And You Think I’m Tough On Lane Kiffin?

The triumphant return of the “modern-day philosopher” Wednesday night included some digs at someone who went unmentioned: Lane Kiffin.

Pete Carroll offered this comment: “From early on, I tried to get the administration to guarantee that (Steve Sarkisian) would be the next coach if I left.”

Ouch. This is yet another confirmation of the falling out Carroll and Kiffin had a few years ago as Kiffin’s criticism of the roster he inherited at USC got back to him in Seattle.

But more surprising was this comment from current USC coach Steve Sarkisian: “So much of the focus of the last three years has been on the sanctions, the ‘Woe is me.”

Share this post:Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • Joseph B. Lowe

    Second time you posted this. Come on. MOVE ON.

    • SUCC de trop

      Joey K attempts reason. Good boy.

  • ScottWolfSniffsHisOwnFarts

    Only in Gargamel’s world does it make sense for a former and a current USC head coach to revel in the failed tenure of Lane Kiffin. How much of a buzz kill are you that you would want them to wallow in Kiffin’s failings?

    • he doesn’t make ’em up, paly.

      • Helen

        Actually he does.

        • marvgoux1

          So Pete didn’t say that quote?

          • Helen

            So Scottie doesn’t manufacture stories to… to… to… oh heck I don’t know why any professional journalist would make up stories.

    • gotroy22

      In your fevered imagination you are now being mobbed by Princess Leia lookalikes after winning Best Jar Jar Binks costume at the Comic Con convention in Sacramento, Golly-Nerd. Sadly, reality is the buzz-kill for your world of illusion.

  • Independent_George

    Nah. I think he is more or less commenting on the entire culture — program, alumni, fans,blog commenters — than singling out Lane Kiffin.

    Jeez, just read the Rivals and Scout message boards. Ryan Abraham and Dan Weber have made a cottage industry out of Sanctions Outage. Need subsricption renewals? JUst have Dan fire up another article that says “Let’s yell really loud at the injustice of it all. Pat Haden and Max Nikias, why aren’t you strapping on suicide bombs to your chest and blowing them up in the NCAA HQ lobby? Oh, the humanity!!”

    Better yet, Scott, read your own blog. Some of the usual suspects have been whining non-stop for four years.

    Yes, the sanctions are unfair and punitive and arbitrary and all that, but USC will have gone 8-5, 10-2, 7-6, 10-4 under the Lame Kitten regime. It shows the strength of the legacy Carroll left behind and the overall power behind the program.

    Meanwhile, Paul Dee died in shame, and the entire COI scheme has no credibility. The BCS is dead, the O’Bannon suit threatens the very existence of the NCAA and it is impossible to find any sentient being who doesn’t believe that the NCAA does not need nuts, bolts and root level reform. Or it’s elimination entirely.

    I’d say USC Football pretty much came out as well as possible.

    • SUCC de trop

      Ok, but had Kiffy the Goat finished the year SUCC wouldn’t have finished 10 – 4; more like 5 – 9. The 10 – 4 record belong to the effort of Coach O.

      • Cheap seats

        One of the rare times I can agree with you — at least somewhat.

        If Kiff stayed, I don’t think he beats Stanford or Oregon State, but he beats the rest of them that coach O won. So, 8-6 is more like it.

      • Independent_George

        Proves my point. Carroll left a very strong legacy and brand identity that even Kiffin could not completely eff up.

        It’s not about whether Kiffin would have gone 5-9 (he would not have gone to a bowl with a five win season, so he would be 5-8), or 8-6. With Kiffin they would have lost to Arizona, OSU and Stanford, probably Utah as well, so yeah, USC goes 5-8.

        It is about that even with the double whammy of Kiffin, perhaps one of the most overmatched head coaches of a major program since Gerry Faust, and sanctions, the USC brand survived, if not thrived, more or less.

        • ThaiMex

          Georgie…I have to agree with your assessment. Had Goat Boy been allowed to finish out the season, Marquises Lee’s comment , “Kiffn Don’t Know” would have set the stage for infighting like you’ve never seen. Not even Oggie’s cookies could have kept the team from imploding and BTW…your 5-8 prediction (5-8….ain’t that great!) seems to “ring a bell” with me.
          fit Un!

        • marvgoux1

          More of a Ted Tollner without the charm.

  • B.Miller

    Interesting.. So because PC tried to get Sark to be “HC next in line” Its an automatic shot at KIffin? could it be the fact that Sark actually stayed with PC longer?
    How long are you going to ride this Kiffin thing? Everyone is ready to move on, but you just can not let him go… #creepy

  • so SUGAR SWEEET!! Caesar and Sark BOTH validating the cry baby victim mentality of trOXans!!!

    i also note that the adage “trOXan for NOW” is also validated!! Kiff stabbed in the back by his fellow coaches!! i know the “trOXans for Life” is pure bull, but at LEAST there used to be honor among coaches!!

    when do you EVER hear a coach blasting his predecessor?? but Caesar was never know for having class.

