PonyFans.com

Per ESPN

I wondered how much longer Spurrier was going to last considering he is 70.

South Carolina is a interesting proposition. It's harder to win there than people think - there are more people in Atlanta, GA than in all of the state of South Carolina. They don't have a great history, and a number of good coaches have gone there and done only so well. I think Spurrier did more with less there and the next coach is going to have a tough go of it.

Two interesting points.

1) I wonder if CM would have been on their radar had he still be the OC at Clemson?

2) It's believed by many that Spurrier was one of the weak links in the gentleman's agreement among Eastern SEC schools like Florida, Georgia, USC, and Kentucky to keep their in-state sister schools out. Many people thought that Spurrier, in his old age, had become open to letting Clemson into the SEC. Maybe it's true and maybe it's not, and it's a moot point now, but that could have mattered in a couple of years if true.

I think people forget how much pride plays a part in these coaching searches. Georgia Tech decided not to hires Muschamp because he went to Georgia (yea, it worked out for them). UT today would never hire an aggie or a sooner, despite the fact their best coach ever came from OU. South Carolina was not going to hire a coordinator from Clemson, no matter how much sense it made. These coaching searches wind up being a D-measuring contest as much as winning games ever do.

Why is he retiring immediately vs season end?

Because he was fired.

same reason June retired last year.

I wonder if South Carolina targets one of their alums...Mark Dantonio. I'd imagine he gets a phone call

This sounds familiar. I seem to recall another offensive genius, who ran his program into the ground, then walk out on his players during the season. I wish I could remember the name of that other brave soul.

Spurrier is just as chickensh*t as that other guy for not finishing the season.

stc9 wrote:This sounds familiar. I seem to recall another offensive genius, who ran his program into the ground, then walk out on his players during the season. I wish I could remember the name of that other brave soul.

Spurrier is just as chickensh*t as that other guy for not finishing the season.

June jones didn't quit, he was forced to sign his resignation.

vielsiehorsepower wrote:

stc9 wrote:This sounds familiar. I seem to recall another offensive genius, who ran his program into the ground, then walk out on his players during the season. I wish I could remember the name of that other brave soul.

Spurrier is just as chickensh*t as that other guy for not finishing the season.

June jones didn't quit, he was forced to sign his resignation.

He quit before he was fired. He lost all his COC support after UNT, so he bounced to save face. Don't you dare kid yourself. This came straight from a former COC member.

And no I'm not special, I just pay $8 a month for rivals

stc9 wrote:This sounds familiar. I seem to recall another offensive genius, who ran his program into the ground, then walk out on his players during the season. I wish I could remember the name of that other brave soul.

Spurrier is just as chickensh*t as that other guy for not finishing the season.

Yeah, I'm not trying to start something, but I don't buy this. Comparing Steve Spurrier and June Jones, at least as collegiate head coaches, is just wrong. Spurrier is in his 11th season and this was going to be his first losing season, and it wasn't because he wouldn't leave the USC campus to recruit. This doesn't seem to be like him at all, so between that, and the fact that the guy is 70 and may have actual health issues, I'll wait for the whole story.

leopold wrote:I wondered how much longer Spurrier was going to last considering he is 70.

South Carolina is a interesting proposition. It's harder to win there than people think - there are more people in Atlanta, GA than in all of the state of South Carolina. They don't have a great history, and a number of good coaches have gone there and done only so well. I think Spurrier did more with less there and the next coach is going to have a tough go of it.

Two interesting points.

1) I wonder if CM would have been on their radar had he still be the OC at Clemson?

2) It's believed by many that Spurrier was one of the weak links in the gentleman's agreement among Eastern SEC schools like Florida, Georgia, USC, and Kentucky to keep their in-state sister schools out. Many people thought that Spurrier, in his old age, had become open to letting Clemson into the SEC. Maybe it's true and maybe it's not, and it's a moot point now, but that could have mattered in a couple of years if true.

Maybe you could elaborate on this? I always considered Clemson superior to most (not all) SEC schools recruiting wise. Cannot see the SEC really wanting to reject Clemson at any time in history. Certainly Ford's teams of the 80's were every bit as good if not better than what the SEC was typically putting out during those years. They regressed under Hatfield/West/Bowden but the talent was always there only to be wasted by inferior coaching imo.

Fondly remember that 81 NC team from Clemson. When was the last time Georgia won a NC? Was Arkansas more deserving of SEC membership than Clemson? (NOT..nor did Clemson even want to join the SEC at that time to the best of my knowledge). Your comment about "letting Clemson into the SEC" sounds a bit condescending towards Clemson in my view. As for Kentucky, Louisville is a commuter school and is not a "sister" in the same way Iowa State is to Iowa or Oklahoma is to Oklahoma State or Clemson is to South Carolina etc..Not the same dynamic at all. In football Louisville is the academically inferior commuter school to the large state school in Lexington which happens to be historically god awful in Football. The 2 schools are basketball rivals only because they are both historically very very good. They do not compete for the same type of student academically. More like a Boise Junior College (BSU) to University of Idaho analogy.

orguy wrote:
Maybe you could elaborate on this? I always considered Clemson superior to most (not all) SEC schools recruiting wise. Cannot see the SEC really wanting to reject Clemson at any time in history. Certainly Ford's teams of the 80's were every bit as good if not better than what the SEC was typically putting out during those years. They regressed under Hatfield/West/Bowden but the talent was always there only to be wasted by inferior coaching imo.

You're absolutely right - that's part of the issue.

FSU, Tech, Clemson, and Louisville have shown they can keep up with their flagship school sisters on the field and on the court, but it's believed the SEC brand gave those schools an edge. All those national championships in a row sent the HC's at those schools into kids homes saying "Do you want to play Maryland and Wake or do you want to compete against Alabama and LSU?" Just ask Dabo about having to deal with all that "SEC, SEC" BS.

So now you have the football schools in the ACC upset at the distribution of that conference and looking to possibly make a change - many believed that FSU and Clemson, specifically, jockeyed for the 14th spot in the SEC that eventually went to Missouri. And many believe that conference realignment isn't over, and that those schools will try to jump again, especially if they can't work out the money with the ACC. But, again, the SEC is a football conference, and it works against them to have their chief rivals play in the same conference (or at least that's what they believe) and, of course, the fact that they are schools located in states that already have teams in that state means that, theoretically, they don't add additional TV markets. So Florida, Georgia, USC, and Kentucky have all agreed to keep the other guys rivals out of the conference if they do the same for them.

Was Arkansas more deserving of SEC membership than Clemson?

Probably not, although, like I said, Clemson wouldn't add a new TV market and Arky did. Also, until they joined the SEC, Arky had a pretty impressive historical resume, too.

But keep in mind, it wasn't Arky and USC that the SEC initially wanted. They wanted Miami and A&M. It was Spurrier, and Spurrier specifically, who voted against Miami, saying the conference had enough cheaters, and in state politics was believed to have kept A&M out of the SEC in '92. So the SEC moved down the line until they settled on South Carolina and Arkansas.

I would think Chad Morris would get an interview since he is familiar with the area.

gostangs wrote:same reason June retired last year.

He quit on the job.