We know that Lincoln Riley is an elite football coach, and that Clay Helton is not. We know that USC’s current coach understands the game at a molecular, granular level, and that Helton didn’t grasp a lot of basic components of the craft. We know that USC is a nationally relevant program under Riley in ways it very rarely was under Helton. Only the singular brilliance of Sam Darnold gave USC a brief period of prominence in the Helton era, but without Sam, Helton floundered.
Riley has restored USC and has the program poised to achieve bigger things in the coming years. Helton — who will face USC and Riley in 2025 — is now at Georgia Southern, removed from the cutthroat world of Power Five football.
We know the gap in quality is significant, but what is a more specific and detailed way of getting at the difference between the two coaches?
USC football analyst Josh Webb really seemed to get to the heart of the matter, at least in terms of showing how they treated the running game and offensive play calling:
“The idea for Riley is that opposing defenses do not have enough men to account for all of the talent on the field,” Webb explained. “If they want to double up and take away Dorian Singer or any elite receiver, that’s fine. Riley can use the talent discrepancy to exploit many weaknesses. It’s really not fair to ask a defense to account for all of those players, but that’s the job and they’re going to have to try.
“If Riley’s offense is working as it should and the run game is complementary to the passing game rather than secondary, as it had been during the Helton administration, then USC should see massive returns.”
The running game being complementary, not secondary, is a great way of showing how Lincoln Riley understands football at a higher level.
[lawrence-auto-related count=1 tag=696092269]