Gamecocks being boycotted

The Doddfather

The Doddfather

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
156
This has been on the table for months, but it was finally decided today....The BCA (Black Coaches Association) is urging all potential recruits and assistant coaches to boyctt South Carolina. This is because the association gave USC a copy of the guidelines for hiring a coach before USC hired Spurrier, and they do not feel that USC abided by those guidelines. I do not have a racist bone in my body, but does this seem a bit ridiculous to anyone else? I mean this was an exception to the rule. To get a coach of Spurrier's quality, whether you like him or not, is tough to pass up. I don't think many schools would say, "Hey Steve, your resume looks pretty impressive and we like what we see, unfortunately, we have some guidelines we have to follow so we are going to have to let you know something in a few weeks after we interview 20 other candidates. This is not like a ban by the NCAA, but the BCA will be doing all they can to make sure no championships, super regionals, etc. will be held in Columbia. Doesn't make much sense to me.

31 DAYS TIL TOE MEETS LEATHER!!!!!
 
Reverse racism at its finest and its perfectly acceptable. What's new.
 
I agree, but SC new what they were getting into so I don't feel too bad for them. Similar to the Lions and Mariucci, even if you know what you want to do sometimes you have to just follow the process.
 
Agree with what's posted so far, but having had some experience dealing with these kinds of groups,albeit from a state and local perspective charges that it was cloaked and predetermined would have been made reguardless.
I am not familiar with the BCA but with most of these groups It's the AGENDA.
 
I think we agree, but if SC had gone through a process of interviewing black candidates and then said wtte, "we were impressed by several candidates but with Spurrier's experience and record we just can't pass him up", I think the BCA would have very little ground to stand on. The fact is though that they simply offered him the job without talking to anyone else and deserve any censure they get.
 
I don't consider myself to be racist either. But how can a group accuse anyone of racism when the name of the accuser is (Black Coaches Association). That ranks right up there with some other favorites like........military intelligence!!!!!
 
ncjacket said:
The fact is though that they simply offered him the job without talking to anyone else and deserve any censure they get.
Click to expand...

What's the point of interviewing other coaches when you know you aren't going to hire them? It's a waste of money and time. And, if you're only doing it because some organization said they think you should, but you know nothing will come of it, it's even worse.
 
Since few of us if any have a dog in this fight what is the BCA trying to do? Seems to me they are trying to force everyone to kowtow to them. Will this happen to us, Tenn, U of Ala etc if they don't interview/hire a black coach? What will they do if a team, any team interviews a black coach then hires a white guy? I suspect the same. This is a country based on performance and Spurrier has proven performance. So I guess the BCA is like a bandit who says give me or I'll shoot you!
 
It already happens. Teams do interview black candidates and then hire white coaches. What they are trying to demand is a chance, not a job. Maybe I'm being naive, but until they complain about a black not being hired, versus not being interviewed, that's how I see it.
 
beernutts, because that's the way it is today. If you know who you want, and choose to ignore the process as it's understood, then you should be willing to pay the consequences. Besides, your point is exactly what they're fighting against. Who says Spurrier would have been the best candidate if they had done their interviews? The Lions just knew they needed Mariucci too, how'd that work out?

Besides, college sports is a major industry know and should expect to be treated as such. Plus they're a federally supported industry. I'll bet USC can't hire for any other positions without posting the job, and interviewing candidates. Why should they be able to do it for a football coach?
 
Another factor to remember

Didn't Spurrier blow off UF because they expected him to interview and go through the full hiring process? If the Evil One had just blown off his own alma mater, what do you think the Gamecock search committee was thinking when faced with the propsect of losing him just to make some "agenda group" happy?

I'd rather have the BCA mad at me than the entire alumni base.
 
ncjacket said:
even if you know what you want to do sometimes you have to just follow the process.
Click to expand...

Unless you are breaking the law... Why?

ncjacket said:
I think we agree, but if SC had gone through a process of interviewing black candidates and then said wtte, "we were impressed by several candidates but with Spurrier's experience and record we just can't pass him up", I think the BCA would have very little ground to stand on. The fact is though that they simply offered him the job without talking to anyone else and deserve any censure they get.
Click to expand...

What you just described is lip service because this organization is holding them hostage to do things their way, when they had a clear plan from the get go. They deserve the censure they get?? That is a ludicrous statement.

I might agree with you if a Black Coach came forward and expressed his interest in the job, and there was no definitive candidate at large like Spurrier was at the time. But for some intangible enigma of black coaches that are not coming forward to want the position or express interest in the position being represented by an organization that wants you to go out there and review and seek out black candidates IS NOT HOW IT FREAKING WORKS!

