Umm if people should just ignor unfairness in sports, then why does everyone complain so much about the BCS Championship game and why are we considering changing the format to a playoff? I'm not saying that Spurrier's idea is a great one or that it isn't self-serving, but you have to admit that the best East team did not play in the SEC Championship last season and that is at least something to think about.
Folks can continue to spin, twist and bend the facts of what I wrote, but this is NOT about "unfairness in sports" or "unfairness in America" or "unfairness in the universe." It's about "unfairness" in scheduling. And there is NO way to create a truly balanced, fair schedule. Theoretically that would require all teams to face the exact same teams as all their rivals... on the exact same day and time... with the exact same injury/discipline issues, etc. That cannot be achieved.
Example: Some teams will get Alabama on the road this year. Some will get them at home. Unless everyone gets them at home -- or on the road -- that's unfair.
And, sorry, but I think Georgia was the best team in the SEC East last year. They went 7-1 in the league and barely lost to Carolina on a number of oddball returns and turnovers. South Carolina went 6-2 in the SEC and -- more importantly -- lost to a so-so Auburn squad at home or else they would have gone to Atlanta. Forget Arkansas, beat an 8-5 Auburn team and USC's East Division co-champs with an SEC title game trip lined up.
Interestingly, no other fanbase in the SEC has put forth this kind of silliness with this kind of volume since we've launched this site. I find that amazing, because passionate SEC fans can find a conspiracy in everything... and most would bend or break any rule or change to end any tradition if it meant their team could scrape out an extra win. Yet this has never, ever become an issue. Not even from Spurrier when the same situation might have benefited -- or hurt him -- in the past.
But I'll go back to two things mentioned in the above post:
1. If the roles were reversed and Carolina had reached Atlanta thanks to Georgia losing two games against the West, Spurrier would be silent right now and you would not be posting these comments here. (And judging from past history, no Georgia fans would be bringing this kind of "whine" from the cellar either.) So is this about "unfairness in sports" or is this about creating a new way for college and pro conferences/leagues to tally division-winners just to benefit Carolina in 2011? I think the answer to that is clear.
2. If Spurrier's format were put in place for next season and Carolina went 5-1 with a loss to Georgia and two wins versus the West to go 7-1... and if Georgia also finished 5-1 in the East -- with that tie-breaking win over Carolina -- but they LOST their two West Division games... Carolina fans and Spurrier would be squawking that a 7-1 team shouldn't be kept at home while a 5-3 team went to Atlanta. Whether you'll admit that or not, you know deep down in your heart that that's the long and short of it.
In my view -- and in the view of just about everyone not associated with South Carolina football -- those factors render Carolina's argument moot. After all, if it's such a good plan, why is it being met with laughs, scoffs and eye-rolls by fans and media outside The Palmetto State? Is it just that the whole world loooooves Georgia? Or do we all haaaaaate Carolina and Spurrier? Unless you subscribe to one of those two conspiracy theories, then the answer seems to be that it's just a plain goofy idea and there's a reason no other sport has adopted it.
(And for the record, I've got an autographed Spurrier photo in my office and South Carolina has become my own personal favorite state in the Union. If I could move to Charleston, I'd be there tonight. So the "haaaaaate" thing won't work on me.)
Thanks for reading the site,
Well I never said his plan was a good one (I said as much in my original post and I think it would be a bad idea to completely disregard cross division games) and I wasn't specifically trying to single you out and say you hate SC or Spurrier. However, you and most of the people replying have commented on the fact that sometimes sports (scheduling is a part of sports) are just unfair. I was saying that yes they are but we don't always ignore that, as in the case of the BCS Championship game. Most people didn't claim Oklahoma State was just whining about not making it and they had an arguably less compelling argument than Steve Spurrier does but just as self-serving.
Furthermore, I think SC was definitely better than Georgia. Against every single East opponent, SC had a wider margin of victory, not to mention beating them head-to-head. They had one particularly bad game against a decent opponent and it ruined their chance at the SEC title.
To sum up, I don't really agree with Spurrier's idea although I understand the idea behind them and also find it troubling. Furthermore, people seem to whining a lot harder about Spurrier saying this than he was about the unfairness of it all.