story and never had Sark on the radar much…..until today. LOL
What were Pete Carrol’s qualifications when he was hired?
Sark has done more with lesser talent, than Kiffin did with better talent..
Even created a whole new offense to help Price become a better QB..
This coming from someone that wanted Mike Riley. You really are pathetic Wolfie.
I kind of agree with Wolf on this one. I thought we were a premier job and we settle for Sark????? Are you kidding me. Can someone tell me how he is better than Coach O?
I’d say this was an outgrowth of Coach O and Pat Haden’s ‘tete a tete’ – probably came to a head yesterday at their meeting. Ed realized he was not going to be named the HC but in order to keep him and his documented recruiting skills who would he (Orgeron) be willing to work under?
This is more a move to keep Coach O and limit defections in recruits as well as bring in someone who realizes this is going to be a tough sell but a known quantity, regardless of his record at WA, to see the school through this last year ‘and’ most importantly understand he (Sarkisian) had better have learned from Kiffin what not to do.
Without CEO in the equation, this hire is just odd. I can only imagine that CEO gave his blessing to PH on this, and agreed to stay on (?) The standard for the head coaching job at SC is ALWAYS the ability to win an NC. Even with CEO on board to keep the recruiting going, do you see Sark being “that guy”? He took a deplorable Washington program and brought it some respectability, but not wild success. If you are CEO, don’t you start accepting overtures from other FBS programs to be an HC? Interesting days in the Halls of Troy…
So you think Mora might move his stuff to WA?
I don’t think so–UCLA is young and loaded. Word is that his family loves living in the South Bay and that he wants to continue to build the program, especially with current momentum. However, money talks. We shall see.
Well EB I hope WA hires Mora and UCLA hires Kiffin.
Agreed on all fronts. If Orgeron wants to be a HC again, his stock will never be higher. I could definitely see someone like Illinois hiring him.
And agreed that this hire is a strange one, unless the real key is keeping Orgeron. I think Haden had this one decided during the third quarter of the ASU game. I don’t think Haden considered any other coach all that seriously. It is the safest of all hires (save for giving Orgeron the job) and that disappoints me.
Haden is showing himself to be ultra-conservative with his hires (save for basketball, but there was no risk, as the program has been a joke since Floyd left).
I’m profoundly disappointed in this.
How is this a safe hire? More seasons of 8-4; 9-3 are safe in which sense? The only safe hire would have been Pete Carroll.
Wolf, you are so ignorant. Yes, Sark was only 34-29 at UW.
But, the team was 0-12 in 2008 the year before he took over. Then they went 5-7 the next year, beating #3 USC and playing #11 LSU tough. Then they went 7-6 three years in a row, and then went 8-4 this year.
The theme is improvement. He took a program that was as low as it could possibly be and turned it into a winner, without the advantages of being at a program like USC.
Lane Kiffin ‘improved’ a Tennessee team to 7-6. Guess what happened to him
I’m not sure what your point is – that a track record of improving results at one program doesn’t guarantee winning results at another program? Thanks Captain Obvious.
My point is that Wolf is yet again being lazy and jumping to a firm conclusion without looking at the story behind the evidence he’s presenting.
We all know what Wolf is. He’s not going to change. What’s the point of talking about Wolf.
We were all told we are a top 5 coaching destination. Can you honestly see Alabama or Ohio St. or Texas ever hiring Sark?
What about Sark makes him so suitable for an elite job. How is he more qualified than Kiffin.
Or are we just not an elite program?
I’d much rather appreciate your answers to these questions than your constant berating of Wolf.
That’s fair. No, I don’t see any of those programs hiring Sark because he’s not big enough to hire just based on his name recognition. That doesn’t mean he’s not a good enough coach.
Yes, we are a top 5 coaching destination, but present circumstances have made winning at SC more difficult and our expectations haven’t been lowered, so many coaches might see it as a trap.
I’m not over the moon about the news. However, it can work and he deserves to be supported. I can see the logic behind the hire.
Don’t forget people were pissed when Pete Carroll was announced. 3 Heismans, 2 NCs, 4 Rose Bowl wins and 7 straight conference titles later we can all agree it worked out well.
I remember I was on the OCRegister supporting Lane Kiffin thinking the guy can turn it around. Didn’t happen. Not even close.
Pete Carroll was lightning in a bottle. Not going to happen each time we make a hire.
This is what we know about Sark. He had 5 years to make a 0-12 WA program elite. He was not even close.
Harbaugh took Stanford from the same depths of despair and made them a BCS team.
None of us will ever confuse Harbaugh with Sark. Sark failed his audition and yet we hired him. That disappoints me.
I personally wanted a guy who would bring the “bully” mentality back.
Unfortunately, I feel Sark is too much in the Kiffin mold of a coach: always trying to outSMART the other team rather than outPLAYING them.
I should’ve known that Haden (a former QB) was going to pick an Xs and Os, offensive-minded coach who called his own plays.
I still don’t understand how he is more qualified than Kiffin.
I don’t get it, people were talking NFL talent and elite coaches. Sark is neither of those.
NFL coaches dont know college football / recruiting / dealing with Alum and Boosters.. Problem with NFL coaches is their play book is too complicated.. See Monte Kiffin’s defense
Wolfie must be pissed since he never really broke this story and never had Sark on the radar much…..until today. LOL
What were Pete Carrol’s qualifications when he was hired?
Sark has done more with lesser talent, than Kiffin did with better talent..
Even created a whole new offense to help Price become a better QB..