USC AD Pat Haden last night issued an apology for "interacting with officials on the sideline" during the USC-Stanford game on Saturday, according to Gary Klein of the L.A. TIMES. Haden is a member of the CFP selection committee, so his actions "sparked controversy and calls for him to be removed from the position." Haden in a statement said, "I should not have approached the game officials. I should have waited until after the game and gone through the appropriate channels" (L.A. TIMES, 9/8). The Pac-12 today reprimanded USC Coach Steve Sarkisian and Haden for their roles in the altercation, and fined Haden $25,000 (Pac-12). In L.A., Lindsey Thiry noted Haden "jogged across Stanford Stadium field between the third and fourth quarters of USC's 13-10 victory after he said he received a text message" saying Sarkisian "wanted to talk to him." USC had "just been penalized a combined 35 yards on three consecutive plays." TV cameras showed Haden as he "stood next to Sarkisian on the sideline, engaged in an animated conversation with officials." In postgame interviews, Haden said that he was "not arguing with officials and did not get emotional." However, footage "seems to suggest otherwise" (L.A. TIMES, 9/7). Haden said, "I got a text to come down (to the field) because Sark wanted to talk to me. He felt the call on him was unfair and the referee explained he had warned him and that's why he got the penalty, but it's been a really frustrating quarter with the penalties, believe me." ESPN L.A.'s Heather Dinich noted the CFP "does not send its committee members to games, so Haden was acting in his role as the school's athletic director, but his involvement in the game raised an already hot topic about bias from the 13 committee members" (ESPNLA.com, 9/7).
REASONS FOR CONCERN? In L.A., Bill Plaschke wrote to "expect Haden to be resoundingly criticized this week for several reasons." It is considered a "breach of protocol for athletic directors to interject themselves in the middle of sports events." CFP committee members "probably should never involve themselves in a football game," as it "detracts from the credibility of their impartiality." USC also "quite possibly violated an NCAA rule that states there can be only voice communication -- no text -- from the bench area to the top of the stadium." There were "many reasons the ailing Haden should not have been on that field." But for USC fans, "surely, none were as compelling as the one belief that brought him there." Haden has "earned the right to run down and throw a few haymakers for his guys." It is "fair to speculate Haden could be entering the autumn of his USC tenure here." He has "completed his mission" and "made the athletic program whole again." But as Saturday "magnificently proved, the old quarterback can still sling it" (L.A. TIMES, 9/7). USA TODAY's Dan Wolken wrote Haden "should resign" from the CFP selection committee, and he "should do it today." CFP Exec Dir Bill Hancock "should nudge him in that direction" if he refuses. The 10 FBS commissioners also should "intervene and demand a change." An AD running down to "argue penalties and making a spectacle of himself on national television does not exactly scream impartiality and level-headedness." ADs are "supposed to be out of sight, out of mind during games" (USATODAY.com, 9/6).
SIDELINE WARNING: The Boston Globe's Bob Ryan said, "We know this is stupid. We know this is ridiculous. We know this is unprecedented." The N.Y. Daily News' Mike Lupica added Haden "took himself off of the selection committee" with his actions. Lupica: "Hit the road on the committee, because he does not belong" ("The Sports Reporters," ESPN2, 9/7). In L.A., Chris Dufresne writes this is "everything we imagined could go wrong when commissioners decided to allow acting athletic directors to be members" of the new CFP committee. It was behavior "unbecoming an AD and a committee member but, ah, there lies the rub." Dufresne: "You can't do either job justice." It is a "real stretch ... that he should be removed from the panel." The solution "doesn't need to be radical." Dufresne: "Make sure future replacements don't cash checks from universities that could make the playoff" (L.A. TIMES, 9/8). CBSSPORTS.com's Dennis Dodd wrote Haden's "first priority should always be the condition of USC athletics." He is "merely a volunteer for the new playoff selection committee." This incident "was a bad look, but that's about it" (CBSSPORTS.com, 9/7). In N.Y., Marc Tracy writes of the selection committee, "Apparently, when it was designed, no one considered how the committee members should be expected to behave when they’re not in their committee meetings." Should Haden and his peers on the committee "try to stand detached from the fandom to maintain an air of impartiality?" Or is it "all right if they paint their chests, wave foam fingers and call the opposing quarterback’s hotel room at 3 a.m.?" It is "unclear how much Haden was acting in contravention to the playoff’s principles -- because the new system does not have established principles" (N.Y. TIMES, 9/8). ESPN’s Mike Greenberg said, “Haden is a great example of how your lifetime of goodwill builds you up a benefit of a doubt, which is to say Pat Haden has earned the benefit of the doubt. Was this his finest moment? Absolutely not." Greenberg added, "But the part you then say to yourself is, 'Does this seem like the right idea that people who are obviously this passionate about a team and everything else are the ones who at the end of the year are going to, based on whatever criteria they choose, make the decision of who it is that plays for the championship?" (“Mike & Mike,” ESPN Radio, 9/8).
