In defense of Beamer

[18IsTheMan]

We have 10 (or 11) top 25 finishes in our entire history (that statistic is sad enough to warrant its own post...). Beamer has 2 of those. That's really not all that bad. Fan favorite Joe Morrison only had 2. Lou Holtz only had 2. If this season goes as it is tracking, Beamer will have 3 good/ok years and 3 bad years. All things considered for Gamecock football, that's ok-ish. Morrison also had 3 good years and 3 bad/ok years. Holtz had 3 good/ok years and 3 bad years (even his last year we were 6-5 (4-4) which sounds like a dream right now).

Maybe Beamer's tenure has to be evaluated in terms of where we've come from vs where we hope to get.

 

[Cockofdawn]

We have 10 (or 11) top 25 finishes in our entire history (that statistic is sad enough to warrant its own post...). Beamer has 2 of those. That's really not all that bad. Fan favorite Joe Morrison only had 2. Lou Holtz only had 2. If this season goes as it is tracking, Beamer will have 3 good/ok years and 3 bad years. All things considered for Gamecock football, that's ok-ish. Morrison also had 3 good years and 3 bad/ok years. Holtz had 3 good/ok years and 3 bad years (even his last year we were 6-5 (4-4) which sounds like a dream right now).

Maybe Beamer's tenure has to be evaluated in terms of where we've come from vs where we hope to get.

I will agree AND Disagee.... After the 2024 season, this squad and Players were the talk of the town, 2025 was a disaster with these guys, 2026 is turning into a disaster with these guys, So just think how bad it will get next yearr W/O the "Stars"?? I realize He can recruit, but I dont think he knows how to develop these guys?? Not sure, I am not "AT PRACTICE EACH DAY"..... But no other explanation.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I will agree AND Disagee.... After the 2024 season, this squad and Players were the talk of the town, 2025 was a disaster with these guys, 2026 is turning into a disaster with these guys, So just think how bad it will get next yearr W/O the "Stars"?? I realize He can recruit, but I dont think he knows how to develop these guys?? Not sure, I am not "AT PRACTICE EACH DAY"..... But no other explanation.

Joe Morrison, who is widely revered by the fan base as one of our best and favorite coaches was 39-28-2, a .565 win percentage.

Beamer, at this point is 35-32 or a .522 win percentage.

It's not a whole lot of difference. If you applied Morrison's win percentage to Beamer, it would be 37-30.

It's more an indictment of our history than it is a defense of Beamer, but the guy is not terrible from a historical perspective.
There's a very fine line between "we love you" and "fire him now!".

 

[atlanta cock#]

Money is too big now. Plus we play 12 games. Under Morrison we played 11.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Money is too big now. Plus we play 12 games. Under Morrison we played 11.

Win % is win % though. There's a hair's breadth difference between Morrison's and Beamer's win %.

You could argue Beamer's is more impressive given the harder SEC slate he's faced.

 

[Urbanrooster77]

Joe Morrison, who is widely revered by the fan base as one of our best and favorite coaches was 39-28-2, a .565 win percentage.

Beamer, at this point is 35-32 or a .522 win percentage.

It's not a whole lot of difference. If you applied Morrison's win percentage to Beamer, it would be 37-30.

There's a very fine line between "we love you" and "fire him now!".

Agreed, hell lou holtz is considered as our second best coach ever an he went 33-37 overall. At the least we need to give him the rest of this year and probably next year. He's all class an I'll take losing with class over winning with thugs like bama an auburn an uga.

 

[gamecockengineer2011]

college sports are essentially semi-professional sports. The coaches job is to win, right now Beamer is not winning enough. Its nothing personal but for the money being spent the return on the investment should be better.

I personally reject the aww shucks mentality that .500 football is ok. It ******* isnt, I refuse to settle for mediocrity. We as a fan base should expect more.

 

[18IsTheMan]

college sports are essentially semi-professional sports. The coaches job is to win, right now Beamer is not winning enough. Its nothing personal but for the money being spent the return on the investment should be better.

I personally reject the aww shucks mentality that .500 football is ok. It ******* isnt, I refuse to settle for mediocrity. We as a fan base should expect more.

We've been expecting more for 130 years.

It's one thing to issue ultimatums and demands in online forums. But reality is reality. We can fire Beamer, pay his buyout, hire another coach, who will coach to a .500-ish record, and I can flat out guarantee you we'll be in this same boat within the next 6-7 years.

