SCHSL should green light spring scrimmages

Spring football.

In South Carolina, those words mean that players around the state will get some practice time to shake off the dust from the offseason and to get a look at some of the younger players who are either moving up or from backups from the season before.

But to our neighbors in Georgia and Florida, it not only means practice time to do those same things, but also time to raise some money for the program and capitalize on an opportunity to get their kids seen by college coaches in game-like scrimmages. Florida has been doing it for years, and Georgia passed a rule this year to allow schools to participate in one spring scrimmage game against an opponent.

Having experienced this when I coached in Florida, I’ve been lobbying for this in South Carolina. I don’t understand the reason from the governing body of South Carolina High School Sports why it isn’t allowed to happen. And before you say “well Jim, the SCHSL is representative of the coaches and athletics directors and member schools,” I beg to differ.

If that were the case, then we’d be looking at a six-class system next season as opposed to a five-class system as was voted on and approved. We would also see the Class 5A and 4A championship games go back to the high school’s sites instead of a consolidated event where the big financial winner certainly isn’t any of the teams participating.

I’m sure in the reasoning we’d get some kind of ridiculous statistic on injuries in the spring, which is a poor argument considering the kids would be doing nothing different than what they are now. I’m sure we will hear the term “catastrophic insurance” and the parameters of the coverage, but we all know that can be easily amended.

Allowing spring football scrimmages to take place would do several positive things for our athletics programs. First of all, it would make practice attendance by players better. Not all coaches will admit it, but few schools have 100 percent participation in their spring workouts, and the effort at practices is also subpar because there’s really nothing to be working for. If they were looking forward to a scrimmage with their rival, however, attendance at practices would be improved and the effort would be full tilt.

Having a spring scrimmage would also be beneficial to the athletes. These players would be able to showcase their skills in a game-like scrimmage in front of college coaches during the legal evaluation period.

The biggest thing would be the financial benefit. Imagine two rivals playing each other in the spring and promoting it as a fundraiser. I will use a real example without mentioning the schools. These two schools, from mid-classifications, play each year and bring in between $16-20,000 at the gate. That could fund your entire spring sports program, and keep you from having to use the fall football gates from financing the non-revenue sports.

And if the SCHSL is concerned about not getting their take because it’s a scrimmage and not a sanctioned event, then pass it with a stipulation that the SCHSL gets their 20 percent cut; or since it’s a fundraiser, pass it with a lesser 10 percent cut.

Let’s quit talking about how we are all about doing everything we can to benefit our kids and student-athletes and show that we are serious about it. Give these kids, coaches, and communities a way to improve their entire athletics program with one simple thing – approve real spring football.

This story was originally published May 22, 2016 at 5:25 PM with the headline "SCHSL should green light spring scrimmages."