The difference between recruiting at Georgia and at South Carolina, in a nutshell

Compare and contrast:

“When we sign a young man, we expect him to see through to graduation,” Georgia football coach Mark Richt said. “I know contractually it is one year at a time, but from what’s in my heart and from what’s in the heart of the University of Georgia is for these guys to make it all the way through to graduation. It means a whole lot to us.

“I don’t think it will change the way we view taking care of these guys.”

South Carolina football coach Steve Spurrier believes it’s a “terrible idea” to offer multiyear scholarships.

“What if a young man decides he doesn’t want to give much effort or go weightlifting or go to workouts?” Spurrier said. “How do you get rid of him? Everybody has to earn his or her way in life.”

Just ask Stephen Garcia.


Filed under Georgia Football, Recruiting, The Evil Genius

38 responses to “The difference between recruiting at Georgia and at South Carolina, in a nutshell

  1. Spike

    What a bonehead Garcia is. So much talent squandered.


  2. RocketDawg

    Geez Spurrier is such a douche, and just when I was starting to hate him a little less.

    I think this goes back to the fundamental question of whether we want our football coach to be a mercenary that only cares about winning games and championships a la Saban/Spurrier/Petrino or do we want our coach to be a developer of young men possibly at the expense of less wins and less frequent championship opportunities. Personally I would rather have a quality human being like Mark Richt as our coach and ONLY get to the SECCG 4x in 10 years, win 2 SEC Championships, and have the best winning percentage at this point in his career of any UGA coach, than a piece of garbage with a Napoleon complex like they have over in Alabama.


    • Cojones

      You got it right, RocketDawg. And because of Richt, we have the pleasure of the high ground looking down on hypocritical aholes of the coaching world.


  3. TennesseeDawg

    Was Spurrier earning his way thru life when he went 12-20 with the Redskins?


    • No, though to his “credit,” Spurrier resigned voluntarily when it became clear that his system wasn’t going to work in The League. (And you’ve got to be on-the-ball indeed to beat Dan Snyder’s itchy trigger finger.)

      But that didn’t do much to salve the pain of Redskins fans like myself who’d just seen their proud franchise turned into the functional equivalent of an ex-Gator fantasy team. Hell, I could’ve told Spurrier that wasn’t going to work.


  4. Hogbody Spradlin

    I hate like hell to admit it, but the extra meat on the hoof Spurrier gets to evaluate gives them a material advantage in one area.

    RocketDawg up there is sort of implying that we give up a competitive advantage by making a bigger commitment. I think he’s got a point. I don’t know how big an advantage, but it sure seems like LSU and Bama had endless hordes last year. SC too? Yuck!

    Spurrier knows good and well how to get rid of malingerers, even with multi year commitments. He’s just hiding the real reasons: extra oversigning options, power over the ones on campus, and manipulation.


  5. SonOfASpurrier

    “According to the NCAA, 62.12 percent of the 330 participating institutions voted to override the legislation. A 62.5 percent majority was required for the override.”

    Yeah, that Spurrier is an evil bastard. And only 62.12% of the NCAA agrees with him. Clearly he’s on the wrong side of history.

    And what says Georgia’s President? Oh. More scholarship cuts are needed. I see.


    • TennesseeDawg

      Georgia fans and alumni can’t stand Adams. Quoting him will get you nowhere with this crowd.


    • South FL Dawg

      Being on the right side of history is what it’s all about for you? Like only white males can vote? Surely you jest.


      • Actually, I think you’re both looking at that phrase wrong. Being on the right side of history means that you are in the minority now, but history – future generations – will judge you kindly.

        One day we may name this phenomenan in a football context as the Bobo effect (but only if you keep your foot on the gas in the 4th quarter in 2012…dangit, Bobo!!) and we may measure the magnitude of difference – the degree to which you are demonized in the past vs the degree to which you are later lionized – on a Richter scale, which replaced the Leach field test last year.

        I believe in super scientific football circles they also expect more study and time will prove The Bobo Effect to be the opposite of The Paterno Conundrum.


  6. HeismanHunter

    Spurrier is right, culture of entitlement is what’s wrong with college football (and Georgia), Spurrier believes in a merit based system, stark contrast to Mark Richt. Spurrier also won a Heisman, as a HeismanHnter, I got to go with Spurrier.

    South Carolina will win the SEC East, the more I head from Spurrier, and Richt, the more I come to understand why Georgia keeps losing to South Carolina.


    • You already call that “keep on losing” after 2 seasons. See the last 10 seasons. You are probably a BAMA fan who thinks that after winning one game in 2008, they already own UGA.


    • Normaltown Mike

      “Spurrier believes in a merit based system,”

      Really? Like if you’re a starting WR, you get to stay in a residential hotel at a cut rate price? Or if you’re the best QB on the team, you can attend substance abuse classes while drunk or host a bacchanalia the nite before the SECCG?