 

[Gr8spur]

Win % is win % though. There's a hair's breadth difference between Morrison's and Beamer's win %.

You could argue Beamer's is more impressive given the harder SEC slate he's faced.

You could argue it. But don't forget, Joe was playing against FSU (under Bowden), Nebraska (under Osborn), Notre Dame, and Georgia. I do miss the Joe Moe era.

 

[Lurker123]

Agreed, hell lou holtz is considered as our second best coach ever an he went 33-37 overall. At the least we need to give him the rest of this year and probably next year. He's all class an I'll take losing with class over winning with thugs like bama an auburn an uga.

Holtz's losses were very front loaded though. Meaning he came into a bad situation, and steadily improved us.

Beamer has been erratic, and not steadily improving.

 

[18IsTheMan]

You could argue it. But don't forget, Joe was playing against FSU (under Bowden), Nebraska (under Osborn), Notre Dame, and Georgia. I do miss the Joe Moe era.

And, see, that's the thing. Fans look back wistfully on a coach who had a marginally better win percentage than Beamer does.

But, just about all of Morrison's big wins came in the 1984 season. Outside of 1984, the only top 25 wins he had were Clemson in '87 and UGA in '88. He beat Clemson 2x, same as Beamer has so far. And, we can't forget, he coached us to what is our most legendary cataclysmic loss in the history of our entire athletic program. That loss IS the hallmark of the Chicken Curse.

I'm not saying any of that to dog Morrison but rather to point out how fine the line is between loving a guy and having the pitchforks out.

 

[atlanta cock#]

Win % is win % though. There's a hair's breadth difference between Morrison's and Beamer's win %.

You could argue Beamer's is more impressive given the harder SEC slate he's faced.

That's fair but it doesn't change the fact he's not improving at all, he's stubborn as hell, and it's apparent he has lost the fanbase and appears to be losing the team.

 

[18IsTheMan]

That's fair but it doesn't change the fact he's not improving at all, he's stubborn as hell, and it's apparent he has lost the fanbase and appears to be losing the team.

Yeah, there are a lot of subjective factors...the general feel/vibe of the program.

I just think it's interesting when you clear all that out and look at the raw data comparing the 2. On paper, neither is distinguished from the other.

 

[Swifty]

And, see, that's the thing. Fans look back wistfully on a coach who had a marginally better win percentage than Beamer does.

But, just about all of Morrison's big wins came in the 1984 season. Outside of 1984, the only top 25 wins he had were Clemson in '87 and UGA in '88. He beat Clemson 2x, same as Beamer has so far. And, we can't forget, he coached us to what is our most legendary cataclysmic loss in the history of our entire athletic program. That loss IS the hallmark of the Chicken Curse.

I'm not saying any of that to dog Morrison but rather to point out how fine the line is between loving a guy and having the pitchforks out.

Spurrier blew that stuff out the window. 2010-2013 showed that it is possible to be a legitimate contender in Columbia. Yes, the landscape has changed since then, but also... Indiana. Indiana, who held on at home to beat Northwestern this past weekend. Indiana and Northwestern are the #1 and #2 worst division 1A football programs in history. We are in what is still the premier conference and we benefit from that revenue and we have the facilities and fan base. It's all there except for the winning part, but it can be done.

 

[Deathstar]

Beamer is a nice man and a mid football coach. We are never going to be any good with this guy in charge. We never were any good, but after 6 years we do not seem to headed in the right direction with Beamer.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Spurrier blew that stuff out the window. 2010-2013 showed that it is possible to be a legitimate contender in Columbia. Yes, the landscape has changed since then, but also... Indiana. Indiana, who held on at home to beat Northwestern this past weekend. Indiana and Northwestern are the #1 and #2 worst division 1A football programs in history. We are in what is still the premier conference and we benefit from that revenue and we have the facilities and fan base. It's all there except for the winning part, but it can be done.

Did he though?

How did Spurrier's tenure end?

Spurrier only found success as the state produced an unprecedented run of in-state recruiting talent. Once that dried up, his tenure went in the toilet.

Yes, I know folks will forever use IU as the example of what's possible now. All that proves, though, is that coaching hires are crapshoots. Not a single person in the world paid attention when they hired the coach from James Madison. Nobody was hailing it has a world-changing hire. They simply got lucky and won the jackpot.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Beamer is a nice man and a mid football coach. We are never going to be any good with this guy in charge. We never were any good, but after 6 years we do not seem to headed in the right direction with Beamer.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Sparky's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Scott's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Lou's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Spurrier's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Muschamp's tenure.

