Floyd out at USC
by Grady Clapp on Jun 9, 2009 7:41 PM PDT
Email
PrintWow.
Floyd submitted his resignation saying that he "no longer had full enthusiasm for the job". Also, he probably cheated, but I'm sure that has nothing to do with his decision.
Possible candidates? Anyone?
18 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There are none
What coach will touch this with a ten foot pole? Nobody wants to lay their rep on a program that is about to be absolutely slammed by the NCAA. There’s a reason Floyd left and it is probably because USC is trying to save face and because both USC and Floyd know what is coming next.
I would take that job in a heartbeat
Remember when Thad Matta took over Ohio State? They were staring down sanctions, too. Probably not the lack of institutional control stuff, but bad stuff nonetheless. If you’ve got a chance to get a head coaching job, you take it — no matter what. Want to know why people continue to take the Raiders job? Ask Paul Westphal. The guy has been an abject failure in his past two head coaching jobs, yet he gets hired again.
Once you’re in, you’re in.
Also it gives you a few years of "grace period" with which to recruit your own athletes
By which I mean that you have a ready-made excuse for losing seasons while you’re installing your new system.
Also, I’m not sure if the NCAA will really slam them. It feels like USC should have it coming after years of allegations in both football and basketball, but really the NCAA can only prosecute what it can prove, and at this point it looks like they can only prove $1000 went to Mayo’s handler (if that!).
by johnnycougar on Jun 10, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Oh, I disagree
really the NCAA can only prosecute what it can prove
The NCAA is not a legal institution. There is no prosecution. As an organization whose members agree to be a part of it, they can do pretty much whatever they want to the institution. They don’t have to “prove” anything.
by Jeff Nusser on Jun 10, 2009 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions
well, technically
I guess I thought they are usually pretty reasonable about those sorts of things. Although I didn’t consider the full ramifications of “lack of institutional control” for the job.
But I still feel that any head coach who takes that job has nothing to lose except a few years of his life struggling uphill. Maybe you won’t be able to get to the tournament for five years, but no one could blame you! It’s a win-win job if you’re not an elite coach. I would be really surprised if USC tumbles as a powerhouse (in any sport) because of NCAA crackdowns, because it still has everything going for it (location, alumni, tv deals, fan base) which probably won’t be lessened even if they are penalized for a few years.
by johnnycougar on Jun 10, 2009 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Add the Bush investigation which may still be bubbling under the surface
By combining the two investigations, the NCAA showed they’re really looking at the dreaded lack of institutional control. I really think something is coming soon for USC. Floyd being fired was a face saving move by USC. The AD is probably next to go all in an effort to show the NCAA that they are doing something. If they are labeled with lack of control, it spells doom for the athletic department as a whole. An established coach probably will not want to jump into this job, leaving it to an assistant or a coach that wants to make a name for himself.
Make no mistake about it, this job is a long haul rebuilding effort. They have no recruits at this point and their established players are all jumping ship to the draft. That program is not in a good spot right now.
Plus, you know you're going to get some serious coin
SC is going to have to pay a pretty penny to whomever they can get to be the next head coach. Because the next coach will presumably face some pretty tough conditions, they’re going to have to toss out some pretty darn good cash…especially if they want to hire a “name” coach to right the ship.
by '03CouveCoug on Jun 10, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Promoting as assistant to interim head coach
Is what they will likely do. Then next year when the dust settles they will start an actual national search.
....
This is the obvious choice imo.
by Roy Weaver Stuckey on Jun 9, 2009 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Paul Westphal....
would be the perfect choice and I think he’d be very interested in getting back into college coaching. Just saying….
At his age, he’s not looking for greener pastures. He’s an alumni, knows the territory, has coached at the college level before as head coach at Pepperdine, and this is a chance to help out his alma mater.
I don’t think Mike Garrett will last too much longer. There are going to be sanctions and Westphal would easily be able to handle the transition through all of that and bring the program back to respectability.
I think he’s wanted this job for quite some time. I don’t think he cares about the sanctions as long as he gets the support of the administration. The fans and alumni base would be grateful someone as qualified as him would be willing to do it.
must have missed it...
Westphal just got hired today as the Sacramento Kings coach. It’s gonna be an asst. coach until the violations go away.
by Roy Weaver Stuckey on Jun 9, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions
No kidding....
I thought of Paul Westphal and had no clue he was hired by the Kings. I’m clueless, no doubt about it. lmao
The investigation must
be getting close to done. Either Floyd saw the writing (sanctions) on the wall or the administration forced him out.
http://wsufoundation.wsu.edu/giving/enteramount.asp?Fund=Martin%20Stadium%20Project
The later, probably, and not the former
It seems like a face saving move on the surface. You cannot tell me Tim Floyd lost his passion for the game. We’ve all seen him and know he’s got plenty of passion to go around. More likely, the AD knows something is coming and this is a “look NCAA we can handle our problems” move
At Least Alabama Admits When It Cheats Now
by StraightOuttaPullman on Jun 12, 2009 12:21 AM PDT reply actions
Not sure how this should result in vacating wins
It’s not like it provided a competitive advantage. Essentially, these guys stole — they should all be forced to pay restitution or face charges.
The whole nonsense of giving up wins seems like a silly punishment to me.
If you were a team that lost to Memphis in the 2008 tourney and they had all those wins taken away, where does that leave you? More bitter about the loss because the other guys were cheating.
I never really liked the old tagline.
CougCenter
by Craig Powers on Jun 12, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
