As always I do not have insider information but di have some contacts that are relabel and accurate. If you recall during the Muschamp hire they were spot on. I was surprised that the decision was made now but with new information it makes sense.
To fully understand we need to go back to Caslen's hire and how that became politicized, bringing him in under a cloud of doubt if he was really the right person to take over from Harris Pastides, who was a popular president. Caslen has had an off and on record since then and has worked hard to overcome some of the objections to his hire, with all not being successful. COVID did not help and the financial standing of both the university and the athletic department being well known. It is not good on either front, worse than most.
I do not know all the personalities involved (donors, BOT, politicians, etc) but with Muschamp being universally "hated" (that may be the right word in this day and age) sending him packing was the easy decision except for the $13.2 buyout and more. The USC administration was under tremendous pressure to do something. Apparently it became not if, but when.
Now, this was not, I repeat not, AD Tanner's decision. He may play the lead role publicly and will probably go through all the motions of an AD hiring a new coach but Caslen is pulling every string. Every string. Tanner is the puppet here. Putting aside all the pressure and the cocks losing in embarrassing fashion, this ironically came down to a financial decision and not the way it may appear. Caslen decided that things were so bad that he was losing the fan base, and all that means so after all the fire and smoke, the financial decision was that the buyouts would be less than than speculated losses with new, and maybe permanently, lost future revenues from a shrinking and upset fan base. Added to that equation was that USC spent plenty on facilities that demanded more concession sales, and they provided new venues for that.
There were plenty of players in all this but it came down to Caslen making a popular decision and the bottom line of the lesser of two financial evils. As is usually the case, follow the money. And, of course, it will be made well known that no taxpayer money was used for the buyout.
If Caslen is right in his evaluation, it makes me wonder how closely this mirrors our situation. As the world turns....
To fully understand we need to go back to Caslen's hire and how that became politicized, bringing him in under a cloud of doubt if he was really the right person to take over from Harris Pastides, who was a popular president. Caslen has had an off and on record since then and has worked hard to overcome some of the objections to his hire, with all not being successful. COVID did not help and the financial standing of both the university and the athletic department being well known. It is not good on either front, worse than most.
I do not know all the personalities involved (donors, BOT, politicians, etc) but with Muschamp being universally "hated" (that may be the right word in this day and age) sending him packing was the easy decision except for the $13.2 buyout and more. The USC administration was under tremendous pressure to do something. Apparently it became not if, but when.
Now, this was not, I repeat not, AD Tanner's decision. He may play the lead role publicly and will probably go through all the motions of an AD hiring a new coach but Caslen is pulling every string. Every string. Tanner is the puppet here. Putting aside all the pressure and the cocks losing in embarrassing fashion, this ironically came down to a financial decision and not the way it may appear. Caslen decided that things were so bad that he was losing the fan base, and all that means so after all the fire and smoke, the financial decision was that the buyouts would be less than than speculated losses with new, and maybe permanently, lost future revenues from a shrinking and upset fan base. Added to that equation was that USC spent plenty on facilities that demanded more concession sales, and they provided new venues for that.
There were plenty of players in all this but it came down to Caslen making a popular decision and the bottom line of the lesser of two financial evils. As is usually the case, follow the money. And, of course, it will be made well known that no taxpayer money was used for the buyout.
If Caslen is right in his evaluation, it makes me wonder how closely this mirrors our situation. As the world turns....
