Read the full NCAA report on sanctions against USC at ncaa.org. and you will discover what the NCAA found with respect to the wrongful conduct of USC football’s assistant coach on the Reggie Bush matter. So do not claim that USC did not know or lie to cover up. IMHO, the fact that the same assistant coach is still employed with USC speaks volumes on USC’s lack of integrity and proclivity to reward cheaters.

But then I heard former Washington State coach Jim Walden on Jeff Aaron’s KJR sports-radio show last Saturday, and as a result, I’m trying to cut Carroll some slack. You’d think that head coaches would know everything about their players, but they don’t.

“If no one tells you that one of your kids is doing something, you don’t find out ’til the news hits,” Walden said in a phone interview Monday afternoon. “I never had an idea of where the parents of one of my kids were living. I don’t want to hang it on Pete Carroll at all, but they always go to the highest level.

“Blame Pete Carroll if you want to blame him, but I’ll be strongly on his side. It’s absolutely bogus. Reggie Bush is not his one concern. He’s got 84 other guys. You just don’t have time for them all. You have no way of knowing. He’s only coaching those kids; he’s not running their lives.”

Carroll initially won Walden’s support by not having his vastly superior team run up the score against Washington State the past two years.

“Not once did he indicate that he was trying to put it on us by doing one of those (Jeff) Tedford B.S. deals,” said Walden, who can’t stand the Cal coach for pouring it on the Cougs. “Pete Carroll is a man of dignity. He showed his colors to me.”

But I don’t think you squarely addressed my point. “Tradition” is whatever you make of it. The Pac-10 was the Pac-8 in my lifetime. Has adding the Arizonas destroyed tradition? Pre-1990, all Pac-10 schools did not play each other. Since 1990, that has been the case. Which tradition is better? The Rose Bowl agreed to abandon the Pac-10/Big-10 matchups. Where is your outrage directed towards them?

And if it matters so much to have each Pac-10 team play each other, that can still happen in a Pac-12. Granted, everyone only gets a single out of conference opponent, and that might get a little boring, but tradition for tradition’s sake can be preserved. Just to note – traveling to Nebraska in 1999, Michigan State in 2002, and Tennessee in 2006 were pretty freaking awesome.

2) The scheduling has NOT been perfect in the past, as Eric points out. If there had been a tie atop the Pac10, the team that went to the Rose was the one that hadn’t been as recent as the other. But it recently DID become perfect when the NCAA allowed a 12 game season (9+3 for all Pac10 teams, not 8+3). So, now that it finally became perfect, don’t abandon that.

3) Rose totally hosed Cal in 2004. The bastards! But not other bowl game has a parade in Pasadena on New Years Day.

4) There are billions of dollars in college football and basketball. The kids are slave labor, and should instead be paid! Larry Scott is getting WAY more money than any of them, but they are just chips to move around, no? That reeks!

I had the privilege of attending the Cal-USC game in 2003, and I think that that triple-overtime victory was as much fun as winning the national championship for the athletes, coaches, and fans. I’ll take those sorts of experiences any day over winning a national championship by corrupting the University and its teams. (Should we take a moment here to thank Coach Tedford, Coach Montgomery, and the rest of the Cal coaches for being such good examples and running programs that uphold the honor, integrity, and excellence of the University? Would only that the administration serve the University as well.)

Let’s stop pretending about history, tradition, blah blah blah. You remind me of Grandpa Simpson complaining about the metric system. Players leave early all the time now (Jason Kidd anyone? Aaron Rodgers? Marshawn Lynch? Desean?), but that wasn’t always the case. The number of bowls has so greatly expanded that teams that go 6-6 go “bowling,” cheapening the entire enterprise. And, most obviously, it wasn’t all that long ago that the Pac-10 football WASN’T a format that required playing each other Pac-10 school. 1989, Cal did not play ASU. 1988, Cal did not play Oregon. 1987, Cal did not play Washington or Oregon. Does “tradition” only start in 1990?

And if you want to go back into the mists of history, the Rose Bowl WAS the national championship game, pitting East versus West. It wasn’t always Pac-10 versus Big-10 (or 11, or 12).

And it used to be that the best team wasn’t always the one who made it to the Rose Bowl. Didn’we get jobbed out of the Rose Bowl in the 1970s with Joe Roth?

Anyway, Jabes correctly noted, that the Rose Bowl concept – at least we knew it pre-BCS – is gone. Even in 2004, when we got screwed by that whore Mack Brown, we still would have only backed in (putting aside the cheating by U$C), so it wouldn’t have been pure anyway. At this point, with the Rose Bowl not really the Rose Bowl as I knew it when I was at Cal (for the record, graduated in 1995), I would love a pure playoff system, and expansion across the conferences is going to make that happen. The Mountain West, with Boise State, now has a very good case for an automatic bid. The expanded Big-10 (or 12, I guess) will always clamor for 2 spots. The ACC and Big East will either expand to preserve their spots or will fight for a playoff. It is inevitable. For the Pac-10, if we have to expand, I like Colorado, and I like Utah. Both are more in tune with west coast schools, and have real academics, far more than T Tech, OU, and OSU. Besides, thinking of the snowboarding opportunities for those away games.