Why Is South Carolina a Coach-Killing Stop for Good Coaches?

Larry Burton (Panama City Beach, Fl) When Fred Ebb wrote the lyrics for New York, New York which was later recorded and best remembered as a Frank Sinatra hit, he got it all wrong. The lyrics go, "If I can make it here, I'll make it anywhere." That mantra belongs to South Carolina.

Since World War II, no coach has had a winning percentage of  just over .500.

Quick, who was the winningest coach for the Gamecocks since 1943?

If you didn't know the answer, don't be ashamed, he's hardly a household name. It is Joe Morrison. Yep, the first coach of the modern age to get sucked into college football's version of the tar pit.

Morrison was quite a hot prospect back in 1982 when he led the Lobos of New Mexico to unheard of heights with a 10-1 season among other great seasons.

Then he went to South Carolina and posted a .580 winning percentage and the frustration killed him, quite literally, as he died there.

He was the first to have a little success, including a nine game winning streak and three post season bowls, only to be pulled back down into mediocrity. His winning percentage is higher than anyone since.

Morrision was there from 1983 to 1988 and then a young assistant got the chance to take the reigns, Sparky Woods. He lasted five seasons and a sub .500 record.

After this they hired the hottest assistant out there at the time, Brad Scott, the FSU offensive coordinator who led FSU's offense to national titles and Heisman glory.

Five years and a .420 average later, the school decided they needed a big name, so they went out and got one, Lou Holtz.

Lou came from Notre Dame with a winning percentage at .700, a perfect season, a National Championship and a very long impressive resume. He left six seasons later with a sub .500 winning percentage and his tail firmly between his legs.

But now things were bound to change. In 2005 they acquired Steve Spurrier who had always won in college football. Could there be a better pick? Did anyone know more more about winning in the SEC? This was a no brainer and a no lose opportunity.

Fast forward five years and Spurrier is about .550, has only had one season that he won more games in the SEC than he lost and South Carolina has killed yet another career.

The question is, Why? I've seen the facilities there and they're not bad. It's not like Kentucky where basketball is king and there's certainly good recruiting tools like the SEC television contract and more to attract athletes, so why the failure?

They've had young energetic coaches like Woods and older more mature veterans like Holtz and Spurrier, but nothing seems to work.

The reason is, while there's no more competition for recruits as there is at any other school, there's a smaller pool to fish in and less big fish in the territorial waters to be claimed than say Alabama and especially Florida.

The pond is pretty small for Tennessee too, but they have always had a national recruiting campaign that has worked well for them.

The real reason Holtz and Spurrier failed was their laziness to get out and recruit as hard as the rest of their SEC brethren. God forbid that a recruiting trip interfere with Spurrier's tee times.

Both Holtz and Spurrier were content to coast for much of the year and hope their game-day savvy could pull out wins, but in today's college football scene, you win with talent and it has been short in South Carolina for over 10 years.

Until they pull in a firebrand coach who will hit the recruiting trail as hard as Nick Saban and Les Miles, they will continue to be a place where coaches go to die.