Looking at this year's Heisman hopefuls they all have a few things in common: big conferences, big schools, big names and big scandals. Well maybe not all of the potential Heisman winners are riddled with controversy, but possibly the two biggest names are, "Famous" Jameis Winston and Todd Gurley. Winston (Florida State) and Gurley (Georgia) have both been linked to a company that has been selling their autographs and paying the players for it, a violation of NCAA policy. Neither player have been proven guilty, but Georgia decided to suspend Gurley, while Florida State decided to wait until an investigation to say whether Winston will face suspension or not. The question is which program and which coach made the correct call?
Gurley was the first player associated with the autograph scandal, and was suspended indefinitely by coach Mark Richt despite Georgia's decent chance to make the first College Football Playoff, or at least a high profile bowl game. The Bulldogs, a top ten ranked team, have played multiple games now without arguably the best running back in college football, and seem content to wait until a final decision is made between the University and the NCAA.
Florida State and coach Jimbo Fisher took a different route than that of Mark Richt. When Winston was linked to the same company, it seemed like another nail in the coffin for the sophomore who already missed a game due to suspension earlier in the year. Despite Winston's questionable off the field issues, Fisher decided that no action will be taken until an investigation into the incident is complete assuring that Winston said he did not receive any monetary compensation for his autographs. Fisher essentially saying that nobody knows whether Winston did anything wrong, and that he can't be punished for something he might not have done.
Two different coaches took different routes of addressing an issue that could potentially cost their teams victories and a shot at a national championship, but which was the best course? I don't honestly know. Richt seemed to take a hard ball coach approach, not letting any nonsense supersede the Bulldogs and his team. Fisher took a more understanding approach, a players coach approach if you will. Both styles can work, but time will only tell which option was the best course to take.
What do these situations and coaches' decisions tell us about college athletics? Do decisions that deal with star players getting suspended depend on the team's ability to overcome those suspensions? Georgia can definitely compensate the loss of Gurley much more effectively than Florida State can compensate Winston (as evident by Florida State nearly losing to Clemson with a back up quarterback). Did Georgia suspend Gurley because they had more information about the situation then Florida State did, and that forced Georgia's hand? Does the amount of information matter, or would the decisions regarding both players have been made the same regardless? Should this off field issue effect Gurley and Winston's chance at winning the Heisman? Former Georgia great and Heisman Trophy winner Hershel Walker thinks so, but time will only tell.
At the end of the day I can't say which decision was right, if both were the correct choice, or if both were completely inappropriate decisions. I feel for Gurley, he had arguably the best shot at the trophy, but missing multiple games will cost him. I also don't feel for Gurley. He was aware of the NCAA policy and whether he received money or not, associating oneself with the situation is very dangerous. I find it interesting that despite his history, more rigorous and harsh penalties weren't brought against Winston. His track record hasn't been great in recent history, but innocent unless proven guilty. So my point is I don't know who to tip my hat to in this post, the jury is still out.
No comments:
Post a Comment