First Answers

Q: Wolfie, I estimate that we will have approximately 80 scholarship players when this class enrolls. Does that seem right, and do we normally have around 5 scholarships available? I suspect that we normally prefer to carry 82 - 84 scholarship players, with only a couple open for dry powder. Which would mean that this 2008 class was not intentionally smaller; rather, PC lost out on getting a couple more big-time LB and DB recruits that we really wanted this year....Brown, Telemacque, Harris, Johnson, Hill, Robinson, Beal, Lynn, etc. Thus, rather than lower standards, he is saving those scholarships for next season

A: The recruiting class was definitely smaller than preferred. And USC does have a few more scholarships available than normal. Last year at this time, USC held one scholarship for Mitch Mustain. This year, it's got a handful it can rollover to next year. With Vincent Joseph gone, that gives USC an additional scholarship. Officially, Matt Meyer and Shane Horton, as spring admits, do not count against the scholarship limit until next fall. It also might be a good time to be a walk on next year, with these extra scholarships available.

Q: In your answers section last week you said that Mitch Mustain was not the most decorated player we have ever had enroll, then who else would it be? Sure, we've had other players who have won one or two national player of the year awards but as far as I know, Mustain is the only player that we, or anyone else, has had who was a unanimous national player of the year, meaning that he won every single national player of the year award. So if it's not Mustain, who else would be more decorated?

A: First off, most of the awards you're referring to were not even around until the past 10-20 years, so how do you compare one era to another? I'm not one of these people who thinks if it happened now, it automatically has to be the best. For example, is Mustain more decorated on arriving at USC than Mort Kaer? Let's see, Kaer competed in the heptathlon in the 1924 Olympics in Paris before he arrived at USC. Now at the time, track and field was much more popular in the USA than it is today and sellout crowds at the Coliseum for track meets was not surprising. So Kaer came to USC as a bona-fide star in a marquee sport, known to sports fans world-wide. Does that compare to being the Gatorade Player of the Year? I guess that's a matter of opinion.

Q: Which school is Allen Bradford going to transfer to: UCLA, Washington, Oregon, Florida State, or UNLV?

A: Florida State. Actually, he has not decided to transfer, so we won't know unless that day comes.

Q: Would you agree that without Joe McKnight and the running game, USC would have lost the Arizona game this past season?

A: My memory tells me Joe McKnight made some big plays in that game and it was also Mark Sanchez's first start. So yes, it was key to the victory.

Q: I want to touch upon your views on the QB competition. I agree with you that if Quarterback A and Quarterback B are completely equal in talent, then Quarterback A should start if he has more experience.
But in 2003, how come Matt Cassel went from being Quarterback No. 2 for the previous two seasons to being overtaken by Matt Leinart who was behind him? Wasn't it because Leinart beat Cassel out on the field by simply being better?
Also, isn't it obvious that Booty was simply far better than Sanchez (regardless of experience) in 2006 and the gap between the two actually increased in 2007? It wasn't even close. How often are quarterbacks really even equal in talent? Aren't there significant differences in talent, abilities and style?

A: I never said Quarterback A ``should'' start. I said that coaches like the safe choice, while I'm usually more risky in the quarterbacks I like to see playing.
Anyways, back to 2003. Matt Leinart and Matt Cassel were fairly even during spring practice. The night before the final practice, Pete Carroll and Norm Chow told me they might not name a starter, it was that close. But they did a slight turnaround and selected Leinart. He did not exactly blow everyone away at the Coliseum scrimmage on the final day of practice. But during the summer he improved by leaps and bounds once he was named the starter. Even his high school coaches would tell you he did much better when he didn't have competition, because his confidence was sometimes shaky.
As for 2006, John David Booty missed most of spring practice because of back surgery and Mark Sanchez took most of the snaps. In training camp, I thought Booty was better but a lot of fans told me Sanchez looked better but it always seemed like the coaches wanted Booty from the start and would give him every opportunity. With a year of experience, Booty was obviously better in 2007.
But looking ahead, I don't think it is clear cut right now who is better. Sanchez and Mustain both have strengths, but I keep getting the sense the coaches prefer Sanchez's experience.