OT: L.A.Times- Sarkisan Had "Issues" at Washington, Too

Submitted by Chitown Kev on

 

It seems that former USC coach Steve Sarkisan's alcohol problems were quite known and even well-documented during his stint as head coach at the University of Washington. 

 

http://www.latimes.com/sports/usc/la-sp-usc-sarkisian-washington-20151012-story.html

The L.A. Times story has its' comic elements, to be sure, but overall, it's simply a story of the (hopefully) final descent of Sarkisan to the bottom so that he can get the help that he needs.

 

Been there and done that. I'm pulling for Mr. Sarkisian.

My question is that given how well documented Sarkisan's issues seem to have been at Washington (where his drinking issues seem to have been an "open secret"), this can't reflect well on USC AD's Pat Haden. Either Haden knew the extensiveness of Sarkisan's problem and hired him anyway or he really didn't know...and I don't know which is worse.

 

 

 

 

Jack Hammer

October 15th, 2015 at 2:38 AM ^

I'm sure his contract had standards he needed to live up to. He didn't. Very unfortunate. All parties moved on. My emotions are more with Steve and the hope he can be a good dad and ex-husband long term. Not an easy path he is embarking. On the USC side, they will be fine. After Lane and Steve, maybe go after a character guy. Or Will Ferrell. Will is a damn fine motivator.

Chitown Kev

October 15th, 2015 at 2:51 AM ^

that maybe those standards weren't in his contract...if that is true (more likely it's implied in ambiguous language) then Haden and USC was either that stupid or that desparate to get a coach...also, forget UW for a sec, did Garrett and Carroll have any inkling of it (given the the stuff that the story has, Washington may have been kinda sorta glaf to be rid of Sarkisan)

wolpherine2000

October 15th, 2015 at 11:24 AM ^

...USC, when Haden announced his suspension, knowing that they would have an interim coach for the rest of the seaosn, I really hoped that they could hold off on termination and give him a chance to clean up and return.

I can't think of a time when this was happened at that level of the sport and it would have been a nice (and rare) display of humanity and compassion over a concern for winning (in what is after all an amateur sport).

But then they fired him. Best of luck to coach Sark.

bjk

October 15th, 2015 at 12:22 PM ^

that denies students all manner of compensation (including medical compensation for on-field injuries) using the "amateurism" ruse, while commercializing every other aspect of the game and compensating coaches at NFL levels, I don't think the treatment of coaches is relevent to the increasingly laughable "amateurism" of the sport. That said, I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the rest of what you say. As we know, it is a tough sport. If they had held on to him, it would still have been out of a concern for (eventual) winning.

Yo_Blue

October 15th, 2015 at 7:41 AM ^

Haden goes for the short term glitz.  He has that Hollywood mentality and hires by "appearance" more than substance.  Haden wouldn't look twice at McKay, Robinson, Tollner, or Smith if they were younger and available because they aren't "sexy" enough for LA.

Pat Garrett was a far better AD than Haden.  He found and hired Pete Carroll who returned USC to being a monster.  Haden's big claim to fame was being reprimanded for going down on the field to help Sark attempt to browbeat the officials.

UofM626

October 15th, 2015 at 10:35 AM ^

Landed at USC DO YOU? Carroll was not the 1st choice or the 2nd choice or the 3rd choice or the 4th choice. Listen dude! Carroll bugged Mike Garrett for months about that job as they walked on campus because Carrolls daughter was a student there. Mike told Pete countless times that he wasn't in the running from day 1. After USC was turned down by at least 7 coaches ( yes 7 ) Pete cornered him when Garrett was walking by the student union and basically begged for the job and told him that he had learned from his mistakes etc: this is a true story. I can go on and on as to who turned SC down. Riley, Bellotti, Peterson, OBC, the list goes on and on.

CARROLL FELL INTO GARRETTS LAP BY DEFAULT! Garret gets zero credit for that!!!

The Victors

October 15th, 2015 at 11:11 AM ^

Are we really going to say Garrett was a "far better" AD because of 1 great hire?

We seem to be quick to forget--that "great hire" got USC in a lot of trouble with the NCAA because of the win-at-all-costs culture he, and the AD, created. USC vacated a national championship, lost a ton of scholarships, and was given a postseason ban--one of the harshest punishments in NCAA history.

Garrett is also the guy who said, "As I read the decision by the NCAA, all I could get out of all of this was...there was nothing but a lot of envy, and they wish they all were Trojans," after the hammer was brought down on USC.

