The Cavalier daily Friday, December 1, 1967 | ||
Mr. Blackburn
"He is a great coach, a symbol of decency
especially to the young men he helped grow
up, and there was never a man more faithful
to his principles or his friends. He is not
an easy man to know. Those who do know
him are utterly devoted to him." In January,
1959, columnist Red Smith wrote that description
of Army's legendary Red Blaik.
He might have been writing about Virginia's
Head Coach George Blackburn. Most of the
words are appropriate.
Mr. Blackburn is a gentleman in the fullest
sense of the word. Those who have come
into contact with him cannot help but be
impressed by his thoughtful kindness and
never-tiring patience. Like Red Blaik, Mr.
Blackburn is not an easy man to know. He
is an essentially private person cast in the
most public of roles. Having a weekly
television show is not particularly suited to
Mr. Blackburn. He does not come across
well; putting words together off the cuff is
not his forte. He is a man who is best in
small person-to-person groups.
The members of the football team are
unanimous in their support of Mr. Blackburn.
They are quick to point out how
much he has done for Virginia football.
In three years since his arrival, the number
of football grants-in-aid has risen from
twenty-three to thirty-four. Recruiting, as a
result, has improved. Mr. Blackburn has
also been extremely conscientious about
maintaining the University's strict entrance
requirements in his recruiting—which many
coaches, under the pressure to win, might
be prone to disregard. The assistant coaches,
too, have been recruited by Mr. Blackburn
and the 1967 staff has managed marked improvement
in team morale and performance.
During the mid-season slump, which saw
four straight defeats, criticism of Mr. Blackburn,
both here at the University and in
the state press, became more pointed. As
a direct result, the team made the final
three games a crusade for their coach. After
the Openings triumph over North Carolina,
the team closed the locker room to press
and visitors and began a chant of "We
want Blackie!" until the coach appeared.
The tenor of the team's support for Mr.
Blackburn cannot be overlooked. Ara Parseghian's
comment in a recent Sport Magazine
article that he had learned how to "achieve
a team rapport from George Blackburn"
adds further weight to the argument that
Mr. Blackburn is a fine handler of his players.
There can be no question about the integrity
of Mr. Blackburn's character. He is
sincere and hard-working in his effort to
bring better football to the University. One
question, however, must be asked. Can Mr.
Blackburn produce a winner? In his three
years here, his teams have compiled season
marks of 4-6, 4-6, and 5-5. In his ten
years in the head coaching business, he has
produced a 45-45-7 record.
Mr. Blackburn has devoted forty years
of his life to the game of football. He is
one of the most highly-regarded offensive
football minds in the country. We do not
pretend to take issue with his knowledge
of his business. To be sure, the black-and-white
numbers of season and life records
do not tell the whole story of a coach's
ability. But numbers are facts and therefore
do merit some consideration.
It was Leo Durocher who uttered the now
-famous quote, "Nice guys finish last."
Perhaps this is Mr. Blackburn's predicament.
This is not to suggest he is a loser
for, of course, his record stands. But Mr.
Blackburn is undoubtedly a nice guy. It is
a sad fact of human nature that people
tend to take advantage of nice guys—and
sometimes that is why they are so popular.
The most successful college coaches in the
victory column—the Bear Bryants and the
John McKays—seem to have a different
player-coach rapport than does Mr. Blackburn.
They are respected by their players,
certainly, but there is a greater distance.
There are definite sacrifices that must be
made to have winning big-time college football.
There is something immeasurable that
separates the good coach from the great
coach. We wish we knew what it is. There
has not been a winning football team at the
University since 1952—fifteen long years ago.
Of all the seasons in recent history, next
season shows the greatest potential
for eliminating this unwanted University
tradition. Much of the credit for bringing
this potential here must belong to Mr.
Blackburn. But potential brought here is not
the same thing as victories on the field.
Next year there should be both.
J. D. M.
The Cavalier daily Friday, December 1, 1967 | ||