 

[Deathstar]

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Sparky's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Scott's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Lou's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Spurrier's tenure.

Nor were we headed in the right way at the end of Muschamp's tenure.

Yep, always lost, as we seem to be again. He is too expensive to replace so do not worry, you will get at least two more years of this.

 

[Swifty]

Did he though?

How did Spurrier's tenure end?

Spurrier only found success as the state produced an unprecedented run of in-state recruiting talent. Once that dried up, his tenure went in the toilet.

Yes, I know folks will forever use IU as the example of what's possible now. All that proves, though, is that coaching hires are crapshoots. Not a single person in the world paid attention when they hired the coach from James Madison. Nobody was hailing it has a world-changing hire. They simply got lucky and won the jackpot.

Yes, he did. '12 & '13 teams were each a play away from being in Atlanta playing for the SEC title and a shot at the BCS title game.
His tenure ended really sh!@%y, but that was the result of a string of bad staff decisions he made.
I don't buy the in-state recruiting talent excuse, either. The team upstate won two titles with more out of state talent than in-state talent, especially at skill positions. Recruiting went south as soon as Beamer, Graham, Johnson and Lawing left. Whammy was NOT ready to be DC. Steve Jr being promoted to Recruiting Coordinator upon Beamer's exit was a disaster.
But there was a window in time over 3+ seasons where we all went into gameday not hoping to win, but expecting to win. That is possible in Columbia.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Yes, he did. '12 & '13 teams were each a play away from being in Atlanta playing for the SEC title and a shot at the BCS title game.
His tenure ended really sh!@%y, but that was the result of a string of bad staff decisions he made.
I don't buy the in-state recruiting talent excuse, either. The team upstate won two titles with more out of state talent than in-state talent, especially at skill positions. Recruiting went south as soon as Beamer, Graham, Johnson and Lawing left. Whammy was NOT ready to be DC. Steve Jr being promoted to Recruiting Coordinator upon Beamer's exit was a disaster.
But there was a window in time over 3+ seasons where we all went into gameday not hoping to win, but expecting to win. That is possible in Columbia.

So, you're basing your conclusion 3 years and ignoring the other 127+ years?

It's widely understood that those 3 years were the product of an insane amount of top shelf in-state talent. It was just a perfect storm. Right coach. Right place. Right time.

There's nothing from that time that replicable, though.

You can't just point to those 3 years and disregard the ending. We were an absolute dumpster fire. A HOF coach simply quit midseason. We had a walk-on starting at QB. It was an unmitigated disaster.

 

[Swifty]

So, you're basing your conclusion 3 years and ignoring the other 127+ years?

It's widely understood that those 3 years were the product of an insane amount of top shelf in-state talent. It was just a perfect storm. Right coach. Right place. Right time.

There's nothing from that time that replicable, though.

You can't just point to those 3 years and disregard the ending. We were an absolute dumpster fire. A HOF coach simply quit midseason. We had a walk-on starting at QB. It was an unmitigated disaster.

You challenged my statement that Spurrier proved that it is possible to be a legitimate contender at USC. I mean... I'm not sure how you argue that stance when the facts are that he did. Sure, there was a lot of in-state talent, but you still have to fill out a roster. If you don't have the numbers in SC, you go elsewhere (Garcia (FL) and Shaw (GA) led those teams). We aren't required to sign any certain percentage of players from SC.
I didn't disregard the ending. It was awful. He lost the team and he quit. But you are disregarding the fact that Spurrier proved that being a legitimate contender at USC is possible because it ended badly.

 

[18IsTheMan]

You challenged my statement that Spurrier proved that it is possible to be a legitimate contender at USC. I mean... I'm not sure how you argue that stance when the facts are that he did. Sure, there was a lot of in-state talent, but you still have to fill out a roster. If you don't have the numbers in SC, you go elsewhere (Garcia (FL) and Shaw (GA) led those teams). We aren't required to sign any certain percentage of players from SC.
I didn't disregard the ending. It was awful. He lost the team and he quit. But you are disregarding the fact that Spurrier proved that being a legitimate contender at USC is possible because it ended badly.

3 brief years of unsustained success don't prove anything though. That's especially illustrated by how quickly the bottom fell out. LOTS of mediocre programs have had a spurt of success here and there over the years.

Spurrier's first 5 years were extremely mediocre, with no real progress made year-over-year. The saving grace is that he was mixing in some wins over UGA/UT/UF for the first time ever. But you look back at those records and they aren't great.