    • TrojanFan3.0

      Is that you, wolfman?

  • WEB_Dupree

    Certainly by the time he was fired, Kiffin had virtually no defenders left; everybody was “tough on Lane Kiffin.” When readers gripe about Wolf in this context, it’s usually about the persistence of Lane Kiffin coverage on this blog, especially when Wolf seems to reach to find a flimsy excuse to bring Kiffin up yet again for the sheer joy of it (see Wolf post above). Also, Wolf’s Kiffin criticism eventually reached a fevered, hysterical pitch in the wake of the firing; I’m thinking of the post when Wolf basically called Kiffin “inhuman.”

    Anyway, for Wolf’s sake, I hope Pete visits more often. What a bonanza of opportunities for Wolf to retrieve all his old axes from the garage for some re-grinding. Imagine what he’d do if Garrett gave a talk.

    • you seem to forget that Kiff targeted the wolfman. tried to embarrass him in front of the entire country by singling him out and potentially affecting his livelihood (which i don’t doubt for a SECOND was the intent).

      and when it blew up in Kiff’s face, he wasn’t man enough to make up with the wolfman!!

      under the circumstances, i view the wolfman’s treatment of Kiff MORE that fair. Kiff was a DISASTER, notwithstanding his treachery!!

      if i WERE the wolfman as some claim, i would ban you for 48 hrs for your comment!!

      • WEB_Dupree

        I’m not a Wolf Truther, so I’m not too concerned about you banning me. (I’m only a “Bucket = Smackula and Yoda” Truther).

        I don’t believe that Kiffin was trying to affect Wolf’s livelihood with that silly ban. That seemed more like a petulant child trying to take his toy and go home after someone was mean to him. Unfortunately, Kiffin’s “toy” was the USC football program.

        • you don’t feel Kiffin was trying to affect the wolfman’s livelihood……

          you mentioned you practiced law, maybe you still do….lets say you somehow offended a big shot on the Ca State Bar Court, and he Suspended your license to practice in CA for 3 months. would you feel that affected your livlihood? or would you call that a “silly ban”?? in either case the suspended party has lost access to practice their trade…..i guess the law firm could still employ you to draft motions and handle research and discovery on cases, but your livelihood IS affected by not being able to represent clients in a courtroom.

          why can’t you empathize with poor innocent wolfman???

          • WESTWOOD ROB

            That analogy is pretty rough. Kiffin didn’t revoke Wolf’s “professional license” (so to speak) to be a journalist or run a blog. Wolf could still do a lot (maybe most) of what he does now — posting links to stories on other websites, spreading anonymous gossip, updating us about former coaches, taking shots at Pete Carroll, posting electronic polls, etc. It seems like one of the annual gripes from readers on this blog is the lack of specifics about what went on at practice.

            Also, I see a significant difference between a two-week ban and a three-month ban (whatever profession we’re talking about), but setting that aside, I just find it hard to believe that Kiffin really put that much thought into it. It seems less like a sinister plan to damage Wolf’s career and more like a poorly conceived, spur-of-the-moment decision to try to punish an adult journalist the way you would punish a student-athlete — by making him “sit out” of something he wanted to participate in. Kiffin couldn’t make Wolf run laps or do push-ups (that would be something to see!), so his mind latched on to the next option on his limited mental list of ways to discipline someone.

            I’m not defending old Kiff, by the way; I’m just skeptical about the alleged motive.

          • marvgoux1

            Wrong, he attempted to deny him access to the program. That would be like locking you out of your office.

          • WEB_Dupree

            That’s not the analogy Bucket offered, but it’s probably a better one. If the State Bar suspends or disbars you, practicing law becomes an actual crime. Wolf could still write about USC without breaking the law. If we really want to come up with a lawyer analogy, I would compare it to taking away my access to a law library or a website like Westlaw or Lexis, which would make the job much more difficult. Anyway, whatever analogy you choose, I’m skeptical of this idea that Kiffin was out to ruin Wolf’s career. The decision just strikes me as more petulant than sinister.

          • Ok i’ll grant you I can’t make a strong case for Kiff hatching a diabolical scheme to get wolfman fired. But I think you should allow that intent notwithstanding, affecting a beat reporter’s career is a foreseeable consequence of banning him from his specific beat.

            If I’m in a bar and I see 78 yr old Marv Levy and decide to punch him really hard, I can’t say later, I didn’t INTEND to knock him down and for him to hit his head on the concrete! I just punched him!

            Bottom line I say an eye for an eye. Kiff went after the wolfman, so wolfman gets to exact payback. That is the oldest rule of the schoolyard. Kiff’s problem for trying to pick on a member of the press with a tremendous bully pulpit!!

