Offensive Genius? Not at South Carolina.

I think must of us agree Spurrier hangs it up in the next two years. But I think Leach is radioactive. There are a lot of other names out there.

but this is my real beef with Skulls’ post.

Picture a concerned parent of a child who is good enough to have a seat in the advanced class, but has never demonstrated academic prowess.

"I know my little Jimmy could do better in school! I’ve seen flashes of brilliance before! I know all the pieces could be there for an Ivy League scholarship! It’s not for lack of trying, or lack of money. We’ve given Jimmy all the tools he needs to succeed. No, it’s got to be the teacher! If only Jimmy had the right teacher! Most of his former teachers have been failures. Oh, sure. From time to time he’s scored an A on this test or that. But for the most part its been nothing but straight Cs and we had to let them all go for one reason or another.

I had such high hopes for this last teacher! Everyone … and I mean everyone … said he was a genius. His last pupils excelled! Straight A’s! Everyone said he had the best methods! I wasn’t expecting miracles. I mean, I didn’t expect Jimmy to be the salutatorian or anything. But Jimmy’s performance has been pretty much par for the course! Yes – its now mostly B’s, not C’s. But there are still too many Cs. And now it looks like he’s slding. I’m so upset. It must be the teacher’s fault. Some genius. Hmmph.

Teaching has passed him by. I’m not saying fire him or anything. But he’s certainly no genius. Jimmy’s lack of progress is proof of that!"

Who is the one who is blinded by emotion?

I’ve seen a lot of “If you don’t have anything positive to say…” types of responses, which is silly. We have a right to be critical as fans, particularly if we’re doing so thoughtfully and reasonably. I don’t see anything unreasonable in your post. If you were calling for Spurrier’s head or saying that his tenure has been a failure, that would be one thing. But all I see here is criticism of his offensive coaching, and while you might quibble about the reasons why, it’s obvious that the offense is a train wreck right now.

The premise of your post proceeds as follows: (1) Spurrier is considered by many to be an offensive genius; (2) Spurrier was an offensive genius in the past; (3) however, since he arrived in Columbia, Spurrier’s Gamecock teams have had only mediocre success; (4) many of these problems relate to personnel decisions and recruiting errors; (5) QED, Spurrier is no offensive genius – the game has passed him by (“College football has changed since Steve Spurrier was at Florida”).; (6) I am tired of people defending him as an offensive genius when he hasn’t delivered leprechauns and pots o’ gold at Carolina.; (7) now that the season is shaping up as a disappointment, I’m ready to unload on the Old Man

Did I miss something?

First, I reject the premise that I am some sort of Pollyanna. I’ve leveled serious criticisms in Spurrier’s direction. GM has actually touched on many of them in his comments – Hunt (a total disaster as an OL coach and recruiter, not to mention a snake in the grass); Garcia; and the fact that Spurrier’s sideline antics have turned off a generation of QB recruits. So I am unmoved by strawman type arguments that all criticism of your post must be generated by a “Love is Blind” type attitude.

Second, you simultaneously engage in a classic logical fallacy in your post. Your main thesis (Spurrier was a genius at UF, but his USC teams are mediocre, therefore he can no longer be considered genius) is a classic non sequitur (fallacy of false cause) with a healthy dose of cum ergo hoc propter hoc .

The real reason we’ve failed to achieve consistent offensive excellence has more to do with personnel rather than Steve Spurrier’s football IQ.

Our offensive line has been a mess for years, and Spurrier can be criticized for taking too long to fire Hunt. But our offensive line was a mess under Holtz and Scott too. I can also go player-by-player through injuries or early defections to the NFL that hurt our team, too., at other key positions.

Our quarterback recruits have not panned out. Spurrier can be criticized for expecting too much or being too mean or just being too old to talk to them. But he was infinitely harder on Wuerffel, Palmer and Grossman. By comparison, Smelley, Beecher and Garcia were mollycoddled (yes, even Garcia).

Let’s not forget that Spurrier has been recruiting at levels previously unparalled at USC. Sure, we’ve had top flight skill players before. But we’ve never had this depth. And we’ve never recruited so well in-state. Or in North Carolina. Or in Georgia. Marcus Lattimore and Jadeveon Clowney are Exhibits A and B.

Unfortunately, with all that football talent in the Carolinas, there hasn’t been a legit top QB prospect in years out of the Palmetto State or even the North State. Willy Korn (who grew up a CU fan at Byrnes) was the last one I can think of. Russell Wilson (formerly at NCSU) was from Virginia. Georgia’s last two greats (Murray and Stafford) are from Florida and Texas. It’s hurt not having a homegrown talent, since to get top QBs you have to compete with more entrenched programs. Again – criticize Spurrier freely for not landing a big-time QB. But then look around and see how many programs are suffering because they cannot land a big-time QB either (e.g. UCLA).

On the other hand, I don’t remember Spurrier being criticized for changing his whole offensive game plan to focus on the run last year.

My final argument is that you’ve completely ignored the systemic mess that is Carolina football. We’ve never been great offensively for sustained periods. We’ve brought in former NC-winning coach after coach (Dietzel, Holtz); we’ve hired can’t-miss Coordinators (Scott); we’ve hired clean-cut, sure-fire 1-AA coaches (Woods); we’ve hired hardbitten guys with win-at-all-cost attitudes (Carlen, Morrison). We’ve tried everything. And its been pretty much the same-old, same-old – until Spurrier. He is the best of the bunch. But you’re not satisfied. He hasn’t lived up to the hype.

Well, the problem isn’t Spurrier. It’s Carolina. I love this university dearly, but it has a history of shooting itself in the foot. It has a history of rabid fans who eat their own the minute something goes off-track. It has a history of changing coaches without really having a good idea who should replace them. And it competes in one of the toughest football environments there is – against some great defenses (and offenses) – against teams that usually have better personnel and deeper rosters. But somehow Spurrier should come in here and snap his fingers and next thing we’ll be on winning streaks against Georgia and Clemson (wait – we are. Never mind).

This is the hardest job Spurrier ever undertook. He could literally have gone anywhere when he left the Redskins. He came to South Carolina. Into a much tougher situation than he had a Duke (with a Sr. QB and a veteran OL, playing in pre-Seminole ACC). It is a much tougher situation than UF (inheriting Emmett Smith and a Charlie Pell’s talent-rich squad in a State that would soon be producing more homegrown major CFB prospects than any other state). It was even a tougher gig than coaching for the excerable Dan Synder.

So, in sum. The problem isn’t Steve Spurrier’s genius. And it’s unfair (and probably based on emotion – being angry at the current state of affairs) to say that it is. In the end, Spurrier is the best thing to happen to Carolina football since I became a fan. To run him off now – or attack his football IQ – is counter productive.

But Spurrier is the one who said after the Auburn game that our signals are compromised. And it would be hard to argue based on how Auburn and Miss. St. ran run blitzes every time we ran the ball. Spurrier said they would work on it.