OT: Mike Garrett axed, Tom Hammond to rule with an iron fist

Submitted by PurpleStuff on July 20th, 2010 at 2:19 PM

It looks like USC is set to axe Mike Garrett with former Trojan quarterback, Rhodes Scholar, and long time Notre Dame color man, Pat Haden, to take over as AD. 

http://insidesocal.com/usc/archives/2010/07/haden-new-ad.html

Seems like a pretty big step up for USC.  No word yet on who will replace Haden in the booth alongside MGoLegend Tom Hammond, but my guess is that Hammond will now run the show by himself, single handedly creeping out an entire nation.

Comments

M-Wolverine

July 20th, 2010 at 2:31 PM ^

ESPN is reporting it too...

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/news/story?id=5395550

 

And I wonder if Garrett is getting canned because everyone else is just jealous of him...? (I'm guessing, not today).

And did anyone else, at first read, think that Garrett's replacement was an ex-USC quarterback named Rhodes Scholar?  I mean, what are the odds.... (Funny, if still accurate, comma placement).

PurpleStuff

July 20th, 2010 at 3:49 PM ^

Max Nikias, who has just taken over as president of the university, apparently flipped out when Garrett made his ridiculous, "Y'all just jealous" comments.  Once that happened Garrett was gone according to SC's beat writer.

http://insidesocal.com/usc/archives/2010/07/firing-line.html

UPDATE: It looks like that ESPN article you posted was just updated with more info.  USC is returning Reggie Bush's Heisman Trophy (the school gets one and the player gets one) and removing all banners/posters/pictures featuring Bush or Mayo around campus and the athletic facilities.  Awesomely harsh quote from the new university president about the decision regarding Bush/Mayo:

"The Trojan Family honors and respects the USC sporting careers of those persons whose actions did not compromise their athletic program or the opportunities of future USC student-athletes," Nikias said.

PhillipFulmersPants

July 20th, 2010 at 3:12 PM ^

from one of my Southern Cal friends who's on top of that program, so "inexplicable" isn't exactly right. It's a decent enough explanation, though if I were the board of regents , I would have just gone ahead had the president fire his butt anyway and name some associate AD the "interim" AD until the successor was installed. What's the worst that could happen if they had no AD for 60 days?  Instead, the university looks a bit foolish, I think.

PurpleStuff

July 20th, 2010 at 3:22 PM ^

If Garrett had been canned right after the sanctions came down or following his dumbass "jealous" comments, I think things would have looked worse (i.e. "the shit has completely hit the fan and we are freaking out").  As it is, his firing is now a quiet offseason story and I'm guessing as much focus will be on Haden taking the job as there is on Garrett leaving.  The story can be spun as an exciting new chapter rather than a gaping hole in the athletic department.

Once Garrett opened his mouth about the sanctions, any slim chance he had of staying was destroyed.  Firing him in this manner looks more like a calm decision that (in my opinion) dramatically improves the athletic department rather than a move resulting from knee-jerk panic.

PhillipFulmersPants

July 20th, 2010 at 4:53 PM ^

Fankly I'm surprised he survived Paul Hackett (zing!). 

It's a tough call. Tim Floyd and Carroll were both his hires. Both got them major sanctions. That's squarely on Garrett. Ironically Carroll  was his savior after a very pedestrian first several years of AD-ship, and then ultimately his demise. 

Anyway, I can see why USC would want to control the damage, but can't say that I have a lot of respect for the timing.

PurpleStuff

July 20th, 2010 at 3:07 PM ^

I always thought Haden was there to give the strong appearance of a neutral, impartial broadcast.  The Notre Dame-only contract at NBC seems like a recipe for an obnoxious, homer broadcast but I think Hammond/Haden do a pretty good job avoiding that.  If they had someone like Golic cheerleading in the booth it would turn off the big chunk of their viewership that tunes in hoping to see ND lose, making them less money in the process.

PurpleStuff

July 20th, 2010 at 5:31 PM ^

I guess that is why I said "appearance of an impartial broadcast."  I think just having commentary come from a guy who played for their chief rival (even if that commentary is from a strong ND perspective a lot of the time) gave the broadcast a little more legitimacy.  If someone like Theismann did even the exact same job, I think neutral or anti-ND viewers would probably not be able to stand it.

umjgheitma

July 20th, 2010 at 2:46 PM ^

At ND when Manningham had about 30 yards on the nearest defender and Henne just lofted it in there. My jaw dropped when I first saw that then couldn't stop laughing when I just hear a soft "Oh he's open." One of my favorite ND moments....of course there are others above it....

MGlobules

July 20th, 2010 at 2:49 PM ^

back in the 80s. I got a temp job with NBC Sports World and used it to get over to Ireland and my girlfriend by piggybacking on a big Irish horse race. (I got to sit with the trophy, made of Waterford Crystal, in a limo for a while, I remember.) His eyes looked right through you then, too.

CincyBlue

July 20th, 2010 at 3:00 PM ^

Tom Brady is coming for your job.   Maybe Drew Henson or Brian Griese.  Didn't Brian have the highest score on the Wonderlick test?  Wonderlick = Rhodes Scholar?

baorao

July 20th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^

"USC is giving back Reggie Bush's Heisman Trophy"?

Is that like Michigan basketball taking down Final Four banners? Or do they actually have possession of the trophy, will hand it over to the NCAA and Reggie Bush will never see it again?

PurpleStuff

July 20th, 2010 at 5:04 PM ^

When somebody wins the Heisman, their school gets a trophy and the player gets a trophy.  SC is giving theirs back but Reggie still has his.  So yeah, it is more like taking down a banner as the trophy will no longer be on display in their athletic offices.

Kal

July 20th, 2010 at 5:58 PM ^

If USC doesn't acknowledge it, does that mean the Heisman committee will eventually take his back? And could they retroactively award it to the runner-up (Vince Young)?

clarkiefromcanada

July 20th, 2010 at 8:54 PM ^

This sort of sets up one or the other of them; you always have to lay your money on the AD. Kiffin, Oregeron et al. were around during the corruption era at USC so it will be interesting to see how this thing works out between them and Haden. 

Haden will have pressure from tall over the place...the fickle LA and SC fan (they are with you win or tie) will not support a loser while, at the same time, he needs to maintain revenues. Haden may envision a "clean" program  but it's hard to say if he can make the Stanford model work in a culture of Snoop Dog fandom. 

Tater

July 20th, 2010 at 8:08 PM ^

...but I really can't find anything to bash about this choice.  Haden is a great choice to clean house, because his credentials are academically, athletically, and ethically solid.  If USC is to crawl out of their current mess, having a Rhodes Scholar to lead them out is brilliant, both mechanically and politically.

Considering the decision to revise USC history to not include Bush and Mayo, I wonder how long Kiffin survives?