O/T who fared better USC or Stanford after loss of coach?

[Hawktown]

The only reason i ask is because i don't watch college football. I am curious to know which team fared better (sanctions aside) after the loss of pete and jim, and why that team fared better. Who was devastated the most, if at all? did USC suck after the loss or did stanford, or either one? Can this question be used as a barometer for who was a better coach or who happened to have more talent at the time.

I am sure it is all subjective but i would like to hear your thoughts.

[mykc14]

There is no doubt that Stanford has been better, but it would be hard to pin it just on Pete leaving because of the sanctions and lack of scholarships. With PC USC was 91-19. Since he left (before this season) they are 28-15. With Harbaugh Stanford was 29-21 and have been 34-6 without him. Pretty big difference in both cases. Stanford was pretty bad before Harbaugh got there though and he definitely had them moving towards that 34-6 record, but he really didn't have any great seasons until he had Luck.

[Hawktown]

thanks mykc14, kinda what i was looking for i suppose for some meaningless info.

[RiverDog]

The only reason i ask is because i don't watch college football. I am curious to know which team fared better (sanctions aside) after the loss of pete and jim, and why that team fared better. Who was devastated the most, if at all? did USC suck after the loss or did stanford, or either one? Can this question be used as a barometer for who was a better coach or who happened to have more talent at the time.

I am sure it is all subjective but i would like to hear your thoughts.

It's pretty hard to set aside the sanctions issue when discussing this subject. The sanctions were a major reason why USC crashed and burned after Carroll left, and Pete was at least partially to blame for the sanctions.

Pete left a relatively empty cupboard when he left in 2010, of which little can be attributed to the sanctions as most of us realize that recruiting occurs 4-5 years prior to player graduation. In the 5 years post Carroll from 2010-2014, USC had 7 players taken in the first or second round. Contrast that to the previous 5 years prior to Carroll leaving, from 2005-2009, where the Trojans had 18 players taken in the first two rounds. 2008 alone saw as many players taken in the top two rounds as in the 4 years after Pete left. Again, this is all relative, as even the 7 players USC had taken post Carroll in the top two rounds is a lot more than Stanford had at any point in recent history, but Stanford had more players taken in the top two rounds in the 4 years after Harbaugh left(6) than the 4 prior years(1).

I know it's not a topic a lot of us Seahawk fans like discussing as it's drawn out a lot of emotional outbursts and accusations of Pete hating, but don't think there's any question that Harbaugh left Stanford in a lot better shape than Pete left USC.

[Seahawks4Ever]

You claim you don't hate Pete Carroll yet here you go again kicking our Super Bowl winning head coach in the teeth.

[obiken]

As a Duck Alum, I would say Stanford by far. I still have serious doubts about Sark. IF I was a Husky fan that you told me I would lose Sark and gain Chris Peterson, I would be doing backflips!!

[RiverDog]

You claim you don't hate Pete Carroll yet here you go again kicking our Super Bowl winning head coach in the teeth.

Boy, that didn't take long, did it?

I didn't start the thread. I responded to the OP and did so in a very factual manner. If you feel I was in error, then point it out rather than simply telling me that I'm kicking him in the teeth.