November 22, 2004
No Bowl for South Carolina
WIS reports that South Carolina is announcing at a 5 p.m. news conference that they will not attend a bowl game following Saturday's brawl during the Clemson game. Clemson made a similar announcement earlier.
South Carolina's statement is also below in the extended entry.
Transcript of AD Mike McGee's statement
Nov. 22, 2004Columbia, S.C. - GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS MORNING WE SAID GOOD-BYE TO A COACHING LEGEND, OUR OWN Lou Holtz IN THIS VERY ROOM ... THIS AFTERNOON, WE ARE HERE FOR ANOTHER REASON ...
SOUTH CAROLINA WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY BOWL GAME INVITATION THIS SEASON NOR WILL CLEMSON ...
THIS WAS NOT A KNEE JERK REACTION TO THE MOST UNFORTUNATE INCIDENT ON SATURDAY. AFTER MUCH CONSULTATION BETWEEN THE SEC OFFICE, WITH THE PRESIDENTS, ATHLETICS DIRECTORS AND ADMINISTRATION OF BOTH SCHOOLS, WE FELT IT WAS NECESSARY TO DECLINE ANY BOWL INVITATION WE WOULD RECEIVE THIS YEAR.
THE ACTIONS ON SATURDAY ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CORE VALUES, MORALS AND ETHICS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA. WHILE WE ARE FULLY COMMITTED TO BUILDING CHAMPIONSHIP TEAMS AT CAROLINA, WE ARE EVEN MORE COMMITTED TO SEEING STUDENT-ATHLETES DEVELOP WITH THE FINEST INTEGRITY AND CHARACTER POSSIBLE ...
WHILE THIS DECISION WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL IMPACT ON USC AND WILL ALSO LOSE A MONTH OF PRE-BOWL PRACTICE IT WAS A DECISION THAT HAD TO BE MADE ...
FOOTBALL IS A TEAM SPORT. THE PUNISHMENT WILL BE ONE THAT WILL AFFECT THE ENTIRE TEAM. THE PLAYERS ACTED WITHOUT THINKING. I AM CERTAIN THEY FEEL EMBARRASSED, UPSET, AND SORRY THAT IT HAPPENED. BUT, REGRET AND REMORSE DO NOT EXCUSE THESE ACTIONS FROM BEING PUNISHED. THE TEAM NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE CHOSE TO TAKE THESE ACTIONS AND KNOW THIS IS THE RIGHT COURSE OF ACTION ...
ULTIMATELY, THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSONS LEARNED THROUGH SOUTH CAROLINA FOOTBALL ARE CHARACTER, COURAGE, PERSEVERANCE, SACRIFICE, INTEGRITY AND SELF-CONTROL. WE CANNOT AND WILL NOT ALLOW LAPSES OF THESE LIFE-LONG LESSONS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA. THE CAROLINA ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT AND ITS FOOTBALL STUDENT-ATHLETES AND ATHLETICS DIRECTOR EXPRESS THEIR DEEPEST APOLOGIES FOR THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN THIS TERRIBLY UNFORTUNATE INCIDENT.
Trackback
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.fanblogs.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2185
You can use this specified URL in a weblogging program that supports pinging, such as Movable Type. If your blog software does not support Trackback, click here to send a manual ping.
Comments & Trackbacks
From Backcountry Conservative
pinged on Nov 22, 2004 5:28 PMFull details at my Fanblogs post, which I will update as more becomes available. South Carolina made a similar announcement....
From The MUSC Tiger
pinged on Nov 22, 2004 5:32 PMThe Clemson Sports website has confirmed that the Tigers will not be attending any postseason play this year, despite qualifying for a bowl berth after defeating South Carolina on Saturday. This, of course, stems from the brawl that took place in the ...
Jeff Quinton says:
posted on November 22, 2004 05:51 PM — linkHoltz's next win would have been 250.
Jeff Quinton says:
posted on November 22, 2004 06:04 PM — linkKudos to the Clemson Athletic Department for having somebody typing their statements up for the web who knows how to turn the caps lock key off (unlike S. Carolina apparently.)
Robert Knodell says:
posted on November 22, 2004 06:25 PM — linkAs I've said, the biggest losers in this are the SEC bowl partners. For starters, the Houston Bowl (which had hoped against hope for an Arkansas upset of LSU this weekend) has now seems its slim chances of getting the Hogs and their traditionally large contingent of fans for their game. Similarly (assumed Arkansas loses), either the Independence Bowl or the Music City loses out on having an SEC team, since now the Peach and those two will only have Florida and Alabama to choose from.
One of them will effectively end up losing out on a large SEC fan base, the larger ticket sales, and their money that would've been spent in the community. Now, one of those bowls will have to pluck a team from elsewhere, likely one with less traveling support and less local interest. It's especially for the Independence Bowl, which is without a sponsor and is trying to attract one. This certainly won't help matters.
