Answer Tuesday, Part II

Q: After watching the game yesterday, it seems to me that one of our biggest problems, with the exception of Jeff Byers, is the young, relatively inexperienced offensive line, both when it comes to run blocking and pass protection.
Do you and/or the coaches expect to see a great deal of improvement in this area as the season goes along?
Is the potential there, or is it just a lack of talent?
Thanx for having the open forums.

A: The line played fine the first two games then suffered a setback against Oregon State. They also struggled against Arizona State. This was not at all unexpected but the first two games caused some people to unrealistically think the line would not go through an adjustment phase. It should clearly be better as the season goes along but it always was going to be one of the main issues for this season.

Q: The only two occasions when Mark Sanchez has played in hostile environments -- at Oregon in 2007 and at Oregon State in 2008 -- he collapsed and looked completely nervous and disoriented when the student bodies of those universities got on him with various chants of "rapist," "molester" and "felon" throughout the game.
There was also the infamous incident with the LA Times where he lied on the record about videotaped evidence against him, when he did not know how to answer the questions so he blatantly lied and demanded the interview end and abruptly walked away.

Now against Arizona State, he set a new USC record with four straight turnovers, including three interceptions, and rather than face the media after the game, he ran out as fast as he could. This was in stark contrast to John David Booty who after the Stanford loss in 2007 when he threw four interceptions, which were due to a broken finger on his throwing hand, stood there like a man and fielded one tough question from the media after another.

So if there is clearly a pattern of immaturity and lack of poise and ability to handle tough situations on the part of Sanchez, why is he allowed to continue? These have been issues and questions that have been raised about Sanchez since he came to USC and continue to plague him to this day. All these reporters are saying that they have never seen a player run off without answering their questions after a tough game, so why is he never held accountable for his actions? If he cannot handle poor situations that are his doing, why is he allowed to keep embarrassing the university in such an immature manner?

A: I don't think any crowd taunts affected Mark Sanchez in those road games, otherwise he might not have played as well as he did at Virginia or Notre Dame. I think it was more a case of the Oregon and Oregon State playing well. Now I have said several times that he has yet to lead USC to a comeback victory, so I think that is a fair point.
The issue with the media after the Arizona State game did not reflect well on the program but I hold sports information more responsible. They know Sanchez is the highest-profile player at USC yet did not even bother to make sure he stayed to address the media. Most of the media were attending Pete Carroll's press conference when Sanchez departed. They are happy to have the media write fawning stories and seek their votes for awards like the Heisman Trophy, so they could also display some professionalism by making sure they best-known player is available. There is a lack of accountability, which causes these P.R. debacles.
It is also troubling that while John David Booty was available to the media every day (including after the Stanford game), Sanchez is not available past Tuesday, a la Matt Leinart. I don't mention this to seek sympathy from fans. Instead I wonder if USC thinks there might be a ``fragile psyche'' issue, which certainly existed with Leinart, who needed positive reinforcement on a daily basis.