“Ignorant. Hypocrite. Absurd. Redneck. Blowhard. Pompous. Micromanager. Arrogant. Traitor.”

Thanks to commenter Cerbera, I was alerted to Dink NeSmith’s follow up to his “pay for play” proposal from a week or so ago.

Not that there’s much of a surprise in what he’s written this time.  There’s the usual wallowing in the First Amendment, the “gosh, we have some angry fans who called me names” stuff and the all too expected flashing of his Dawg credentials.  Plus, the Dawgnation is behind him – just ask the 76% that barked.  Ultimately, what’s missing is any substance.

Mr. NeSmith (unless you prefer “Dink”), when you write your next missive for public consumption, would you mind addressing a few questions about yourself and your proposal that I have?  Here’s what I’d like to know:

• If you’re gonna hit us with this “examine the last 41 years” stuff, why aren’t you addressing your concerns behind the scenes, instead of in guest opinion columns in the Red and Black?  I mean, you’ve got the kind of face to face access with the powers at Butts-Mehre that we lowly peons who tender over the yearly minimum to keep our season tickets can only dream of.  So why aren’t you using it?  You evidently believe that you’re helping your beloved football program by airing your complaints publicly.  If this isn’t some outsized ego trip, what’s your point?
• You acknowledge that Mark Richt has done much to bring the pride back to the Georgia football program.  But you insist that an incentive pay plan is the only engine that can take the program to the next level.  Exactly why do you believe that Mark Richt is so crassly motivated by money?
• While we’re on the subject of pay for play, in light of this story, do you think it would be helpful to urge that college football players should be paid to motivate them as well?
• You mention that you are “uncomfortable with the side deals coaches made with Nike and broadcast companies”.  Could you explain why?  Are you worried that Mark Richt has a conflict of interest that might affect his ability to lead the program?
• You mention that increasing the incentives for winning is a businesslike approach.  What business are you referring to?  Do you know of any other D-1 school that currently pays a prominent head football in the manner that you propose?
• Why do you think Mark Richt would be willing to tear up his existing contract in order to accept the risk of a significant pay cut?  For that matter, given the contracts that we see handed out to other SEC coaches (none of whom have had any more sustained success over the past five or six seasons than Richt – it’s a tough conference, you know), what kind of coaching talent would you expect to be able to attract to Georgia in the future under your proposal?

I’m sort of amazed by NeSmith, frankly.  Here’s somebody who professes to bleed red and black, and who says that he thinks Richt is a treasured asset and the right head coach for Georgia, but also believes that it’s incumbent upon him to remind his treasure that he needs to “… go down giving it all we’ve got and then some…”, as if all of Georgia’s problems boil down to the coaches simply not caring enough.  And that throwing enough money at the problem will fix it.

If caring and money were all it took to be a successful SEC head coach, Ron Zook would still be the the man at Florida.