the ol' ballcoach gets whamboozled!
this is my second post today that's not really about bad journalism. still pisses me off enough to link it. read this and tell me it's not completely ridiculous. what is becoming of college athletics? are you serious? a coach can actually say this about his employer? i know even academically prestigious schools like notre dame have a certain number of "exemptions" their coaches can use to bring in athletes that might not traditionally fit the resume model of an admitted student. but at some point they've got to draw the line. it sounds like south carolina drew such a line for spurrier... and now he's pissed... and as a result he and the school are close to reaching some kind of an agreement about not drawing any more lines in the future. what the hell is wrong with this picture?
8 comments:
ok but look at it from spurrier's point of view:
he promised these kids they could come play football at south carolina if they met certan academic obligations. then they have their admission denied.
it's clear that their was a breakdown in communication between SC and Spurrier and I really doubt it was at Spurrier's end
no, they didn't meet SC's academic requirements, which is usually (correct me if I'm wrong) a prerequisite for attending a school. Just because they are NCAA qualified, doesn't mean they can go anywhere they want. I'm sure a big state school like SC has extremely lax requirements for student athletes as well. I'm really not worried about retards who probably scored a 860 on their SATs. If they want to play for an academic institution, they have to qualify as students. they can go to a Junior college, like every other half-brained dolt who has done it before them.
Spurrier is completely, 100 percent in the wrong. if you coach for a school, you have to play by the school's rules. Spurrier has coached in college long enough to know how things work
i'm not saying anyone's right or wrong.
i'm saying, for some reason spurrier was under the impression that these boys would be able to get in to the university--whether it be because he wasn't aware of the university's requirements for athletes or because he'd been led to believe he was allotted exemptions.
that was not the case, which indicates a failure in communication. when failures in communication effect your ability to effectively carry out your job, that is something you have a right to be upset about. he's not bitching that they couldn't get in. he's bitching that he promised these kids they could and they were denied admission. he's bitching at the communication level between himself and administration.
you can rant and rave about college sports or whatever but this is a completely reasonable thing to be upset about if you're spurrier
and if anything the extent to which spurrier has coached in college football shows that he probably understands the way things work, and that the fault likely lies with the university--one that is not exactly known to be masters of the art of college football
fair points, chris, but college sports and particularly the NCAA itself as an organization bug the hell out of me and this was a chance to get it out in the open. plus, the article is at least a little ambiguous as to what the anger is about. spurrier's quotes don't make it obvious he's talking exclusively about the problems with communication. he probably is... but there seems to be a hint of "if i say these guys get in, then they get in" there as well.
let's not forget that Spurrier has a track record of being a whiney bitch, so although we don't know all the facts, I feel pretty safe assuming he's being a little ridiculous.
Plus, I hate how he acts like he's bigger than the university. And when he has a problem with something, he doesn't go through appropiate means; instead he bitches about it to the media. Football's a big money maker for SC, but it's still a small percentage of university business. Much of their funding (public and private) comes from grants that are dependant on student admissions and performance. My point is that Spurrier is an extremely well paid employee of a very large organization, but he's still not that important in the grand scheme of the university.
My only problem would be if the University told Spurrier he could allow these two guys on and then renegged. That would be and worthy of complaint. But it sure seems like the situation here is a power grab by Spurrier, who wants to be able to tell the University who they can let in, and that's fucking ballocks.
If Spurrier has a problem with things, he can quit. that's fine. But using the media to lash out at his employer is realy petty and annoying. I hope he goes 1-12 this season and gets fired.
and if anything the extent to which spurrier has coached in college football shows that he probably understands the way things work, and that the fault likely lies with the university--one that is not exactly known to be masters of the art of college football
No all that means is that he knows how things work at the University of Florida for a head coach. And just because SC isn't a football championship machine, it doesn't mean they don't know how to run a sucessful athletics program.
I guess what's happening here is that larry b and I automatically assumed that Spurrier is being a giant, self important douche, and chris w assumes that the university is incompetant. Since there are basically no facts here, except that two guys who were told they would be at SC playing football are now not, there is really no point in arguing.
Except this: Spurrier should shut the hell up nad deal with this in an appropiate manner, not through the media
:shrug:
CFB is a business. AND BUSINESS IS GOOD
also ass kicking is a business. etc.
Post a Comment