AJC > Sports > Columnists > Archives > 2006 > September > 15 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USBeatings benefit small schools financially
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Jeff Schultz
Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath. Those who run the NCAA take the Hypocritic Oath. They condemn the power of sports programs and preach academic reform, but grab the money from TV networks, approve 12-game regular seasons and help create the monstrous blob they claim to disdain.
It follows that there are several athletics directors who are more than willing to sell their soul — and offer members of their student body up for sacrifice — when piecing together a football schedule.
Already this season, we have seen Florida Atlantic accept a 54-6 beating from Clemson, which was nice enough to leave $500,000 on the night stand. Northwestern State added to its building fund to take whippings from Kansas (49-18) and Baylor (47-10).
Nebraska is into the flip side of this. The Cornhuskers have beaten Louisiana Tech and Nicholls State by a combined 105-17. It was worth the coin.
“Yeah, poor David,” said David Walker. Louisiana-Lafayette’s interim athletics director could’ve been referring to himself, but in this case, it was a Biblical reference. As in: Yikes, down comes Goliath’s foot.
When the college season resumes Saturday, Georgia plays UAB, and Georgia Tech faces Troy. Both opponents were scheduled to pad win totals. Walker is happy to report that Louisiana-Lafayette has a bye.
In the first two weeks of the season, the Ragin’ Cajuns had the living “bam” knocked out of them. They lost to LSU, 45-3, and Texas A&M, 51-7.
For this, they were paid $1.2 million.
Was it worth it?
“Unfortunately, it’s not a matter of, ‘Is it worth it?’ It’s not worth it,” Walker said by phone. “But the problem is it’s very much needed. Many of us in the Sun Belt [Conference] have to play big guarantee games. Those kinds of scores are never worth $600,000. Coaches want a more competitive game. Our athletes are up for those games. No amount of money is worth that.”
Walker said the money goes into the general athletics budget. This year, it helped find scholarships for summer school students and fifth-year seniors.
The other players: They got Band-Aids and ice bags.
If you’re a student-athlete, is the humiliation of getting served for lunch to a Division 1-A power worth whatever pregame glory might be evident?
“It’s kind of like high school, if you had a 1-A team going against a 6-A team,” said Tech cornerback Jahi Word-Daniels. “It doesn’t benefit anybody.
“I don’t really like it because teams are just putting weak teams on their schedules so they can end up with 10-win seasons. Teams with harder schedules may win six or seven games, but that doesn’t mean they’re much worse than the 10-win teams.”
Word-Daniels grew up in Hoover, Ala., near Troy. He said he personally wouldn’t mind playing a national power if he attended a smaller school because “it would be a way to showcase my talents and see where I stand against those players.”
But he added, “To be honest, I would think most players would think, ‘OK, we’re about the get killed.’ “
Chan Gailey has been the hors d’oeuvre. His head coaching career has taken him through Troy (1983-84) and Samford (1993). In 1992, Samford lost at Auburn 55-0. And in Gailey’s season?
“It depends on who you talk to,” he said. “If you talk to us at Samford, we played great for a half and then depth got us. You know, and all those other things you say. But in the end, it was pretty lopsided.”
Actually, 35-7 isn’t as bad as 55-0. Or as bad as Texas over North Texas, 56-7; Georgia over Western Kentucky, 48-12; West Virginia over Eastern Washington, 52-3; Louisville over Temple, 62-0; TCU over UC Davis, 46-13.
Medic?
Gailey believes most players look at it as a worthy challenge.
“If you go through it eight times, that’s one thing,” he said. “But to go through it once or twice [is OK].” Sure. He’s on the sideline.
Permalink | Comments (14) | Post your comment | Categories: Jeff Schultz, Tech / ACC, UGA / SEC
Comments
By pitbull
September 15, 2006 08:06 PM | Link to this
I liked your column, but I don’t see anything hypocritical about these matches. No one forces the smaller schools to play the bigger ones. The bigger schools can always offer an excuse if they lose to another bigger school, but if they lose to a small school they know they are going to catch criticism.
There have been some memorable matchups too. I remember Georgia Southern leading Spurrier’s Florida going into the 4th quarter one year, Georgia Tech struggling to either tie or bearly beat Furman, and Appalachian State almost beating Auburn, when it replaced FSU when Auburn did not want to play FSU.
I am sure there have been some upsets too, as I believe Troy beat LSU about 5 years ago, but I could be mistaken.
By Richard
September 15, 2006 08:26 PM | Link to this
Hey Mr. Shultz. Next time you write an article on this subject, ask Gailey if losing to UGA 51-7 makes us about as respectable as a 1-AA school. I’m curious to hear his response.
By homebuilderdawg
September 16, 2006 12:14 AM | Link to this
Good article. This proves why there should be an 11 game season, and a BCS playoff for the MNC. All the athletic directors, and presidents say they don’t want a playoff because it extends the student-athletes’ seasons too much, but they jumped all over that extra 1/2 mil. for a 12th game. It’s hypocrisy at it’s worst, and they should be ashamed. A 1+ game playoff in the BCS (with an 11 game season) would be the same schedule that the SEC champion plays. But they seem to want to make college football worse with their extra game during the season, instead of adding one at the end when it really matters. It stinks of greed, and it’s sad, especially for the kids that should be able to play that ‘extra’ game in the BCS instead of playing Western Kentucky or Troy.
