Arhedge Junior Member Joined: Aug 24, 2017 Messages: 2,273 Likes Received: 6,741 Jun 3, 2021 #21 I want to make sure I understand your position, Wolfpack. You're saying there is no hire to replace Helton that would be a guaranteed success. I agree with that ... but only now that Meyer is out of the picture. Meyer has USC in the playoff almost immediately. But can't we agree that somebody like Fickell or Campbell is far more likely to be successful than Helton is? It's not like Helton hasn't had enough time to recruit his guys and implement his system, whatever that system is supposed to be. Helton is below average, and he'll never be anything other than below average. Second, you're saying there are reasons other than Helton why blue-chip recruits have chosen to leave California and go elsewhere. And I agree. But we should also be able to agree that if Helton were a better coach -- somebody known for developing talent and winning, somebody that blue-chip recruits, their parents, and their coaches could trust to make the most of a talented kid's career -- that fewer blue-chip recruits would leave California and the west coast. If Pete Carroll were still at USC, very few blue-chip recruits would be spurning USC for the SEC or (for crying out loud) Oregon. Some would leave, and he would pull some superstars out of SEC territory, too. But most of the top guys would stay, because they know they'd be developed and would win. If you're pushing back against a position of "anybody but Helton," then I'm with you. Hiring yet another inept coach would be a disaster, as the guy will get at least three and probably four or five years. For one of the first times in recent USC history, the administration needs to make a smart hire this time. But that doesn't mean that you leave in place somebody who can't do the job. What kind of logic says that because the next guy might be lousy you should continue to pay $5 million per year to a guy you know is lousy? Last edited: Jun 3, 2021 SC93er, AMLTrojan and gubo&palanka like this.