I don't think it "lacks integrity" to do what he did. Maybe I'm weird, but if I have a "dream" job that is across the country that would make me happier, my family happier, and would just be an overall easier job at a better company that also happens to pay more, then I'm taking it. I don't care if I'm 2 weeks into the current job. How often does the USC job come open? There's no way to know when Kiffin would get a chance at USC again. Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't.
Not the whole picture. It does lack integrity to sell the future of what you will do with a program to the players on the team, the fans and the university and then to ditch all of that before you even begin to deliver it. It lacks integrity to say that you are "all Vol" and then do something that hurts the Vol program over personal satisfaction.
Some jobs come with a higher level of responsibility than others. Leaving a job that involves architecting and executing a relatively long-term plan on which a lot of people are depending is not the same thing as leaving Chevron to work at Exxon because you like the weather better in California.
As far as your initial questions go, the players will respect Kiffin. He threw plenty of UT players off the team. He doesn't have discipline issues. Now, if players go off and do dumb things on their own (a la Nukeese and Co.), then no coach can control that.
Goodfellas.
Being a respected leader involves a lot more than being feared. At some point, if you rely on that, your punishments only foster resentment rather than a sense of justice. Part of leading is projecting that you believe yourself in what you are saying. Talks that every coach has to have about sticking with a commitment, following through and integrity will be hollow words for Lane Kiffin and everyone knows it.
Also, how is Kiffin the "laughing stock of college football" and still able to reel in the #2 recruiting class? I don't think top high school players think that he's a laughing stock. The bottom line is that it WAS a smart business decision if for no other reason that it is a much more comfortable situation for him. USC is a better program than UT. It just is.
That wasn't Lane Kiffin's recruiting class. It was already established by other people. A lot of kids are probably sticking around because they think that they have a good shot at winning at USC, whoever is the HC.
And there is evidence that players do think Kiffin is a laughing stock. I'm sure you remember this:
"When I got there, Coach Kiffin and some of the other guys were cussing a lot and up in your face, and I didn't like that," Eastland said. "They never said anything about the school or the academics; it was all just about coming to play football for them. I knew (Kiffin) was up to no good when I met him. I just felt like something wasn't right.
"Then we all got in a room and some of them started ripping their shirts off. I thought they were idiots. I thought it was stupid and I wanted to leave, but I was afraid it would have been disrespectful. That just wasn't my type of environment."
Kiffin will have a short leash probably at USC. But, it's pretty hard to struggle at USC. He's already landed a stellar recruiting class. He's in the PAC-10 which is 10x easier to win in than the SEC. He'll continue to recruit really well. I honestly think that he'll have similar success to what Carroll had.
If Kiffin isn't a laughing stock, why would he have a short leash? How is it a good business decision to do things that give you a short leash?
The Pac-10 is easy to win in even though USC, with back-to-back-to-back top recruiting classes got their asses handed to them by Stanford and Oregon and lost to Washington and Arizona last year?
Yeah, I guess it just depends on how you judge it. I judge it by the ability to win. It's easier to recruit and win at USC. The PAC-10 isn't the SEC, and California isn't Tennessee. Recruiting and scheduling are probably the biggest 2 factors in winning. That's why I think USC will always be ahead of UT as long as the PAC-10 remains weak b/c I don't see the recruiting changing.
I think you're selling Carroll's CEO and recruiting ability short. We got used to USC standing out because he had a remarkable run there. But, those of us who have been watching for a while (not saying you haven't) will remember that it wasn't that long ago that USC sucked. In fact, before Pete Carroll, USC mostly sucked for about twice as long as they have been recently good.
As someone else pointed out, these things are cyclical. UT could become the USC of the future. At UT, Kiffin had the long-term support as someone building a program up. At USC, anything that goes wrong will be seen by fans as a sign that they have the wrong guy. As you suggest yourself, the perception is that anyone should be able to win at USC. That's why it was a stupid business decision for Kiffin to damage his integrity to go to a program with immediate expectations to win the conference.