      “Spurrier also won a Heisman”

      So did Eric Crouch. And OJ Simposon for that matter.


  7. TimRankine

    What a tidy juxtaposition for Paschall to make with those two quotes. I’m not sure there’s all that much to deduce here, but I do like to claim moral superiority to others every now an again. Newt taught me how to.


  8. OKDawg

    Spurrier will never change – love him or hate him for it. He has no filter or idea of political correctness. His internal monologue is the next media quote: “How do you get rid of him?”

    Classic Spurrier.


  9. Normaltown Mike

    The funny thing is that when he was at UF, he was the choir boy complaining about the dirty program at FSU.

    Now that he’s in a lower tier school, he has to fight harder and cut some corners to build a “winner”.


    • Cojones

      I think he complained more of his players getting bit, kicked and gouged in the pileups. Yep, them were the “good ole days” for the FSU D. And the whining days of Spurrier at FU.


  10. South FL Dawg

    Somebody’s gonna have to enlighten me if my understanding is wrong, but my understanding is scholarships – even the 4 year kind – require that the student athlete meet conditions with regards to his conduct. What coaches like Spurrier wish to do, therefore, must be to cut players who aren’t good enough on the field. And that is the question that everybody is dancing around – is it OK to cut players at this level? Or put in a nicer way, is it OK to have annual tryouts (and maybe an otherwise good kid isn’t good enough to make the team)?

    One thing for sure though….from Garcia’s example we can disprove the assertion that following rules is what holding your spot on the team is all about; Spurrier thinks we’re all dumb if he expects us to buy that.

    BTW, I do favor the players on this. I think if a kid is on track to meet his degree requirements and he never had the money to pay tuition (esp. out of state) he should be allowed to complete his degree requirements at that school. You get 85 schollies after all.


    • Just Chuck

      This may be one of the most enlightened comments I’ve read on the issue. Why shouldn’t we expect a kid to come for four years and complete a degree if he’s a good citizen? Maybe this multi-year scholarship creates a little more focus on the student part of student/athlete.


    • Coastal Dawg

      If the players have to try out every year to keep their scholarships, the schools should have to recruit them every year and a player should not have to sit out a year or have to beg for a conditional release. The whole process is too one sided. Forcing the schools/coaches to the level of commitment evens things out a little. I and others have said many times that the cure to roster management is to 1. eliminate the scholarship limit 2. institute a true hard cap on signing 3. require the school to honor a full four year scholarship unless the athlete leaves school.


  11. I am so thankful we have the MAN we do at the helm–for this Dog integrity matters


    • Cojones

      Spoken like an alumnus. There is a tribute written exactly to issues of fielty at “Unrequited love in a mercenary age. Your sentiment is on par.


  12. W Cobb Dawg

    One would think CMR’s approach would provide a better team over a 4 year period. But you have to develop the young guys so they can be more productive in their last couple years. I think we’re seeing this on the defensive side of the ball with CTG – players are returning, and the return on time invested improves. Our O and ST coaches have to follow CTG’s example and do a better job of developing players. Our 4th & 5th year seniors should be beating the hell out of scu’s 1st & 2nd year newbees.


  13. Grubby

    I think most of the QB’s mentioned above, suffer, at least in a mild degree, from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

    It starts when these guys are showered with a lot of attention due to being on a good team. They begin to have grandiose visions and think they are the primary reason for a teams’ success.

    They don’t get realistic balanced feedback, the bad for example, so they become more and more self centered in their goal setting.

    They stop defining themselves by team goals, like championships, and move towards personal goals like touchdown records and passing yards.


  14. Just Chuck

    I’m on record (above) as being favor of multi-year scholarships, more fair to the athlete. However, maybe someone who knows more about contracts than I do can answer a question for me. If a player signs on for multiple years, e.g., agrees to play for four years in exchange for four or five years of school, what happens if the athlete decides to go out early to the pros? Not that schools would do it (bad PR) but, could the kid be sued for breaking a contract? What is a kid agreeing to if he signs on for multiple years? Just asking.


    • South FL Dawg

      Coaches leave all the time. They usually have buyout clauses but if not….it was fair pay for fair work and that’s the end of it.

      The only question I have on 4 year schollies is, are the players now “employed” by the school and subject to tax on the value of their scholly? Or did the tax code change? Because back in the day, it was the fact that they were non renewable that made the scholarships exempt. That is the only downside I could see for the athlete accepting a renewable scholarship.


  15. no. because we don’t allow slavery anymore ,I think it’s in one of those Amendment thingies. Besides he’s not getting his scholarship while playing in the Pros…


  16. Pingback: Post #142: Monday Morning Hangover « sugarfalling

  17. gatorhater

    I’m not sure it’s that much of a disadvantage. How many slackers have we been stuck with taking up space for long periods of time? Richt has discretely stopped the Greyhound several times to let the disgruntled off the bus…(ala King, Ealey, et al)