I'm not saying Haden has been a good AD.  In fact, I believe he's been a pretty poor AD. But I wouldn't exactly call Garrett better. Both are terrible, just different kinds of terrible.

Yeoman

October 15th, 2015 at 11:46 AM ^

Garrett's first choice was Dennis Erickson. He whiffed. Then Mike Bellotti. It was only after he'd been turned down by Mike Riley that he offered the job, in desperation, to Carroll.

Sure, it turned out to be a great hire if you don't mind all the sanctions and baggage that came with it. But he would rather have had Mike Riley.

ElBictors

October 15th, 2015 at 10:11 AM ^

That's like asking if it's worth $500 for a tune up.  For your 2004 Chevy Impala?  No way.  For your 2015 Porsche?  Yes.

When millions are on the line, what's a few hundred thousand up front to a private school like USC?

 

peanuts

wolverine1987

October 15th, 2015 at 2:24 PM ^

A search firm is very useful in private business, but in that world, most people don;t know who works where and who's the head of marketing at company x. But all coaching information is public knowledge, and anyone who takes the time can research very easily in a weekend, who a list of candidates might be.

Ty Butterfield

October 15th, 2015 at 2:07 AM ^

Certainly sounds like he has had some issues for awhile. Hope Sark can get things under control and turn his life around. I have had my own battles with alcohol. Never went to meetings or rehab, but I turned my life around. Started running, lost 60 pounds, met an awesome woman and got married. I still have a beer every once in awhile but it has become pretty rare. I may have to crack one open if Michigan can somehow get past Staee on Saturday.

Year of Revenge II

October 15th, 2015 at 10:13 AM ^

Most people in general want to give you the benefit of the doubt when you are sick.  Hard to blame USC or Haden for Sark's sickness.  Only Sark really could say for sure.  It is possible to function for a time at a higher level like Sarkisian did, but there is really only one way to go---down.

The circumstances of my own escape from denial were on the front page of the newspaper, and the lead story on the evening news in the relatively small city (compared to LA) I resided.  It makes it a little different, but really, you feel so horrible at that point, it hurts, but you don't even care.  That was 25 years ago.

But no matter who you are, or what you have been, there are more people watching than you think.  

Like you, I hope Sark embraces the opportunity to have a life he never imagined possible, and faces it rather than runs from it.  

HARBAUGH

ElBictors

October 15th, 2015 at 3:18 AM ^

Haden has clearly tried to scapegoat the 'hiring firm' and has been overtly defensive in his actions.  Hell, I don't work in high profile collegiate athletics but have been made aware of a potential candidate's social habits during a hiring process more than once.

IMO, Haden is toast.

Especially if the theory is true that Haden wanted to fire him before he could be diagnosed as an alcoholic.

 

Hope Sark gets his life together - the anecdotal stories are pretty dramatic

vdiddy24

October 15th, 2015 at 4:05 AM ^

I lived near South Lake Union and frequently saw Sark, other UW coaches, and what looked like active UW players (they could have been grad assistants) drinking frequently at Joey's South Lake Union and Citrus. 

The article actually undersells the incidiences, as you could easily read into the claims as a coach that had too much fun traveling on the road or at crowded bars on the weekend but it was actually much more depressing than that. I mostly saw them on Wednesdays and often there weren't many other patrons at the bar at all, but they were all incredibly intoxicated.

I'm pretty confident that I saw them there before a Thursday game as well.

Mr. Yost

October 15th, 2015 at 4:36 AM ^

and on ESPN multiple times.

I know I'm being a whiny baby about it - but this has been a shit week for board topic and everyone's sensitive on it.

But this was already posted and there have obviously been 3 other Sark threads as things progressed with his situation.

This time article also doesn't tell you that much (you didn't know) besides the player comments. I've worked in athletics for many years now...I know coaches with bar tabs that long who don't even drink. Clearly not the case with Sark, but just saying it doesn't prove that much. Unless someone can prove he was drinking all of it by himself.

Head coaches make millions - most assistants and staffers don't. Who do you think picks up the tab when they all go out?

Hell, just last month I was out with my family for dinner - our head basketball coach was eating with his 4 assistants and we happened to be seated next to each other. Before leaving Coach tells the waitress that he wants to pay for all of our alcohol. We were far from raging...but his tab obviously got a little longer.

Anyway, Sark is out of control and clearly needs help. The stuff we already knew was the bad part...keeping alcohol in his office, bar hopping, alcohol on his breath at the ASU game, showing up to team meetings smelling like alcohol, etc. - the public records request could've been left out and it's still a horrible situation.

