Spurred On

It was interesting, to say the least, to pick up the paper Monday morning and see the hullaballoo over Steve Spurrier's comments over the weekend.

Spurrier, in effect, drew a line in the sand with the South Carolina administration over admissions. Or, more to the point, a lack of admission of two football recruits.

His anger came because the school denied entry to the two players, despite the fact that both had met the minimum NCAA qualifying standards. Spurrier said the decision made him a liar to those players, and something had to change. He can't coach at a place like that, he said.

The intrigue will come when we see what USC's administration says about Spurrier's blast.

If they say anything at all.

Because make no mistake about it - South Carolina needs Spurrier much more than he needs the school.

Spurrier's efforts to change the losing culture that has dogged the Gamecock football program for most of its life appear to be taking hold. Slowly, perhaps, but there are signs that the ship is headed in the right direction (a minor miracle in its own right, even before you take into consideration the thuggish end to the Lou Holtz era).

Though it was said about Holtz before him, it may be that if Spurrier can't win consistently at USC, truly no one can.

So don't be surprised if you hear little in the way of admonishment by the USC administration toward Spurrier. They know he holds all the cards.

With more of Redskins' owner Daniel Snyder's money in his bank account than he can ever spend, Spurrier has what every coach would love to possess:

The financial leeway to tell any school, USC included, to take a hike.

And if the Gamecock hierarchy antagonizes Spurrier to the point that he picks up his golf clubs and heads to the links full time, competing in the ultra-violent SEC East will be little more than a pipe dream.

Too much power for a head coach to have? Perhaps.

But then again, when was the last time anybody accused college football of having a healthy balance, anyway?