Forde Needs a Bailout

Whenever there is a coaching change, a lot of fans go overboard. At Tennessee, they apparently have mistakenly confused Knoxville with Poland circa 1989. Impressive show of Solidarity, though. Ha!

So, thank goodness national media figures like Pat Forde are here to calm everyone down and to bring perspective to this situation. Pat Forde, that voice of reason, who only got his job because he was the guy at the Lousiville-Courier who broke the 2003 story that then Louisville-coach Bobby Petrino was interviewing for the Auburn job before it was even open, certainly wouldn't do anything crazy like exploit and add further fuel to this fire. No way. He'd just write something like this. In case you can't read, and I'm looking at you Tennessee fans and "alumni", don't worry, he also appeared on the Doug Gottlieb show on ESPN Radio and PTI on ESPN (that's a television channel, Rocky Top Nation. It's like a radio, but with pictures!).

If you don't feel like reading senseless drivel, and I know you probably do on a Friday morning, let me paraphrase for you: Lane Kiffin is a worse version of Hitler and Darth Vader combined.

In lieu of writing an actual, coherent essay, allow me to follow my own lead from the post-national title game hubub and just respond point by point to some of Forde's assertions.

1. Lane Kiffin is a horrible person for taking this job

And we open up 0-1. Alright, I am supposed to believe that Lane Kiffin is a horrible person for taking this job? This job that he never went on a Saban-esque rant swearing he wouldn't take, because no one ever asked? The job that he told his AD, on Saturday when USC called, that if he got the offer he'd take? Gasp, betrayal!

I know a lot of people have jumped on Kiffin for this, both in and outside of the mainstream media, but let me try to break this down. Lane Kiffin was offered a pay raise. He was offered a pay raise at a school that has a better history, reputation, and talent on the roster than his current roster. He was offered a pay raise at a school that is without a doubt the most prestigious school on the West Coast. He was offered a pay raise to leave a school that he had no ties to, to return to a school that he coached for for four year. He left his job in Knoxville to take a job in Southern California. He left the job for a pay raise at a school that plays in a conference that gives him a better shot at a conference and National Title game.

Listen, it's cruel if you are a Tennessee fan, but this job is a promotion. USC is a better job than Tennessee. This also leads me to my next point

2. Lane Kiffin is a horrible person for breaking a contract

Let me poke holes in this argument in two ways. First, his contract included a clause that declared if Kiffin was fired or if he resigned before the end date of the contract, the party that terminated the contract would owe the other party $800,000. This means that from the first day of the f-cked up marriage, both sides had already planned on divorce. So the idea that Kiffin "betrayed" the university is ridiculous. It's also hypocritical. No school, other than Notre Dame, is ever lambasted for firing a coach early. So, Tennessee could have declared this season's 7-6 result "unacceptable," fired Kiffin and no one in the media would care after a day. Or, if Pete Carroll had called Tennessee last weekend and said, "I want a new challenge, and you're it," they wouldn't have dropped Kiffin like Tupac dropped albums after he died (tragic)? Kiffin didn't break the contract, he followed the rules of the contract and terminated it early. If I was Jemele Hill, I would find some cool way to phrase this view, but sadly I can find no clever way to work Marlo Stanfield shouting "My name is my name!" I wish Cleveland was more street.

Second, the reality is that there is a hierarchy in academia. In the NFL, you have an equal chance to win with all 32 franchises. Everyone spends the same amount of money, so being in one market or another, one division or another, doesn't make certain jobs more attractive than its peers. That's why you don't see coaches leave one job for another mid-contract. In college, it's different. If you are tenure track at Tennessee, then the school has given you a lifetime contract. No one would ever fault a professor at Tennessee for leaving his tenure track position for the same position at Harvard. Harvard means better pay, better resources, smarter students, better location, and better publishing deals for your work. Sure, you could build up your program at Tennessee, and maybe even occasionally have a groups of students that rival Harvard's. But at Harvard, you would consistently do better with less effort.

It is the same thing with college football. USC is an Ivy League school of football. It has the best resources, best athletic pool, and the best financial capital. Going there is a no brainer as a coach. You get paid more to win more with less hassle.

3. He didn't earn this!
This argument is based on Kiffin's career record: 5-15 with the Oakland Raiders and 7-6 with Tennessee. I'm not exactly sure what an NFL record has to do with college coaching, after all, Pete Carroll was barely better than .500 in the NFL and Bill Callahan took a team to the Super Bowl. Besides, who the f-ck wins in Oakland?

So, let's look at Lane's college track record. He was a highly successful recruiter for USC as an assistant. He was a decent play caller as offensive coordinator, if decent is having an offense in 2005 that averaged 45+ points per game and made it to the national title game. He was the right hand man for five years for arguably USC's greatest coach. At Tennessee, he took a five win team and in two years, brought in one top 10 recruiting class, improved the team to seven wins a took them to a bowl game, drastically improved an awful quarterback in Jonathan Crompton by making him servicable, and had more or less locked up another top 10 recruiting class. If he had been hired in 2006 when he was still at USC, people would've thought it made sense. When the king leaves, you promote the heir.

He doesn't have a strong sample size, but to say he didn't "earn it" is pretty weak. Mark Richt didn't "earn" the job at Georgia, since after all he had never coached a winning team, but he's worked out great. Carroll hadn't "earned" it since he had never been a head coach in a college game or coordinated a recruiting season. Flipping out about Kiffin's experience is pretty ridiculous, and only looking at the evidence that proves your flimsy point is lazy and poor journalism.

4. He is a dirty recruiter, which is the last thing USC needs
Well, now that is completely correct. He was a lead recruiter when USC brought in Reggie Bush, which is like marrying the person you have an affair with-- you know they'll do it again, but it's your fault for not seeing it coming. In light of Kiffin's own repeated secondary violations at Tennessee, it's an incredible display of hubris to hire him one month before they go before the USC with the threat of the "lack of institutional control" penalty out there. Ahh, hubris.

Also, if Kiffin's lead recruiter Ed Orgeron really was calling players that were already on campus in Knoxville to follow him, that's beyond low. And, unlike John Calipari apparently, Kiffin will be held responsible for his assistants.