South Carolina stock report after regular season: Gamecocks fall short, but what’s next for program?
The schedule is generally always tough but even so it's not ultimate reason for not reaching 6 wins this year. Every year there's wins left on the field. But given the schedule difficulty it would not seem to be the continually daunting task that it is, if this team wasn't so consistently mediocre. This year's Missouri team is a good example. They played a very similar lineup and won 10 games. They were a good team, not a great team (both loses were very competitive games too). 7-5 was the likely the best case for SC this season and 6 wins was realistic. They have much to figure out and if some staff changes aren't made then next season will be worse.
He needs to to the NFL. It’s surprising he hasn’t been injured this year with the OL play and it won’t be better next season. He has had a good season and should capitalize on that. NIL money ain’t NFL money, and he risks losing that coming back.
Lost any hope in Loggains tonight. It was always a curious move to bring him in but I have never been certain to gauge him. The OL is putrid and has the ability to make any OC look bad, yet Rattler is having a better season. However looking at the play-calling in general and especially tonight it made very little sense regardless of the OL's status/ability.
No he hasn't, it was a shot at the AD/BoT who have demonstrated by Beamer's raise and extension the ability to learn no lessons what so ever from the mishandling of Muschmap's contracts. No one was trying to make Loggains an OC this season, just Beamer. Granted the offense is better but no one is coming for him after this season. So provided the bad decision making by the wrong people in the right places I would not be surprised whatsoever to see Loggains offered a raise and an extension.
No one is coming after Loggains and Pittman is probably gone after this season anyhow. So the logical move here on the part of the SC AD is to give Loggains a raise and contract extension.
Last year Stoops claimed the comment wasn't about Beamer, that it was about himself as it was said among a few other comments that would not have been about Beamer (if we're being objective). IIRC he claimed to not even know about that stupid video. Potentially plausible as busy as these coaches are but I don't necessarily buy it. Beamer said in the week before the game that he didn't think the comment was about him. Clearly coach-speak cause much different tone, words, and actions after the game. But here's the thing, Stoops is right. You can't put on sunglasses and dance around and change the culture. Stoops has changed Kentucky, Beamer is not changing SC.
Again, some people were really excited about Beamer, some of us weren't. I'll take your word for it on Loggains, but again, some of us weren't excited at all. Hooker's injury had no impact on the outcome, at best it had an impact on final score. He got hurt in the early 4th after the Gamecocks took their largest lead of the night (18 points) in a game they never trailed in.
Yep, time for this Beamer experiment to end.
This is stupid and simply inaccurate. Some folks were very high on Beamer from the beginning, some of us we're not so he's not want all of us wanted by any means. I don't recall specific posts about Loggains on here or any site but the general consensus among Gamecock fans was "who?". UT wasn't hobbled coming into that game, and no one was claiming being on the way to a natty.
@AFan - the reply link evidently isn't a reply link, not letting me respond directly to your message, just sending me to the regular box (but watch it post as a reply...) Yeah, familiar with Rich Rodriguez. He was Clemson's OC before heading to WV where he did well, then not so well at Michigan, and after that was doing fine at AZ. He was interviewed at SC prior to Muschamp being hired but in an odd display publicly turned down the job he was never offered. There was an interview and maybe there would have been an offer but it didn't get that far but he made it sound like it. Don't know what that was all about. But very little in Ray Tanner coaching searches make sense.
I was not a fan of this hire, he started to win me over a little in year one but that's completely worn off. I'm convinced he's in over his head, comes across like Butch Jones and Jeremy Pruitt. Both were never cut out to be HC's at SEC programs (or maybe anywhere). I watched most of his post-game press conferences the first season. Was interested to see how he would handle things, thought they may be good indicators of how he was dealing with learning how to be an HC. There was a moment after the Missouri game that season that it looked like something was beginning to click. But nope. I haven't watched this post-game press but I can probably guess what it will all be "Uh...really proud of our team, these guys care alot...give credit to Jacksonville state...really good football team...uh...[insert some nonsense about outside noise and narrative]."
"delusional walking glory hole", stealing that.
I too doubt he does fire anyone. Some of us knew it was a mistake when he was interviewed. To make it more of a joke go look up the clip from one of Josh Pate's show when he discussed the coaching hiring process and used Beamer's hire as an example.