          • WEB_Dupree

            Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of Kiff? You guys may be right; I’m only saying that we don’t really know. I only know what I read on this blog! (Insert punchline here). Getting back to my original post above, I think that when the readers complain about Wolf’s frequent Kiffin posts (or the long stream of Pete posts the other day), it’s not that they want to defend Kiffin; they just feel that Wolf has gone overboard. It’s a matter of degree. Then someone else accuses them of being rah-rahs for complaining about all the complaining.

          • WEB_Dupree


        • Independent_George

          KIffin did intend to affect Wolf’s livelihood, That was the entire intention of the ban threat. Works in podunk places Eugene or Tuscaloosa or Columbia where depost coaches with track records of success can get people fired, removed from the beat, etc. It doesn’t work in big cities like NY, LA or Chicago, even for successful coaches. That Kiffin beleived it could work in LA shows how delusional he is.

          • WESTWOOD ROB

            I will “incorporate by reference” my lengthy response to Bucket, above. Kiffin seems like he was no sweetheart, but I don’t see any reason to assume that this was something more than a ham-fisted attempt at “disciplining” Wolf according to moronic coach-think. If Kiffin or one of his cronies really did contract the Daily News to try to get Wolf fired or permanently removed from the USC beat, or some similar Petrino-esque move, that would be different, but I don’t see this rising to that level, from what we’ve heard.

      • Cheap seats

        I know you’re not an actual UCLA fan, so this post is for everyone who knows Jim Mora.

        If you’ve seen Mora’s demeanor or dialogue with reporters off-camera (and sometimes ON camera), I’m really surprised he hasn’t done something like ban a reporter of even threaten one ala the Raiders guy who got in Tim Kawakami’s face.

        On the other hand, Kiffin does lots of things that are passive aggressive because of his tendency to hold emotions within. Maybe Mora’s way allows it to vent? Or is he one step from having an episode?

        If temper is genetic, he’s in trouble. Mora Sr. is known for his tantrums.

        • rusoviet

          I can echo that sentiment – a colleague of mine who works for the media in Seattle noted hwo thin skinned Mora was throughout his stint with the Seahawks and it only got worse as his time came to an end. Real difficult to get past all his emotion and ‘pressure’ etc..

          • Cheap seats

            I can imagine being on best behavior during the honeymoon period and expectations are low.

            It will be interesting how he keeps his composure with the highest expectations in the upcoming year.

            If he wins, the composure will be easy. If he starts being criticized in a similar manner as Kiffin was my gut tells me he becomes unraveled.

      • TrojanFan3.0

        Still butt-hurt about the sour bowl of cheerios….haha!!! You sound like an idiot. Move on, you’ll feel better about yourself.

      • TrojanFan3.0

        Kiffin is not the only to target you. Does butt-darts sound familiar?

  • Cheap seats

    “tough” on Lane Kiffin? No.

    OBSESSED with Lane Kiffin. Yes.

    • Helen

      Funny how Scottie equates being “tough” as making childish comments about Kiffin in the middle of other discussions. I think the problem is much deeper than obsession.

  • Helen

    Wolfian logic strikes again.

    Carroll’s comment was referring to when he was still HC at USC (“..if I left”). Kiffin’s comments about the quality of the roster he inherited was made after Kiffin was hired. So these comments could not have influenced what Carroll told the admin years before.

    And it is widely accepted that Carroll did a poor job of recruiting the last couple years and the quality of the team when Kiffin took over was poor.

  • Helen

    Scottie: lost in your “Everything Kiffin World” is another interpretation of Pete Carroll’s comments – Pete did not endorse Ed Orgeron as the next HC.

    • TrojanFan3.0

      After all these months, kiffin STILL lives in wolf’s head. He needs to seek out professional help for this mental illness

      • Helen

        Actually I find it sadistically enjoyable that Kiffin continues to haunt Scottie – I just don’t want to read about it everyday.

  • Andrew Pollet

    So you do read our comments we post about your obsession with Kiffin. Troll strike

  • Marv Elapes

    This is another example of wolf turning everything into a Kiffin hunt. We get it wolf, you’re bitter about how Kiffin/the University treated you. But Kiffin and the rest of us have moved on. We don’t give a rats behind about your angry obsession with him. Time to move on, there is no closer here.

  • jetman624

    Pete’s comments about Sark becoming the next coach could be ENTIRELY made up– you do realize that, right? You know, just trying get the fan base to rally around Sark by using his endorsement to add some credibility to the hire?


    • that actually makes sense given Petey is a born liar.

      NCAA, UNSEAL the records!!!!

      • TrojanFan3.0

        What does “fit Un” mean?

        Is it dementia related?

  • Larry Harris

    Right under my nose. I assume that Will Ferrell has not used up his eligibility at SC. If so, our kicking problems have gone the way of all flesh. This guy is a natural.