Spotlight Answer
Here's one on who should have been hired following Norm Chow's departure.
Q: If you had the trojans best interest in mind, who would you have rather seen leave for Oakland after the 2006 season, Sark or Lane?
Also, how much credit should be given to sark for his work with the offense or is it fair to say he has benefited from inheriting coach chows system and loads of 5 star recruits each year?
As a head coach, would sark be best fit to start at a mid-major (unlike Orgeron) or could you see him turning around a pac-10 or other bcs school within say 3 years. Thank you
A: Ultimately, I think it matters more that Norm Chow left than who replaced him. Kiffin and Sarkisian are good friends and have a similar view on things. Everyone at USC has benefited from the recruits over the past seven years. I don't think Sarkisian would accept anything less than a Pac-10 level job after he turned down the Raiders.
There very well may be some head coaching jobs opening up in the Pac-10. Of course, DeWayne Walker and Chow might be more attractive candidates.
didn't Walker turn down the Fucla job because of his kid being in school in LA ? Chow may be too old for a HC job when his contract runs out.
What do you mean? DeWayne Walker is working at UCLA.
Lane Kiffen had a rough day.....
Yeah, it was rough for Kif, but at least Fargas did well.