Play Fantasy The Most Award Winning Fantasy game with real time scoring, top expert analysis, custom settings, and more. Play Now
Blog Entry

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

Posted on: February 7, 2012 5:24 pm
 

Posted by Jerry Hinnen

With every signal coming out of SEC HQ indicating the league is highly unlikely to follow the ACC's lead and pursue a nine-game league schedule, the 116-year intra-state rivalry between South Carolina and Clemson isn't in any immediate danger of being interrupted by the league's recent expansions. But one Palmetto State legislator has decided he'd rather not take any chances.

South Carolina state representative Nathan Ballentine has proposed that state law require the Gamecocks and Tigers to meet each year on the gridiron, continuing the nation's second-longest continuously played college football rivalry. The proposal will be examined by House lawmakers Wednesday, the State reports.

"I had a constituent bring it up to me, asking whether it was state law that these two teams play. It's not," said Ballentine, a South Carolina graduate from Lexington, S.C. "With all the conference realignment, we just wanted to make sure this annual game continues ... You saw Texas and Texas A&M ... No one wants to see that happen here to our two universities where families enjoy the annual game, and it's great for our economy."

Remarkably, the series has apparently been saved once already by state congressional fiat--according to Ballentine, no game was scheduled between the two teams in 1952 until the legislature stepped in.

But that's not argument enough for officials at either school, who agreed that the legislature's intervention at this stage is unnecessary. 

"Clemson would prefer to not have to legislate this issue," Tiger athletic director Terry Don Phillips said, "as I cannot conceive of a realistic scenario that would prohibit Clemson and South Carolina from continuing our football series."

Which makes us wonder--was this all a grand plot on Ballentine's part to prove to the two schools that they can agree on something? After the epic war of (misattributed) words between Dabo Swinney and (not actually) Steve Spurrier following this year's Gamecock beatdown, could the two programs have needed the reminder not to travel down the road of public in-fighting and back-biting that poisoned the rivalry between the Aggies and 'Horns?

To answer those questions: no, it wasn't, and no, they didn't. But as college football fans, we can understand Rep. Ballentine wanting to play it safe all the same.

Keep up with the latest college football news from around the country. From the opening kick of the year all the way through the offseason, CBSSports.com has you covered with this daily newsletter. View a preview.

Get CBSSports.com College Football updates on Facebook   

Comments

Since: Sep 6, 2008
Posted on: February 8, 2012 12:32 am
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

Actually The University of South Carolina was USC about 79 years before Uhe University of Southern California existed, so therefore South Carolina is USC



Since: Dec 4, 2006
Posted on: February 8, 2012 12:29 am
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

south carolina is NOT USC !!!!!!!



Since: Dec 4, 2006
Posted on: February 8, 2012 12:28 am
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

south carolina is NOT USC !!!!!!!



Since: Oct 14, 2011
Posted on: February 7, 2012 9:45 pm
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

usbummer,

No it is not a joke, if they pass the law and they don't play; all of the players and coaches can be arrested for football game evasion and it is punishable by 10 years imprisonment if it can be proved the game was not played. 



Since: Sep 22, 2009
Posted on: February 7, 2012 8:36 pm
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

Well they better protect it, because honestly, what else does South Carolina have outside of Myrtle Beach?


Says Chapel Hill? hahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaa



Since: Nov 15, 2009
Posted on: February 7, 2012 8:27 pm
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

I feel with all the expansions going on its a smart move because it will keep the 2nd oldest rivarly intact.  I live in this state and can't stand either team but they should always play eachother. Our governments wasted millions on barry Bonds case, I feel this is better for the state than some of the other dumb laws and waste of time and money in other areas.  Texas and Texas A&M won't play and that is a major loss to that fan base.  Alabama and Auburn were told if you don't play your in state rival then state funding would be cut so maybe thats what should be done here in South Carolina.  If Clemson would join the SEC this law wouldn't be made so if you don't want the gov. involved push for Clemson to join a real Football conference.  RTR going for 15 baby..............



Since: Sep 22, 2009
Posted on: February 7, 2012 8:20 pm
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

Surely this is a joke, announced tongue-in-cheek. The government has no business ordering two football teams to play each other. What if they choose not to? Does someone get arrested? Please tell me this is just a bunch of sillyness.
The government has no business?  They are two South Carolina public universities.... I think they have a lot of business to demand such a thing.



Since: Jan 6, 2008
Posted on: February 7, 2012 7:42 pm
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

Well they better protect it, because honestly, what else does South Carolina have outside of Myrtle Beach?



Since: Oct 29, 2007
Posted on: February 7, 2012 7:17 pm
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

Further, your time would be better spent investigating outrageous insurance rates in the state or illegal voting or illegal immigration or corruption or budget deficits or something worthwhile that is in your job description.



Since: Mar 7, 2008
Posted on: February 7, 2012 7:17 pm
 

State rep. wants Gamecocks-Tigers required by law

This rivalry is pretty damn important in the state of South Carolina . o legislate it would be ridiculous to a fault. I dont ever see this rivalry being shelved the way A&M and Texas was...just too intense in a state that holds no other higher . oh , and Clemson dominates this "rivalry" since its 100 + year run began ... totally dominates . 65-40-4 . The recent success enjoyed by the Coots has only strengthened this games importance to the fanbases, especially the Sackerlina fans who feel happy and super-pumped about success on a small scale.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com