Then you had that burst from 2010-2013.

Then we regressed and the bottom fell completely out.

 

[TheRoo]

Spurrier blew that stuff out the window. 2010-2013 showed that it is possible to be a legitimate contender in Columbia. Yes, the landscape has changed since then, but also... Indiana. Indiana, who held on at home to beat Northwestern this past weekend. Indiana and Northwestern are the #1 and #2 worst division 1A football programs in history. We are in what is still the premier conference and we benefit from that revenue and we have the facilities and fan base. It's all there except for the winning part, but it can be done.

One problem is that all of the teams in the conference receive the same revenue we do and that's who we play.

Spurrier himself has stated that he couldn't do what he did during that stretch with the NIL in place.

Unless the University starts unloading its endowment to buy some players, we're never getting close to a Top 10 recruiting class again.
With that said, it doesn't mean there won't be upsets like you mentioned above from time to time.

Just not on any consistent basis.

We were peaking in 2024 because of the Sellers-Rocket tandem and 7 NFL studs on defense.

Vandy peaked last season because of a similar setup.

MIssissippi State could be the lower tier darling of 2026.

 

[Go Gamecocks]

Maybe Beamer's tenure has to be evaluated in terms of where we've come from vs where we hope to get.

In all fairness, NIL & the portal has skewed everything.
There is no way to really compare the past to what's happening now.
Teams are buying their wins.

 

[18IsTheMan]

In all fairness, NIL & the portal has skewed everything.
There is no way to really compare the past to what's happening now.
Teams are buying their wins.

I think that puts us at even more of a disadvantage to the previous system.

 

[Swifty]

3 brief years of unsustained success don't prove anything though. That's especially illustrated by how quickly the bottom fell out. LOTS of mediocre programs have had a spurt of success here and there over the years.

Spurrier's first 5 years were extremely mediocre, with no real progress made year-over-year. The saving grace is that he was mixing in some wins over UGA/UT/UF for the first time ever. But you look back at those records and they aren't great.

Then you had that burst from 2010-2013.

Then we regressed and the bottom fell completely out.

Well I wasn't claiming he proved you could have sustained success over three decades here. I said he proved you can be a legitimate contender here, which he did. Sheesh.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Well I wasn't claiming he proved you could have sustained success over three decades here. I said he proved you can be a legitimate contender here, which he did. Sheesh.

Back to the OP, though, there's not a lot of difference #s wise between Beamer's tenure and Morrison's or Holtz's. Both of the latter being considered successful.

 

[Piscis]

Spurrier blew that stuff out the window. 2010-2013 showed that it is possible to be a legitimate contender in Columbia. Yes, the landscape has changed since then, but also... Indiana. Indiana, who held on at home to beat Northwestern this past weekend. Indiana and Northwestern are the #1 and #2 worst division 1A football programs in history. We are in what is still the premier conference and we benefit from that revenue and we have the facilities and fan base. It's all there except for the winning part, but it can be done.

Indiana is in the current premier conference and they get more revenue from their conference affiliation than we do. I don't know of any other program that leans on their conference affiliation like SC does. We have been crowing about being in the SEC since 1992 and, other than patting ourselves on the back about it, it hasn't really changed anything. I don't see or hear about Rutgers strutting around talking about being in the B1G or TCU acting like being in the Big XII makes them somehow great. Syracuse doesn't puff up about being in the ACC. The only argument we can make is with regards to the "our bottom tier teams are better than your bottom tier teams" between conferences.

Spurrier caught recruiting lightning in a bottle for a few years and won a good many games. He didn't win a championship or even the division in those "glory years". Before 2010 and after, Spurrier was average as unsalted grits, maybe one win a season better than our historical average. Today's college freshmen were 5 years old in 2013. Spurrier's wins might as well have been Morrison's 1984 wins to them.

There are a ton of programs in FBS that can make the statement "It's all there except for the winning part...".

 

[18IsTheMan]

Indiana is in the current premier conference and they get more revenue from their conference affiliation than we do. I don't know of any other program that leans on their conference affiliation like SC does. We have been crowing about being in the SEC since 1992 and, other than patting ourselves on the back about it, it hasn't really changed anything. I don't see or hear about Rutgers strutting around talking about being in the B1G or TCU acting like being in the Big XII makes them somehow great. Syracuse doesn't puff up about being in the ACC. The only argument we can make is with regards to the "our bottom tier teams are better than your bottom tier teams" between conferences.

