Fighton247 Board

Yabbut, he still wrote, "Lane Kiffin now a strength for USC, not a hindrance," which is complete bullshit. Kiffin helped keep that initial class together. Kiffin had a PLAN on how to minimize the impact of the sanctions on the football program. In short, Lane Kiffin was never a "hindrance" for USC (thus far).

TLK

Yes but in a very passive aggressive tone which is totally Mandel.

Is it not rather ironic -- I'd say absurd -- that PSU running back Silas Redd is transferring to USC, a school emerging from severe NCAA sanctions because its athletic department ignored payments made to its (wait for it) star running back? How is this considered part of the big reform?
-- Rex Roberts, New York

Sorry, I'm not getting the Redd/USC backlash. If the NCAA is going to decimate a kid's football program for something he didn't do, it can't then put stipulations on his alternatives. Redd is a college football player, not a professional. Like the rest of us, he deserves the right to attend any college that wants him.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Mandel nailed it. The haters who claim USC shouldn't be able to recruit any Penn State players are REALLY saying those players should have their options limited by being denied the right to attend any college they feel is the best fit for them.

I thought it was a good article also....it seems the haters are coming around.

Fight On!

Then, how was CLK a "hindrance"?

TLK

This.

I think this is a case of a bad headline.

Okay. I see your point. Admittedly, I read the article like it was going to get in a few digs at CLK while praising him at the same time. The headline got me in that kind of mood.

Upvote for you.

TLK

Maybe.
But I've noticed that, even among USC fans, there are those who will say that last year, the team won games "in spite of" the HC, and that they got to 10-2 on talent alone. I believe that even if we win the title, there will be those among the media and fans who will call him our Les Miles, who wins titles through luck, a fortunate schedule, great talent, etc....anything other than his being a good coach.

I think after the yelling match on the field with messiah Chow there were going to be haters. It wont ever go away even with a national championship. But those fans are very few in my view.

Generally I've always been supportive of Lane, even when the whole "Chowista" thing was happening on the other board. Even as a layperson, I could see that he had a lot of promise, and I had faith that Pete was a good judge of coaching talent as well as player talent.

The only time I got a little bit critical that I can recall was early last season and the year before when Lane was coming across a little uptight now and then; like many I worried that the players couldn't relax and just go out and do their best because Lane seemed - well - a tad overly dour at times. I wanted to yell, "It's a game, have fun!"

In retrospect I think that was overblown. He and the team pulled together just fine, and the results showed on the field. I think he's been doing a heck of a good job and continues to improve as he gets more head coaching experience. He's finding his own style - not just mimicking everything Pete or Monte does, but incorporating aspects of their approaches into what works for him. He, Pat and JK seem to have developed a great relationship as well.

I'm feeling quite good about the state of the program, now and going forward.