Apr 13, 2013; Los Angeles, CA, USA; General view of the Southern California Trojans spring game as quarterback Max Browne (4) takes the snap on the USC logo at midfield at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

Pete Carroll's Run at USC is Incredibly Overrated

How many times have we heard the national media and in particular football fans on the west coast refer to the USC run in the mid-2000s as a “historic run?”

Steve Sarkisian and Lane Kiffin always talk about it in press conferences. Fans act like it was the greatest stretch in college football history. Even Fox Sports recently said that Carroll’s run at USC “unlike anything that may ever be seen again.” 

What a joke! I’m going to change that line to say that the overhyping of Carroll’s run at USC is unlike anything that may ever be seen again.

With the news this week that Carroll will get inducted into the USC Hall of Fame, we’re hearing more talk like this, and I’d like to be spared this ridiculous overkill, so it’s time to debunk the myth behind this “amazing run.”

First, let’s get some things out of the way. Yes, he brought the Trojans back to power, and yes, it was a great run. He had six straight Pac 10 championships, USC was No. 1 in the AP Poll for 33 weeks, and it had three Heisman trophy winners during that time to go along with the 2004 BCS National Championship.

So what?

Let’s go ahead and give Carroll a break and ignore the fact that his lone BCS Championship was vacated due to NCAA sanctions. It’s still an overrated run.

Shouldn’t dynasties win more than one national championship? USC in this “incredible run” has one title to show for it. Florida had two from 2006-2008, more than the Trojans during their “incredible run.” LSU also had two, in 2003 and 2007, which is more than the Trojans during this “incredible run.” Alabama had three in four years.

Don’t give me that shared national title spin from 2003 that Trojan fans claim because they were No. 1 in the AP Poll, because if that’s the case Auburn gets a share of it in 2004 since some polls declared them No. 1. That would mean USC only shared two national titles and never won one outright. And speaking of 2004 Auburn…

USC’s lone BCS national championship came when they didn’t even have to face the best team that year. Instead of playing Auburn, who was undefeated and should’ve been in that game, Carroll and Co. were given a very overrated Oklahoma Sooners team, who was “Chokelahoma” under Bob “Big Game Choker” Stoops at the time. I’m still of the mindset that Auburn would have destroyed USC that year, who got to pad stats against pathetic Pac 10 defenses. Just go down the roster. Reggie Bush would’ve looked as soft against that Auburn defense as he looks in the NFL, and Matt Leinart, who never had to face any tough defenses in college, would’ve looked like Matt Leinart at Arizona.

This “historic run” also includes six straight Pac 10 championships. Want a cookie? The conference was pathetic during this time, yet the Trojans still usually managed to choke to at least one mediocre team a year with the exceptions of 2004 and 2005. Remember unranked Cal in 2003? What about unranked UCLA in 2006? There was lowly and unranked Oregon State in 2008, and the most famous one, a loss to unranked Stanford at home in 2007. This is all part of this “great run” Pete Carroll was part of. But true, he did manage to win six straight titles in a conference that only had one other Top 10 team three times during that run. Whoop-de-doo.

I guess it is true that they also had three Heisman winn…. I’m sorry. I couldn’t finish that statement without laughing out loud as I typed it. So they won multiple glorified popularity contests voted on by the LA Media. Does USC honestly think three beauty pageant winners counts toward a football run? Keep your Heisman trophies, which have gone to countless NFL busts, Matt Leinart being one of them.

Fox Sports ignores one major fact when saying that USC’s run under Carroll is “unlike anything that may ever be seen again.” There have already been way more impressive runs. 

I already mentioned that Florida, LSU, and Alabama have all had more impressive runs during this time. I’m not done.

Florida’s run from 1993 to 1998 is on par with USC’s. In that run the Gators had four straight SEC titles (much more difficult than six straight Pac 10 titles) and just as many national championships as USC during the 2000s: One. Miami had a run from 2000 to 2003 when they won four straight Big East titles (on par with the Pac 10 during that time), won a national championship, and got robbed of back to back undefeated seasons. There’s also Tom Osbourne’s run of three national championships in four years in the 1990s at Nebraska.

There’s also Florida State’s run of 14 straight Top 5 finishes and nine straight ACC titles (which was also as competitive in the 1990s as the Pac 10 was in the 2000s).

We can even take history back a bit further.

Remember Oklahoma’s run of 47 straight wins from 1953 to 1957? What about Alabama’s runs in the 1920s, 1930s, and 1970s? Tennessee’s run in the late 1930s and early 1950s. Michigan’s and Notre Dame’s runs throughout college football history.

I can even name more impressive USC runs, when they won multiple national titles in the 1930s, 1960s, and 1970s. All of those Trojan runs dwarf Carroll’s run.

So please, let’s stop with Carroll’s “great run” at USC. It’s not even the best run for the Trojans, and it doesn’t make the Top 10 of greatest runs of all time. This is just an annoying overkill by the media that’s gone on for too long.

And although I said I would leave it out, it can’t be ignored that the sanctions and the forfeiture of the only national title during that run would’ve been the kill to squash all this nonsense. I mean Carroll did leave Lane Kiffin a mess that he ended up getting blamed for.

But that’s a topic for another day.

Tags: Feature Pac 10 PAC 12 Football Pete Carroll USC Trojans

comments powered by Disqus