Sarkisian v. USC: USC defeats Sarkisian's $30M wrongful term suit

Discussion in 'Trojan Huddle' started by Lizelle, Jul 9, 2018.

  1. SoCalN8tiv

    SoCalN8tiv Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,727
    Likes Received:
    5,259
    Jul 12, 2018
    #22
    Good news, it's about time something went USC's way in court. Sarkisian is one of the biggest USC head coach disappointments - snactions or not.
     
  2. denali15

    denali15 Points Member


    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2017
    Messages:
    2,043
    Likes Received:
    1,544
    Jul 12, 2018
    #23
    Perhaps the dumbest thing about Sark's hire...Haden paid $800K to a search firm to contact him. You'd think someone in the Athletic Dept might have kept his phone number somewhere.
     
    Rodgarnay51 likes this.
  3. The Lizard King

    The Lizard King Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Jul 12, 2018
    #24
    Ted Tollner is right up there too.
     
    Rodgarnay51 likes this.
  4. heyrev

    heyrev Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    758
    Jul 12, 2018
    #25
    Hard to be disappointed with a guy whose only HC experience before USC was Morro Bay HS. Talk about low expectations...
     
    BlueBlood likes this.
  5. The Lizard King

    The Lizard King Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Jul 12, 2018
    #26
    True. I hadn't considered his qualification for the job (which was OC for John Robinson).

    My post meant to convey that I was disappointed in the team's performance during his tenure. I could have stated Paul (Can't) Hackett as well.
     
  6. Arhedge

    Arhedge Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    3,002
    Jul 12, 2018
    #27
    You mentioned Paul Hackett. For years, I didn't think that name should be written down or mentioned out loud. Hackett was in a whole different category of bad. There has never been a worse head coach in any sport, at any level, at any time.

    I'm still stunned Mike Garrett hired that guy. Who hires a coach at USC when he was under 40% in winning percentage at his last college job? He failed dramatically at Pitt. And just because he churns out some decent -- not great, not overwhelming, not innovative, just decent -- offenses with the Chiefs, you make him head coach here!?

    Garrett gets credit for stumbling his way into the Pete Carroll hire, but his decision to hire Paul Hackett was as about as foolish a decision as you'll ever see.
     
  7. PickSicx

    PickSicx Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2,174
    Likes Received:
    2,788
    Jul 12, 2018
    #28
    This still boggles my mind.

    His struggles were WELL KNOWN. The stories of Sark out cruising Seattle bars, getting drunk and hitting on women were common fodder on Seattle sports radio. Infidelity and alcoholism: that's a fine combination—but nobody put a stop to him getting hired. Not to mention that he wasn't a good coach. What the heck was Haden thinking? And on top of it, he elected to play hundreds of thousands of dollars to a search firm in order to have Sark's name rise to the top of the list? That's malpractice, on both Haden's part as well as the search firm. Apparently money is so plentiful at USC that they can piss it away by the millions, and Haden is never held accountable for his gross incompetence and fiscal mismanagement.

    No need to wonder how the boondoggle Coliseum tower got approved. Haden's folly.
     
  8. BvB09

    BvB09 Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    817
    Likes Received:
    242
    Jul 14, 2018
    #29
    Boggles the mind that confessed drunkard would blame his former employer when he was undoubtedly drinking on the job and bringing shame to his employer.
     
    Rodgarnay51 likes this.
  9. uscvball

    uscvball Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    3,864
    Jul 14, 2018
    #30
    What was he thinking? He was thinking.....PC told me to hire this guy. You think PC didn't know about Sark? Where did Sark come from? You think beer just started popping up in the locker room when Lane and Sark took the reins? I've said it 1,000 times...like hires like because it's a guarantee of mutual silence. It should have been clear when the mind-boggling decision was made to "give Sark another chance" after the Salute debacle and then USC promptly served him up to the media when it was clear he was high as a kite.


    No, it's called plausible deniability.

    USC looked the other way for 30 years while female students were getting sexually harassed and abused. You think they care about Haden hiring a drunk? Max was bringing in the hundreds of millions. THAT is what they cared about.
     
    CrownoftheValley likes this.
  10. uscvball

    uscvball Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    3,864
    Jul 14, 2018
    #31
    He knew shit. It's not that mind-boggling.
     
  11. BvB09

    BvB09 Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    817
    Likes Received:
    242
    Jul 14, 2018
    #32
    I haven't seen the numbers, but my understanding is that Haden managed the most profitable period in the history of USC athletics. It stands to reason that his outstanding fiscal performance is perhaps a primary reason the other shortcomings were overlooked or tolerated.
     
  12. uscvball

    uscvball Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    3,119
    Likes Received:
    3,864
    Jul 14, 2018
    #33
    Of course you haven't seen the numbers. By what method/individual did you come to this understanding? I find it to be inaccurate and misleading. Football figures are completely separate than athletic in general. With the contract payoffs for Lane and Sardrunkian, USC wasn't exactly rolling in the dough. If you are considering renovation donations, which have been substantial, that's not exactly a sustained period, only a short-term bump. He also benefits from the Pac-12 TV deal although he left a lot on the table so he can't count that either. I am confident that the PC-era was the most profitable for USC football and that Garrett overall did better than Haden. Afterall, it wasn't Garrett who agreed to bend over for the NCAA, costing us millions in TV revenue, post-season playoff $$.

    Again, not outstanding by a long shot. Nobody looked his way because of what Max was doing.....and not doing.
     
    CrownoftheValley and Rodgarnay51 like this.
  13. 3rd Slide

    3rd Slide Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,192
    Likes Received:
    1,128
    Jul 14, 2018
    #34
    What boggles my mind is how Haden went from being a hero to a stain.
     
    Pudly76 likes this.
  14. Rodgarnay51

    Rodgarnay51 Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,782
    Likes Received:
    1,183
    Jul 14, 2018
    #35
    WOW!!
     
  15. BvB09

    BvB09 Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    817
    Likes Received:
    242
    Jul 14, 2018
    #36
    You're just wrong. This is actually pretty common knowledge and was reported in the LA Times.

    "A turbulent 2013 football season that included coaching turnover and a trip to a lower-level bowl game did not prevent USC's athletic department from breaking the $100-million benchmark for the first time, according to a report that must be filed annually with the U.S. Department of Education as part of Title IX compliance."

    Football revenue increased by $1 million in 2013. In 2016, USC’s athletic department brought in a record $113.2 million in revenue.

    "The USC athletic department listed at least $100 million in revenue for a third consecutive year, according to figures provided by the school in its annual Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act filing."

    USC reported total expenses and revenues of $106.2 million for the period covering July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. It showed balanced budgets of $105.9 million and $106.2 million during the previous two fiscal years.

    "For the 2016-17 period, USC’s football revenue increased by more than $8 million to $59.8 million, while expenses decreased by $1 million to $30.2 million." And while this period includes months after his departure, fundraising, particularly in the corporate sector, played a large part and he was part of that planning in early 2016.

    That's what the guy was judged on.
     
    Pudly76 likes this.

Share This Page