If by facts you mean a blend of truth, opinion, and ignorance then sure. The BoT/AD do not have the know how, agreed on that. Commitment is vague so not sure how you're defining it. They will make a commitment to a coach whether they should or not. It was done properly under a different AD with Spurrier, it has been done improperly under the current AD with Muschamp and Beamer. They were one of the first schools to guarantee 4 year scholarships, that's a commitment to the athletes but again not sure you're definition. Resources, sort of. Having resources isn't the issue, not wasting them is. But that is more so "know how". Demographics is also vague. If you mean talent pool to recruit from that's not an problem for any school in the south. Acquiring the talent is another story.
No. 8 should be a punishable by death.
Injuries aside, they've needed a new S&C coach since 2013. Regularly losing at the line of scrimmage in short yardage situations, defenders often being taken for a ride instead of getting the ball carrier on the ground, and poor solo tackling. It was a bad situation when Luke Day showed up and he hasn't been able to correct it.
"...who the hell are they going to get that’s better?" This usually a stupid and lazy opinion, and there's usually not an answer to that question. Maybe whoever is the next hc at any school will be better or worse than the current coach. You never know and it's not the fans job to have an answer. A few years ago Tom Hermon, Justin Fuente, and Kirby Smart were the hottest can't miss names...except that two of them ain't hc's no more. No one outside of Clemson knew what a Dabo Sweeney was until 2008/09 and no one else was coming to make him their hc but it obviously worked out. In South Carolina's case they could not have fired Hotlz and Spurrier. And reasonable expected to do better. Every other coach I have seen them fire they waited at least a season too late regarding on field results. This is going to be a losing season more than likely. If 2025 is too then Beamer needs to go but he'll be allowed to stay through 2026.
What are our unreasonable expectations? Expecting to be able to win 6-8 games a year most season and play in a meh bowl game is unreasonable? Not blowing 4th quarter leads is unreasonable? Dumb statement.
So far Beamer’s teams have pulled off a couple wins each season that no one saw coming. But this is the worst of his teams and this prediction seems incredibly optimistic. Looking like 4 wins at best and there ain’t no reason to think they haven’t already peak at two wins.
It's not a sense of entitlement, that's ignorant. The decision to hire Beamer never made sense and it's becoming more evident. And this was after another sketchy hire in Muschamp and then terrible decision making with his contract. This is a fanbase with very little return on investment. Spurrier showed what many of us believed to be possible. But the leadership of the school and the AD seem to not care about what is possible as long as the fans keep filling the stadium. We'd like to see something that resembles competence from the AD/BoT. The last time that was done SC saw its best days ever in football. If that's entitlement so be it.
Better to grow up expecting the suck instead of constant disappointment. I’ve been at this for a few decades now so I have moved well past disappointment.
Calling BS on Beamer’s words quoted in the last paragraph. He’s thin skinned and often has referred to such things as the “outside narrative”. Comes across as trying to get ahead of the story. Now, he’s right, he didn’t do enough to help the team win but I ain’t buying that’s why he wound up breaking his foot.
I probably qualify as a Beamer hater - whatever that means. Never liked the hire by Tanner. He's won a couple games each season that seemed unlikely. I was hoping he'd keep finding ways to do that, and I suppose there is still time. But it's year 3 and the OL is still awful, practically no run game, and the defense is getting worse year to year and they haven't collectively been good any season under him. So what exactly makes him a good coach? Not even trying to be a d i c k, I just don't see the evidence outside of the aforementioned unexpected wins, but that's not program building stuff.
"That’s not like us..." Beamer's wrong, it's not just like them, its expected. Didn't watch the game. Heard the score with less than 5 minutes to go and said, "they'll blow it." Typical Gamecock football.
Spurrier got people to get behind athletics financially. The facilities that were built and were being built during his tenure was one of the failures for Muschamp (no coach ever started off so well at SC when it came to facilities). There was also recently that useless, million-dollar bronze rooster statue, rooster not a gamecock, funded by donors. So money exists somewhere, it is just not used resourcefully in the event it shows up.
Eh. They miss Bell but Lloyd and Burch did very little as Gamecocks. I have no idea how their seasons are going for them in their new locations, hope it's working out.
Yep, didn't like the Beamer hire. However his teams found ways to win some games in his first two seasons that were unexpected, so I began to think maybe he'll figure this out. But it's year 3 and the same issues plague the team and in the OL's case are even worse (somehow, I don't know how OL has been awful for years).
Stupid and no. I had about the same impression as you did upon reading this, and then the very next item mentioned was the poor run game. Rattler is playing with remarkable consistency provided there is poor pass protection and no run game to speak of. It's hard to win at all when you cannot run the ball and its impossible to beat a team like Georgia when that's the case.