Regardless, all of this has been discussed on TV, in the media, and on MGoBlog...I suppose we can get OT - Lamar Odom next.

In reply to by ijohnb

Kalamablue

October 15th, 2015 at 6:56 AM ^

His point though is that his has been posted numerous times this week. The article is from Monday- this isn't breaking news. It's been discussed ad nauseum already.

bluinohio

October 15th, 2015 at 7:53 AM ^

wow, nice essay on a topic you don't think should be a thread.  you guys need to get over yourselves already.  i think we've had enough of the bitching about threads.  maybe you have seen it for the last 3 days on mgoblog, espn, fs1, etc., but not all of us cling to every headline or article on every topic.  it's nice to get caught up with everything when i'm not busy in my actual life.  not all of us can spend 24 hours a day on message boards from our moms' basement.

Clarence Beeks

October 15th, 2015 at 8:14 AM ^

Not everyone literally lives on the blog message board and sees every. single. thread. People who only read/contribute via mobile would never know this was already posted unless they happened to read the specific day it was posted (and while it showed up as a 20, or whatever the number is, most recently posted topic), as there is no search functionality.

StephenRKass

October 15th, 2015 at 12:38 PM ^

Quit being so crabby. You've been around here plenty long enough to know that if you don't want to read a thread, you don't have to. As it happens, this is the first time I've read one of the Sark threads. With the page down feature semi-permanently broken, it is a pain to look back very far in the week. Also, if there is any new information, it is fine for something to be posted more than once. Be thankful that there is a lot of good stuff to post on, from recruiting to the play of Michigan to the angst of enemies to all the myriad ways no one has it better than us.

Blue Balls Afire

October 15th, 2015 at 12:14 PM ^

I don't think everyone is sensitive about it--only a coterie of self-satisfied MOD wannabes with a lot of points and their sycophantic mutual-enablers.  There seems to be a competition among them:  First to point out a repeat thread: three points; first to claim a topic is not worthy: two points; first to be unnecessarily smug: 1 point; first to be pedantic: 10 points plus a set of steak-knives.

Profwoot

October 15th, 2015 at 6:17 AM ^

I've seen some BYU folks hoping he'll coach at his alma mater for a while as he cleans up. It'd presumably be a good environment for it. I don't know if the admins would allow it though, and they seem pretty set at HC and OC so it'd have to be as qb coach at most.

I don't know if too many teams will be keen on handing him the keys so maybe that's what he will need to do anyway.

ijohnb

October 15th, 2015 at 7:10 AM ^

sometimes the real problem is concealed from public view for a while. A problem drinker can do their social drinking at the bar and their REAL drinking when they get home. Enablers don't always know they are enabling when the problem is developing.

PopeLando

October 15th, 2015 at 3:24 PM ^

Think you have this wrong. And this is only because I've seen serious alcoholics fall apart in my life, so just take this as one guy's experience. You don't need help to get drunk. You don't need furtive bartenders slipping you drinks. You don't need friends to look the other way. We have all seen friends get drunk repeatedly, over a long period of time. We have all BEEN the friend who gets drunk repeatedly. This stuff happens. In a lot of cases, maybe Sark's too, there are a lot of people who LOOK like enablers, but aren't for two reasons: 1) it's hard to tell how drunk an alcoholic is until it's too late. 2) try telling a hardcore alcoholic that they have a serious problem and need to get help. Try saying that to a friend and see how long you stay friends. Blaming the people around Sark is irresponsible.

evenyoubrutus

October 15th, 2015 at 7:52 AM ^

Alcoholism is no joke. I found out last year that my lawyer died of complete organ failure due to alcoholism at freaking 34 years old. Then of course there are the family issues it can create. It's not a fun thing.

Danwillhor

October 15th, 2015 at 8:20 AM ^

is just no joke. We all made fun of D.A.R.E. as kids but they weren't lying when it came to most stuff. Outside of a single joint turning you into a raging lunatic they kinda nailed it. I have experience and witness to that as I live in a very drug flooded town. I've lost a lot. 34 is too damn young, that's almost my age.

ijohnb

October 15th, 2015 at 9:23 AM ^

when it gets to a point when you are actually performing your job responsibilitied intoxicated you are no longer performing at a high level.  People who are at the stage where they use drunken oblivion as a reward for sober performance may still be able to perform well, but when you are attempting to perform your craft while intoxicated you are exposed almost immediately.  I don't think it is a coincidence that USC was looked upon as a Top 5 talent team and got taken to the shed by Stanford and beat by Washington, it kind of figures.