Michael Elkon asks the musical question “Is Georgia the most underachieving team in college football?”. He doesn’t answer the question, leaving instead for his readers, but he does a nice job framing the debate, which I would summarize as follows:
- Georgia historically has been a good, but not élite, program. I agree. As I put it in a post earlier, Georgia has been a top twenty program that believes it’s a top ten one.
- With that in mind, Georgia under Richt has had three close shots at playing for a national title, 2002, 2007 and 2012 and come up short on all three occasions.
- Those two points lead to this question: “Is Georgia an underachieving giant or a team whose good, but not great, results reflect the program’s natural state?”
- If you believe the first is correct, then the program hasn’t been managed to its full potential. (Michael says Richt, but I’d argue you have to point to both the coach and the athletic department; after all, the underachievement predates Richt’s arrival.
- If you believe the second is the more accurate characterization, then Richt has done a respectable job with what he’s been able to carry out.
That is a pretty unemotional way of looking at what Georgia football has done, if you ask me. It’s still up to you to decide which camp you’re in. The only thing I’d add to the review is that if you’re someone like me who thinks there’s been a change in the level of support the program has gotten from the administration of late, that has to factor into the equation, too. Or, as some have put it, there really aren’t any excuses left for either Richt or the athletic department now (barring another insane run of injuries, like 2013, of course) to fall back on.
What do y’all think?
Meet Ran Henry, self-described “foremost authority on Coach Spurrier’s life”, and the author of… well…
the “first authorized biography to cover the iconic career of the modern era’s defining college football coach.” Except it’s not an authorized biography. That was an error on the publisher’s part, Henry says. “Definitive,” not “authorized,” is the term he uses.
Sounds like a real page turner.
Oklahoma blogger takes Finebaum tweet of a speculative comment by Colin Cowherd (boy, talk about instant credibility) and runs with it.
Jay Jacobs sounds like a fifteen-year old nerd trying too hard.
In fact, Auburn athletics director Jay Jacobs believes the teams’ styles have made the Tigers and Ducks the cool kids on the college football landscape.
“Auburn and Oregon are two of the cool teams right now,” Jacobs said Tuesday on The Paul Finebaum Show. “The kids want to play for us because we’re fun and we’re fast.”
That’s so cool, Auburn. In an oxymoronic way, that is.
Life is good when you don’t have to pay the help much.
The costs of doing business for the NCAA continue to increase. NCAA president Mark Emmert received approximately $1.8 million in compensation during the 2013 calendar year, and the NCAA’s legal fees rose 59 percent to $13.8 million, according to the association’s latest federal tax return released Tuesday. Emmert made about $100,000 more in 2013 than the previous year. He had a base salary of $1,365,298, received $201,127 in other reportable compensation, and was credited with $235,700 in retirement/deferred payment that he can receive in 2017… … Like many coaches and athletic directors, salaries continue to increase for NCAA administrators. In 2007, the NCAA reported spending almost $6 million to compensate 14 of its highest-ranking executives. In 2013, the NCAA’s 14 highest-ranking officials totaled $8.5 million. [Emphasis added.]
They’re worth every penny. Just ask ’em. And the legal bills? They’re for a noble cause. Even the usually close-mouthed Stacey Osburn is on board with that story.
The NCAA’s legal expenses rose to $13.8 million in 2013-14 as the association fights a number of lawsuits, up from $8.7 million the previous year. As recently as 2010-11, the legal costs were $4.1 million. The increase is because the NCAA “continues to defend its mission and core values,” NCAA spokeswoman Stacey Osburn said.
Given the pay bumps, I’d say the lawyers are doing their jobs.
In ‘Murica, freedom isn’t free. Neither is amateurism.