Spurrier caught recruiting lightning in a bottle for a few years and won a good many games. He didn't win a championship or even the division in those "glory years". Before 2010 and after, Spurrier was average as unsalted grits, maybe one win a season better than our historical average. Today's college freshmen were 5 years old in 2013. Spurrier's wins might as well have been Morrison's 1984 wins to them.

There are a ton of programs in FBS that can make the statement "It's all there except for the winning part...".

Bing. Go.

It's really more of an indictment that we didn't win a conference title in those years than it is a statement of what's possible here.

 

[Piscis]

Yes, he did. '12 & '13 teams were each a play away from being in Atlanta playing for the SEC title and a shot at the BCS title game.
His tenure ended really sh!@%y, but that was the result of a string of bad staff decisions he made.
I don't buy the in-state recruiting talent excuse, either. The team upstate won two titles with more out of state talent than in-state talent, especially at skill positions. Recruiting went south as soon as Beamer, Graham, Johnson and Lawing left. Whammy was NOT ready to be DC. Steve Jr being promoted to Recruiting Coordinator upon Beamer's exit was a disaster.
But there was a window in time over 3+ seasons where we all went into gameday not hoping to win, but expecting to win. That is possible in Columbia.

Do you have any idea how many fan bases can claim their team was "a play away" from something big? Hell, UGA was winning the NC game in 2018 for the entire game, including half of the overtime until Bama scored on a 2nd and forever play and won the NC. Bama lost the NC to Clemson on one pick play near the end of the game.

SC football history is littered with losses that were "one play away" from being victories. It is the same with every football program.

 

[Piscis]

In all fairness, NIL & the portal has skewed everything.
There is no way to really compare the past to what's happening now.
Teams are buying their wins.

Why then, since we spend more on NIL than UGA, are we not even close to UGA's level of success in recruiting or on the field?

If teams are buying their wins, why hasn't Texas won even the SEC since joining? Why has aTm been its usual underperforming self? Why didn't Ole Miss win the SEC or the NC last year? They spent a fortune of players and had a roster full of portal transfers.

 

[HoldenOversoul]

We have 10 (or 11) top 25 finishes in our entire history (that statistic is sad enough to warrant its own post...). Beamer has 2 of those. That's really not all that bad. Fan favorite Joe Morrison only had 2. Lou Holtz only had 2. If this season goes as it is tracking, Beamer will have 3 good/ok years and 3 bad years. All things considered for Gamecock football, that's ok-ish. Morrison also had 3 good years and 3 bad/ok years. Holtz had 3 good/ok years and 3 bad years (even his last year we were 6-5 (4-4) which sounds like a dream right now).

Maybe Beamer's tenure has to be evaluated in terms of where we've come from vs where we hope to get.

Probably a fair take in a pre-NIL world, but I don't think history matters nearly as much as it used to. Indiana are the defending national champions and they've lost a grand total of 2 games in 2+ seasons since Cignetti got hired to take over one of the absolute worst major conference programs.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Probably a fair take in a pre-NIL world, but I don't think history matters nearly as much as it used to. Indiana are the defending national champions and they've lost a grand total of 2 games in 2+ seasons since Cignetti got hired to take over one of the absolute worst major conference programs.

Flukes are not the basis for a pattern, though. IU simply got plain lucky with the Cignetti hire.

 

[I4CtheFuture]

That's fair but it doesn't change the fact he's not improving at all, he's stubborn as hell, and it's apparent he has lost the fanbase and appears to be losing the team.

I understand your sentiment but there is a but....

The opening two games we played against nobodies and handled them very easily. (As we should but that has not always been the case. Usually it's closer which leaves us all fuming.)

Then, the next two games, we ran up against what is arguably two of the top 10 teams in the country right now, and we had one of them on the ropes early. All I'm saying is that we're probably not as good as the first two games led us to believe, and we're probably not as bad as the last two games led us to believe.

Bottom line: IMHO, taking the emotions out of it, I think it's too early to say that things are not heading in the right direction. This is year 6, and it's not over yet. Key point: The season is not over yet and there are some winnable games on the schedule and we're usually good for an "out of nowhere" win. 8-4 wouldn't surprise me. Wishful thinking? Probably. I grant you that. But it's not over yet. We have no choice but to wait and see.

 

[Piscis]

I understand your sentiment but there is a but....

The opening two games we played against nobodies and handled them very easily. (As we should but that has not always been the case. Usually it's closer which leaves us all fuming.)