Imagine the lunacy in some guy off the street who you don't know in any professional way coming to you and saying, "Hey NCJacket... you need this position and we want you to interview these guys over here." all the while, not one of them has come forward to be interviewed or expressed interest in being interviewed.

I think the BCA actually does more harm than good. The organization exists to promote black coaches for opportunities in coaching NOT hold people ransom to hire black coaches.
 
Last edited:
How do you know there were no black coaches who were interested? Wasn't Strong a fan favorite when he was there? All I'm saying is they knew this was coming. If they don't care that's fine by me. I mean it's not like the BCA can actually do anything to them other than try to paint them in a bad light. But there's no reason to complain about it now.
 
ncjacket said:
How do you know there were no black coaches who were interested? Wasn't Strong a fan favorite when he was there? All I'm saying is they knew this was coming.
Click to expand...

I edited my post above after you replied. The bottom line is the BCA exists to promote black coaches for coaching opportunities not hold organizations, people, and schools hostage over their decisions by shouting "boycott"! How can you take an organization like the BCA who practices this seriously? It hurts the coaches they represent.

USC east had their #1 choice, went out and got him. If Charlie Strong feels slighted because of Spurrier being wanted and hired over him without an interview, then Strong is smoking crack. Spurrier is far more qualified and more proven than Strong is.

Do you think Spurrier was actually formally interviewed? I doubt it. If Spurrier did not want the job, and USC east needed to actually interview someone... then depending on the circumstances, the BCA could flex their muscles. But under the current circumstances, the BCA comes out and acts like a racist "me first" organization totally stripping them of their credibility and damaging the foundation by which they were founded.

Its another example of poor leadership by people who are supposed to be helping their cause and not hurting it.
 
Is this boycott related to the "no NCAA championships to be played in the state of SC" boycott for flying a Confederate flag on state grounds?
 
I don't necessarily disagee with you BOR, I'm just saying USC knew what was in store for them and didn't care. So why should we feel anything for them?

As you say, the BCA is trying to get schools to give black coaches a shot. I haven't seen anything that suggests they are trying to force people to hire anyone, simply to at least give them a chance. USC didn't have to put Spurrier through an interview. But they could have at least spoken with some other coaches before offering him the job. I mean, most people would agree Spurrier was the hot commodity. But who's next? I think that's the point the BCA is trying to make. There's always a convenient reason that black coaches don't even get an interview.

I don't like the boycott idea and wonder how many of the BCA members support it. I guess we could always ask Hewitt?
 
ncjacket said:
Besides, college sports is a major industry know and should expect to be treated as such. Plus they're a federally supported industry. I'll bet USC can't hire for any other positions without posting the job, and interviewing candidates. Why should they be able to do it for a football coach?
Click to expand...

I was pretty much under the impression that College Athletic Associations were privately funded by the fans and alumni of said institution. Had no idea that GTAA or any other AA for that matter got taxpayer funds. If this is so, then we whould be lobbying Congress to get GT more $$$$$$.:rolleyes: The University itself is Federally funded and has to abide by EEOC rules/ regs. I'm sure.
 
You're right, helluvaparamedic. AA's are not publicly funded in Georgia, but they maybe in NC.
 
ncjacket said:
USC didn't have to put Spurrier through an interview. But they could have at least spoken with some other coaches before offering him the job. I mean, most people would agree Spurrier was the hot commodity.
Click to expand...

Like I said before.... why should they have spoken to other coaches if they knew what they wanted all along?

1.) Spurrier was pissed at UF because they wanted him to go through a formal interview process. Any stalling by USC may have gotten the same response.

2.) And far more importantly. If you are USC and know what you want, and how to get it, why should you provide lip service to an outside organization just to go through some formalalities, only to come back to your orignal conclusion. What a complete waste of time and money. USC should never be held hostage by an outside organization for not doing anything wrong.
 
The BCA is obviously full of idiots. Spurrier is as close to a household name as there is in football today. Imagine if Vince Lombardi, Bear Bryant, Knute Rockne, or John Heismann fell into USC's lap and some group said 'you didn't interview before you hired Lombardi'. It makes them look like idiots when they don't have the sense to select their fights.

Paul H. may be a great coach, but if Coach K had called Dave Braine and said 'I want to coach at GT but I don't want to interview' anyone who questioned us hiring him straight up would be proven loco.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top