Interestingly candid editorial from USC fansite
By Garry Paskwietz
WeAreSC Publisher
Posted Jun 10, 2010
I never saw Mike Garrett play football but those who did say that he did it with grit, passion and power. I've also never doubted that Garrett has a unique love for USC, even during his time as athletic director when I didn't see eye to eye on many of his actions.
I was critical during the late 90's for his handling of the football program and some people thought my words were directed at Mike as an individual. They weren't, they were a comment on his job performance. I freely admitted at the time that the performance of the USC football team was my top priority when it came to USC and I think that fact is proven when you consider I have never written a negative story or column about Garrett since December of 2000 when he hired Pete Carroll.
As far as I was concerned, all was once again right in the USC world as Carroll returned us to our natural spot at the top of the college football landscape. It happened under Garrett's watch and it would have been hypocritical of me to criticize any of his other actions since football was clearly my top priority. However, as we sit here right now and read the report which was handed down today by the NCAA there is one question which keeps rattling around in my head:
Mike Garrett, where were you?
Don't get me wrong, there are some pretty damning pieces of information in the report which contain specific instances of wrongdoing by people other than Garrett:
* The claim that Todd McNair knew about the relationship between Reggie Bush and a marketing rep, and then lied to the NCAA about it.
* The fact that Pete Carroll did not check with compliance before allowing a special teams consultant to attend practices and offer advice.
* The fact that Reggie Bush made multiple requests for cash and goods pretty much eliminates the notion that the infractions were limited to his parents.
* The fact that Rodney Guillory was allowed to be around the basketball program at all, considering the Jeff Trepagnier case.
These four items are among the most obvious examples and it's hard to defend them no matter how thick your cardinal and gold glasses are. However, these are only a part of the case, there are also several lesser examples of questionable actions from the USC athletic department that helped make the NCAA case for "Lack of Institutional Control".
The NCAA admitted that USC had a "thorough rules education" program in place but it wasn't enough in their eyes as evidenced by the statements "Universities may not hide their heads in the sand" and "this institution (USC) fell far short" in that regard. It's not like they pulled those statements out of thin air either, they provided plenty of examples to support their reasoning. Not properly checking the automobile registration of a star student-athlete who shows up in a new car, not properly monitoring employment of a student-athlete, the involvement of boosters or agents in the recruiting process, etc. It's one thing to be punished for a clear violation that is out of your control, it's quite another to be punished for transgressions that could have easily been avoided yet they help make a case for lack of control.
When you add all the elements of the NCAA report together (both big and small) it does give the appearance of the USC athletic department being a loose ship and it's clear we needed a pit-bull leader more than ever to keep us away from those landmines. We needed someone to stand up to the most popular man in Los Angeles and say you are pushing the envelope too much. We needed someone with the credibility to have a hard talk with the star running back in a way that only a former star running back could do. We needed someone who didn't care how good the basketball recruit was if he was associated with someone who had already gotten us in trouble. These were the times we needed Mike Garrett the ahletic director to step up and be a tough leader. We needed him to be Iron Mike. Unfortunately, it didn't happen and now we are left with the situation we're in today.
There is still a chance the NCAA penalties will get reduced through the appeals process and, to be honest, I think there is merit to the thought of a one year bowl ban and the loss of 7 scholarships a year. The two year ban and loss of 10 per year just seems a little excessive to me. No matter what happens though, the program has been stained. The athletic program that Mike Garrett and countless others hold so close to their hearts has been clearly damaged and that won't change even if we see some slight adjustments to the penalties. We have now been branded as cheaters. I know Mike Garrett didn't want this any more than I did, I just know he was one person who had the power to make sure it didn't go down like it did.
Last edited:
