Steve Sarkisian Doesn’t Coach Here Anymore

So, what exactly are my feelings on the Steve Sarkisian leaving USC to coach at Washington and Pete Carroll replacing him from within?

Well, first of all, it’s Pete Carroll’s team, and he can certainly do whatever he thinks is best. Nevertheless, I do feel it shows a double standard not to let transferring Vidal Hazelton play out the season while letting Sarkisian coach in the Rose Bowl.

Having to recruit and hire a staff will certainly be more distracting for Sarkisian during the next month than planning a transfer will be for Hazelton.

This is especially true if you are figuring to hire an offensive coordinator from within. Why not let John Morton plan the offense for the Rose Bowl and see how he does? He certainly has to be less distracted than Sarkisian.

Overall, however, I feel Sarkisian has done a fine job. Yes, he has made some mistakes. But who hasn’t?

Yes, the offense sputtered at times and has been hit-and-miss the past two seasons. But what offense hasn’t? Okay, Oklahoma, Texas and Florida. But I’m not sure the Trojans have the talent on offense that does three schools have.

No, I don’t want to hear about the Trojans top recruiting classes and the load of four-stars and five-stars they bring in every year.

That’s raw talent. It’s not refined talent. And how does talent get refined?

Talent is developed on the practice field. But it is refined on the playing field in actual game situations.

If I do have one criticism of Sarkisian and possibly Pete Carroll as well, it’s this. Sometimes, you need to decide if you want to have a consistently successful Top 10 program or a national championship.

Now that may sound contradictory, but let’s examine it for a moment.

USC has had 7 consecutive Pac-10 titles, 7 consecutive BCS bowl appearances, 6 consecutive top 4 or better finishes (7 if they beat Penn State). But only one BCS title game appearance.

Florida has had 2 appearances in 3 years. Oklahoma, which USC beat in the 2005 game, is back again this year; USC is not. Texas, which beat USC in the 2006 game, many believe deserve to go this year. According to the polls, few believe USC deserves to be there.

All three of those schools have a quarterback under consideration for the Heisman Trophy along with Graham Harrell of Texas Tech. All four either started or shared duties at quarterback their freshman or redshirt freshman years.

But none of those teams have had a string of consecutive Top 5 or better seasons.

All except Florida suffered less than Top 10 seasons with an inexperienced but talented freshman at the helm. At Florida, Tim Tebow shared quarterback duties, and they went on to win the BCS Championship.

My point is this. By chosing a young quarterback with loads of raw talent over one who has the experience but not all the skills may cause a team to fall out of the Top 10 one year. But refining that young talent through game experience can eventually lead to an offensive powerhouse if all the other key factors are in place.

While some have complained that Sarkisian was too conservative, my one criticism is that he wasn’t conservative enough.

I feel that he should have “dumbed-down” his offensive sets and schemes to the point where a raw talent like Mark Sanchez could run the offense as a redshirt freshman instead of the more experienced but less talented John David Booty.

USC might not have won eleven games in 2006. They might not have won a Pac-10 title. They might not have played in the Rose Bowl.

On the other hand, with a year of game experience under his belt, Sanchez would have taken care of business last year against Stanford and probably even against a healthy Dennis Dixon and Oregon, insuring a BCS title bid.

This year, the Oregon State game would have turned out differently, and the sputtering offense would have run like a well-oiled machine. Instead of having two one-loss teams in the BCS title game, there would have only been one.

Sarkisian felt that he needed that experience to run his offense and kept an injured Booty in the Stanford game rather than going with Sanchez.

That obviously was a mistake, but I feel it was further compounded by not letting Sanchez finish out the year as a starter. Again, USC might have slipped up at the end of the season. But this year it would have been an altogether different story. The USC offense would have been on a par with its #1 defense.

I respect Sarkisian’s dedication to a player like Booty who had devoted so much time and effort to the program. My only question is did Sarkisian stick with him because of Booty’s devotion or because Sarkisian values experience over skills.

So, as far as Pete Carroll’s decision to hire an offensive coordinator from within is concerned, I don’t think it makes that much difference.

Whether the O.C. comes from within or without, the important thing is to hire a person who can recognize raw talent and work with that talent regardless of experience.

The new O.C. needs to be secure enough in his own abilities to refine that talent in game situations. Since the O.C. will be working directly with the quarterbacks, I do feel it is important to have an O.C. who can also take over as the quarterbacks coach.

That could be vital should Steve Sarkisian’s biggest fan decide to leave once his mentor is gone. Who is his biggest fan?

Mark Sanchez.