By Alabama Jack
September 16, 2006 04:23 AM | Link to this
“Word-Daniels grew up in Hoover, Ala., near Troy” For what its worth, Hoover is 132 miles from Troy, or about the same distance as reality from some of your columns.
By Jim O
September 16, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this
Didn’t the Samford coach say after the game with Tech that he wanted to play us every year and that it was good for recruiting? EVEN after a loss.
These schools need the money a whole lot more than one or two close games or victories. Also, playing against better talent - or maybe in the second half similar talent, helps the team in the future, especially if they stay close as Troy/FSU or play an even second half as at Samford/GT. The coached can build from that.
With a touch ACC schedule, GT should not be playing two top ten teams outside the conference every year as we have been. I personally don’t like seeing them feast on Troy and Samford, but also don’t like a duo of UG and ND or UG and ‘bama/Auburn. We should be playing good 1A teams, but maybe not top ten until Chan builds the program where we would like it to be.
On the other side of the coin, teams like UG and VT should be playing stronger teams than they are - VT has learned that BCS ratings are adversely affected with the weak schedule.
By Jim O
September 16, 2006 09:00 AM | Link to this
Didn’t the Samford coach say after the game with Tech that he wanted to play us every year and that it was good for recruiting? EVEN after a loss.
These schools need the money a whole lot more than one or two close games or victories. Also, playing against better talent - or maybe in the second half similar talent, helps the team in the future, especially if they stay close as Troy/FSU or play an even second half as at Samford/GT. The coached can build from that.
With a touch ACC schedule, GT should not be playing two top ten teams outside the conference every year as we have been. I personally don’t like seeing them feast on Troy and Samford, but also don’t like a duo of UG and ND or UG and ‘bama/Auburn. We should be playing good 1A teams, but maybe not top ten until Chan builds the program where we would like it to be.
On the other side of the coin, teams like UG and VT should be playing stronger teams than they are - VT has learned that BCS ratings are adversely affected with the weak schedule.
By Jim O
September 16, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this
Didn’t the Samford coach say after the game with Tech that he wanted to play us every year and that it was good for recruiting? EVEN after a loss.
These schools need the money a whole lot more than one or two close games or victories. Also, playing against better talent - or maybe in the second half similar talent, helps the team in the future, especially if they stay close as Troy/FSU or play an even second half as at Samford/GT. The coached can build from that.
With a touch ACC schedule, GT should not be playing two top ten teams outside the conference every year as we have been. I personally don’t like seeing them feast on Troy and Samford, but also don’t like a duo of UG and ND or UG and ‘bama/Auburn. We should be playing good 1A teams, but maybe not top ten until Chan builds the program where we would like it to be.
On the other side of the coin, teams like UG and VT should be playing stronger teams than they are - VT has learned that BCS ratings are adversely affected with the weak schedule.
By Jason
September 16, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this
Richard, The 51-7 loss to UGAY was 5 years ago. Get over it.
By tommy t
September 16, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
hey jeff, shut up
By DirkDawggler
September 16, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
Tell it to Chuck Amato. I’m sure Akron is enjoying their cake and eating it, too.
By ME
September 16, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
WHAT CHANNEL IS THE GAME ON TODAY??? I’VE BEEN SEARCHING AND CAN’T FIND IT…..
By Geoff
September 16, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Hey there Jim-O. I’m too engrossed in the games today to get into another long and drawn out debate about the quality of UGA’s out of conference schedule but I will concede that you finish your regular season with a much tougher opponent than we do.
By JR
September 16, 2006 05:13 PM | Link to this
Nice week to pick to post this column. Not the week Tech plays #2 ND or #8 or whatever overranking UGA is at the moment. But pick the game against Troy. Tech scheduled two top tens and two micro-schools. I think thats a lot less shameful than all the schools-named-after-states who havent scheduled a top 50 opponant, save for long-term rivalries, ever.
By Geoff
September 16, 2006 07:08 PM | Link to this
Hey jr, do techies lack shame? You haven’t beaten us without using ineligible players in 15 years and yet you act like we need to toughen up.
While I do recognize that the voters use their influence to try to force schools to schedule high profile non-conference match ups, it really should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty that the SEC schedule should be considered tough enough. If you take Texas vs. Ohio State for example, you know the winner of that game would most likely have the inside track to a national championship shot even though there’s hardly anyone else left on their schedules worth noting. For Texas, an Oklahoma team that might lose to Oregon is all they have left and besides Ohio State, everyone left in the Big Ten looks like a paper tiger. If you compare that to a schedule which every year contains Florida, Tennessee, Auburn, and South Carolina (and sporadically LSU), the argument of UGA’s detractors appears absurd. In spite of all that, when the Georgia athletic department scheduled Colorado for a home and home several years ago, they were the Big Twelve North champions. You also conveniently forgot to mention the recent series with Clemson which the Dawgs dominated.