Round 2

Q: With all of the hype Everson Griffen came in with last year, do you think he was worthy of it? Do you think he was more advanced at that age than BKU or LoJack?
A: The hype Griffen received was really too much and most of it came from Caesar, by the way. But he was definitely worth it because neither Kenechi Udeze nor Lawrence Jackson played as true freshman and got a year to physically develop. In retrospect, it might have been better to redshirt him, but he wanted to play and when Kyle Moore injured his arm, he filled a role. Griffen did not get the luxury of redshirting and over time improved. He should be a much better next season and should start at defensive end.

Q: Do you feel that USC hurts itself by trying to become too specialized on offense and in turn limits the overall development of players? For example recruiting a small receiver to fit the Kareem Kelly role, or having a big back/little back, possession receiver etc. It seems like some teams have more experienced seniors with well rounded skill sets while SC has say Travon Patterson or Joe McKnight that are pushed into a role that used to be filled by a previous player before getting a grasp of the college game.
A: USC's recruited so many talented players over the years that it can afford to try and find a specific role for each one. If Joe McKnight went to Arizona last year, he would probably be an every-down back from the outset, instead of getting a slow transition period. Eventually, I think he could be an every-down back, but with Broderick Green around, he does not need to be a short-yardage back. I guess this is the byproduct of the embarrassment of riches. Similarly, Ronald Johnson was basically used as a deep-threat receiver. At a lesser program, he might be used in a more varied role off the bat.
But I tend to think players determine their roles to a great degree. Mike Williams was an every-down receiver as a freshman because he was a polished player. So was Dwayne Jarrett. So when someone is ready, they tend to make their own way into the offense.

Q: You have indicated on several occasions that the staff didn't have a lot of confidence in Sanchez and that is why he wasn't subsituted for Booty during the course of the Stanford game. You also used similar words about lacking confidence in Sanchez when they brought Booty back after the Oregon game. Wouldn't the fact that the staff lacked confidence in Mark indicate that the competition in the spring for the starting QB may be a little more open then some people are saying? Can you comment on just what is it that the staff lacks in confidence about Mr Sanchez.
A: The lack of confidence stemmed from a lack of experience. After the Oregon game, the coaches had a quarterback with three games experience vs. one with about 17 games of experience. The reason a lot of analyst types are saying Sanchez is the frontrunner is because he's had three years running the offense in practices while Mitch Mustain's had a semester of practices so far. So Mustain has a big hill to climb. I don't think it's insurmountable but it's fair make Sanchez the leader entering spring practice.