Then, the next two games, we ran up against what is arguably two of the top 10 teams in the country right now, and we had one of them on the ropes early. All I'm saying is that we're probably not as good as the first two games led us to believe, and we're probably not as bad as the last two games led us to believe.

Bottom line: IMHO, taking the emotions out of it, I think it's too early to say that things are not heading in the right direction. This is year 6, and it's not over yet. Key point: The season is not over yet and there are some winnable games on the schedule and we're usually good for an "out of nowhere" win. 8-4 wouldn't surprise me. Wishful thinking? Probably. I grant you that. But it's not over yet. We have no choice but to wait and see.

I'm not sure I can go along with MSSt being a top 10 team.

 

[I4CtheFuture]

I'm not sure I can go along with MSSt being a top 10 team.

Well, I did say arguably. There's no question Bama is top 10, and when I was typing, I meant by seasons end, I think there's a good chance Miss St will be there as well. But that leads me back to my overall point: We have no choice but to wait and see. Us fans wanted an immediate upgrade with our offensive coaching staff, and an immediate upgrade to our OL. - Hate to say it, but Shane accomplished both of those.

 

[Piscis]

Well, I did say arguably. There's no question Bama is top 10, and when I was typing, I meant by seasons end, I think there's a good chance Miss St will be there as well. But that leads me back to my overall point: We have no choice but to wait and see. Us fans wanted an immediate upgrade with our offensive coaching staff, and an immediate upgrade to our OL. - Hate to say it, but Shane accomplished both of those.

I'll agree about the OL, the overall offense, I'm not so sure about. Take away the garbage time points against MSSt and Bama and we haven't scored much against non cupcake opponents.

 

[Swifty]

Do you have any idea how many fan bases can claim their team was "a play away" from something big? Hell, UGA was winning the NC game in 2018 for the entire game, including half of the overtime until Bama scored on a 2nd and forever play and won the NC. Bama lost the NC to Clemson on one pick play near the end of the game.

SC football history is littered with losses that were "one play away" from being victories. It is the same with every football program.

Of course, but the fact that we were two points vs LSU in 2012 and literally were one circus catch away against Tennessee in 2013 from being in Atlanta again are facts. Those teams were legitimate title contenders. We were preseason #9 in the AP poll in 2014. This program was at that level. It can be done. Of course, Whammy's ineptitude showed it's ugly head that season and one of our best offenses ever was wasted into a 7-6 season.
And again, that team upstate won two titles during the period following that magical in-state talent boom.
I don't know why you guys spend so much time bitching about Beamer when you're obviously convinced that this program can't possibly be top tier.

 

[I4CtheFuture]

I'll agree about the OL, the overall offense, I'm not so sure about. Take away the garbage time points against MSSt and Bama and we haven't scored much against non cupcake opponents.

Again, fair enough.

On the other hand, I think it's unfair to expect world beaters from the offense in what amounts to a month of real game time experience. I hate the old argument of "coaches can't catch the ball, run the ball, etc...." - but in this case, it's not unreasonable to suggest that we're still coming together as a team. WR's have got to catch the ball, etc.... We're still sputtering out there. No question about it. But there are some sparks there too. Running game is vastly improved, etc. As 18 said, if we can't figure out a fix for the secondary, none of this will matter.

 

[Piscis]

Of course, but the fact that we were two points vs LSU in 2012 and literally were one circus catch away against Tennessee in 2013 from being in Atlanta again are facts. Those teams were legitimate title contenders. We were preseason #9 in the AP poll in 2014. This program was at that level. It can be done. Of course, Whammy's ineptitude showed it's ugly head that season and one of our best offenses ever was wasted into a 7-6 season.
And again, that team upstate won two titles during the period following that magical in-state talent boom.
I don't know why you guys spend so much time bitching about Beamer when you're obviously convinced that this program can't possibly be top tier.

If you will look, you will see I don't really ***** that much about Beamer. I think he is the prototypical SC football coach. Very mediocre 80% of the time and will manage a good season 20% of the time. Like 18, I feel like that is about all we can reasonably expect. There is 130+ years of data to back up my thoughts.

I really think SC should cut spending on football and move money to MBB and baseball. We could become conference and national power in those sports if we committed say, $15M to those sports. We could buy top tier rosters with that kind of NIL money. We wouldn't be much different in football if we spent $20M vs the $35M we are spending now. I think it is time to stop banging our heads against the wall on football. UK does it with basketball and Vandy has always done it with baseball. They have no problem admitting they aren't football powers in the SEC.