Jeff Quinton says:
posted on November 22, 2004 06:29 PM — linkIf the Independence had gotten SC they might have gotten less attendance than an SEC West school because of geography (SC might be an exception but generally most SEC East schools would do worse in bowl trips to Shreveport than West teams.)
If any SC fans talked to their relatives and friends who went to see Clemson in 1986 they'd stay away. I know people who enjoyed the Boise trip a few years ago a lot more than the trip to Shreveport.
Kevin Donahue says:
posted on November 22, 2004 06:45 PM — linkAs I said before, standing ovation for South Carolina. Very, very classy. Benchmark decision for college football programs: can you measure up to Clemson & South Carolina?
As far as bowl partners go, cry me a river. Bowl partners are always at the mercy of chance because there's no guarantee that teams will qualify. If they want to move up in the bowl pecking order, get our your checkbook and bump off the Peach Bowl or something.
What these two teams have done in setting this example means that college football will continue to be worth something and fans will want to travel to see these games.
bryan says:
posted on November 22, 2004 08:20 PM — linkWhat these two teams have done in setting this example means that college football will continue to be worth something and fans will want to travel to see these games.
Oh, please. Both of these teams were going to nothing games. This is all about managing image. The real question would have been whether either of these teams would have made this decision if they were 9-2 or 8-3 and eligible for a real bowl. As it is, it's like declining a Sadie Hawkins Dance invitation from Roseanne Barr because you got in a fight at school with your cousin.
Kevin Donahue says:
posted on November 22, 2004 08:57 PM — linkBS, Bryan. The schools turned down hundreds of thousands in bowl revenues and tens of thousands in booster money. Beyond that, they're also turning away recruiting exposure outside their home markets. Despite what you might think, the decision to turn down the money over principle is significant for both USC and Clemson.
Sadie Hawkins or not, I guarantee you it wasn't easy to break the news to those seniors who've worked for four or five years that - no, there wouldn't be 'one more game', despite all their work day in & day out.
This was the right decisions and I believe it was made for the right reasons. You can be as skeptical as you like, but it's hard to say that either school was wrong to walk away.
Jeff Quinton says:
posted on November 22, 2004 09:55 PM — linkSEC Commissioner Mike Slive issued the following statement today:
"The decision by the University of South Carolina not go to a bowl game sends the important message to student-athletes, not only at South Carolina and in the Southeastern Conference, but thoughout the nation that intercollegiate ahtletics will not tolerate the kind of behavior we saw in the South Carolina-Clemson game last Saturday. The Southeastern Conference supports this decision by the University. The conference continues to review game films to determine additional penalties where warranted."
Jeff Quinton says:
posted on November 22, 2004 10:00 PM — linkLive streaming webcast at 1 pm on WLTX.com and WISTV.com.
Ken Fitzgerald says:
posted on November 22, 2004 11:59 PM — linkI'm glad the two teams are not going to the bowls; this must stop! Isn't the physical contact on the field enough? Sportsmanship needs a new definition, or it needs to be re-read!!!!!!!!
Its shameful, and I'm very sorry that it happened.
Ken FFrom Backcountry Conservative
pinged on Nov 23, 2004 1:28 AMVideo excerpts: Real-Time Slow-Motion I'm posting this on request. Thanks to Taft from TigerNet for providing it. It is a brief excerpt of video from the brawl at Saturday's game. Yahoo Sports has the whole game video here and the...
From Backcountry Conservative
pinged on Nov 23, 2004 1:29 AMVideo excerpts: Real-Time Slow-Motion I'm posting this on request. Thanks to Taft from TigerNet for providing it. It is a brief excerpt of video from the brawl at Saturday's game. Yahoo Sports has the whole game video here and the...
From Backcountry Conservative
pinged on Nov 23, 2004 2:32 AMVideo excerpts: Real-Time Slow-Motion I'm posting this on request. Thanks to Taft from TigerNet for providing it. It is a brief excerpt of video from the brawl at Saturday's game. Yahoo Sports has the whole game video here and the...
From ACC College Football - Fanblogs.com
pinged on Nov 29, 2004 5:16 PMAfter a review of video by ACC officials, six players have been suspended for one game in 2005 for Clemson. The suspension for each player must take place at some point during next season. The players suspended include: Nathan Bennett, Brandon Cannon, ...
From English
pinged on Dec 1, 2004 2:25 PMFrom Backcountry Conservative
pinged on Dec 2, 2004 9:10 AMVideo excerpts: Real-Time Slow-Motion I'm posting this on request. Thanks to Taft from TigerNet for providing it. It is a brief excerpt of video from the brawl at Saturday's game. Yahoo Sports has the whole game video here and the...
