Nice story, but I doubt its authenticity. No, Mckay was a very short man, with an oversized ego, and a man who would avenge even a perceived slight. He was on top of the world with his 1962 and 1967 national championships, and near misses in 1968 and 1969 (voted out in '69). But 1970 and 1971 were very lean years, and Stanford got on top of SC for that briefest of periods in history, and they did not let McKay forget it. In 1972, McKay was once again back on top with a national championship team, and he was going to get even. (Note: I love college football history, and this is my personal interpretation).

This legendary McKay changed football forever.

He is the father of the I-Formation backfield, decades before the west-coast offense was appreciated.

He literally changed America by leading the first African-American team into racist Alabama and SC beat Bear Bryant so bad that integration started there immediately afterward. Eventually the entire south was changed sports-wise. That was huge.

And he had Joe Gibbs as his line coach! Gibbs would go on as head coach and win Superbowls with the 'Skins in the 80's.

Can you imagine if Carroll stayed 20 years with SC? How many Championships would that bring...

So we have McKay to thank for the idiot in the SEC who wrote on an ESPN comment:

"The SEC has SPEED, whenever I turn on a PAC 10 game, all I see are a bunch of slow white guys running around."

(quote paraphrased)

Oh, the Irony continues, the LSU Tiger fans suddenly recognize the legitimacy of the AP Poll!

If Pete Carroll stayed 20 years, he would have one NC (which will be handed over to Oklahoma thanks to Reggie Bush) and 5 blown opportunities. The National Champion of the Daily Trojan poll doesn't count. Half of the so-called National Championships were #1 rankings in one obscure poll that split away from the true national champion of the other three polls.

Make Up National Championships On!

Methinks Bill is a bitter, jealous fan of another school. Poor Bill. Run along now, Bill, this site is not for losers....

If half of ours don't count because they are split, doesn't that mean UCLA has zero titles now?! Thanks for your comment Bill.

How did we get on the subject of national championships? But speaking of which, did you see where Washington recently "crowned" itself football's national champion of 1960 based on some obscure poll. Well, why not.

It is a MYTHICAL championship anyway (notwithstanding the recently installed BCS), not havging been truly won on the playing field, so why not have co-winners some years, or even co-co-winners.

So let Washington rejoice, and let UCLA regale in its lone 1954 co-championship. I kind of like SC's 11 No. 1's myself. And five No. 2's.

An internet search reveals that the source of the story is John McKay himself, as quoted by former Trojan beat writer Joe Jares. The internet story, from Jares' obituary of McKay, may be found here.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com:80/MCKAY+ALWAYS+HIS+BEST+FOR+BIG+GAMES-a083598088

As for national championships, the anti-USC types will never be convinced, but I will try anyway. In the last half century, any team finishing atop the AP writers' poll, or the coaches' poll, as been recognized as a national champion. The BCS did not change this. In fact, the BCS folks recognized this, which is why they got the coaches' poll to contractually agree to place as No. 1 the winner of the BCS Championship Game. That allows a national championship trophy to be awarded, without having to wait for the poll result to be issued.

And the fact that they did that shows that the polls still matter. The BCS did not simply assert "Our game establishes the national champion." They had to go the extra mile, and tie a poll to the result.

But, as I said, the anti-USC folks don't like the facts to interfere with their "SC din't win a national championship" fantasy.

Great story, if true (decking the guard), that is what you call "old school".