Executive Response Isn’t the Ticket at USC

Re: Don Winston’s response to T.J. Simers’ column taking USC to task for its shoddy treatment of Sam, a seriously ill basketball season-ticket holder: Mr. Winston (an official of USC’s athletic department) admits the offense, apologizes, and states that USC has made it up to Sam. He then complains that it was “irresponsible” and “reprehensible” for Mr. Simers to characterize USC’s behavior as “blackmail.”

Does anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of USC’s athletic administration over the last few years really think that USC would have corrected its treatment of Sam without Mr. Simers’ column? USC threatened to take an action against Sam (not giving him the seats he had paid for) unless he made an additional “donation.” A reading of Webster’s would indicate that Mr. Simers’ characterization of that behavior as “blackmail” is not irresponsible; in fact, it’s not even a stretch.

If USC’s administration were smart, they’d stop trying to justify themselves; of course, if they were smart, they wouldn’t be USC’s administration.

George Legg

Rolling Hills Estates

*

Upon reading Don Winston’s drivel, it became apparent to me that he was explaining how politically correct blackmail is in university fund-raising. My question: Why is Winston so upset at T.J. Simers for pointing this fact out?

Peter Hochschild

Camarillo

*

T.J. Simers obviously isn’t taking his valium. His rants against USC and all things Trojan are getting old.

Only a sports section so obviously biased against USC would permit Simers’ trash to be published. What does The Times do with all the front halves of the horses, left over from when you hire your sportswriters?

Bill Saracino

Glendale