Beamer (29-21) broke former coach Steve Spurrier's record of 28 wins in the first four seasons at South Carolina
- Thread starter GoCocksFight2021
- Start date
I know you don't care about being genuine but it's just dumb to compare the eras. Spurrier would have done so much better if he could have bought talent.
Wrong. No way we keep players like Lattimore or Clowney. Both would have been purchased by bigger schools.
It's just dumb to say that when we've bought multiple five star players for Beamer and Rattler and Sanders.
It's just dumb to say that either of those players were even close to comparable to Clowney or Lattimore. Rattler and Rocket wouldn't even come close to demanding the money that Clowney or Lattimore could have demand. Rattler and Rocket were both considered second chance projects and were nowhere near as in demand as Clowney and Lattimore were.
It's so weird that you feel the need to just make up outlandish things to support your opinions.
So we can afford the #2 DE from out of state but we couldn't afford the #1 DE from in state?
Then you just make up facts that Sanders and Rattler weren't still in demand prospects?
I'm not going to make those comparisons other than Beamer's record is a very nice accomplishment for him.
Making the comparisons seems off point to me. There are dozens of ways to look at things between coaches- including our state hasn't produced another Clowney since Clowney- or even another Lattimore. - and on and on and on..
I'm impressed with this team this year given I was hoping we could pull out 6 wins. Some thought this Beamer had little chance at a good year and 9 wins with a chance at 10 is something I didn't think would happen this year.
A former coworker of mine lives in Nashville. He isn't a South Carolina or even an SEC fan- though he doesn't dislike the SEC. He doesn't seem to have one particular team he pulls for but he's more of a Big 10 guy because he's from Wisconsin. He's texted me 3 weeks in a row now telling me we are lucky to have a coach like Beamer who also comes across as a good guy. That's his view and I think sometimes we don't realize we've got a good coach who wants to be at South Carolina more than anywhere else.
I was watching a video today of Hugh Freeze walking into the stadium at Bama and I was reading the comments of Auburn fans making fun of him- even the way he was walking. I was thinking that there aren't but a few out there making fun of Shane Beamer today.
Making the comparisons seems off point to me. There are dozens of ways to look at things between coaches- including our state hasn't produced another Clowney since Clowney- or even another Lattimore. - and on and on and on..
I'm impressed with this team this year given I was hoping we could pull out 6 wins. Some thought this Beamer had little chance at a good year and 9 wins with a chance at 10 is something I didn't think would happen this year.
A former coworker of mine lives in Nashville. He isn't a South Carolina or even an SEC fan- though he doesn't dislike the SEC. He doesn't seem to have one particular team he pulls for but he's more of a Big 10 guy because he's from Wisconsin. He's texted me 3 weeks in a row now telling me we are lucky to have a coach like Beamer who also comes across as a good guy. That's his view and I think sometimes we don't realize we've got a good coach who wants to be at South Carolina more than anywhere else.
I was watching a video today of Hugh Freeze walking into the stadium at Bama and I was reading the comments of Auburn fans making fun of him- even the way he was walking. I was thinking that there aren't but a few out there making fun of Shane Beamer today.
Why do we always have to bish about things? I’d take Beamer record over anything. Dealing with Nil recruiting is very difficult. I like what we have.
Nothing outlandish about it at all.
Clowney was considered at the time the best recruit in history by recruiting services. ZERO chance he comes to us. That would be like us getting Arch Manning now. Where they live doesn't have shit to do with whether or not we could afford to buy them. Money talk, bullshit walks.
And you are the one making up "facts". I never said Sanders and Rattler weren't still in demand. I said they were nowhere near in demand like Clowney and Lattimore. Both Sanders and Rattler were considered risks. Rattler had been benched after a bad season at Oklahoma and Sanders had question marks after sitting out a year with an injury.
Exactly. Why can’t @GoCocksFight2021 be happy with yesterday?
Why does he feel the need to talk down Spurrier in the process?
How would it be like getting Arch Manning, when Arch Mannning was from Louisiana and not Rock Hill?
You honestly think if Arch Manning was from SC and grew up a Gamecock fan we wouldn’t be able to afford him?
You’re just speaking nonsense.
I know your brain doesn’t personally but you can’t compare every single person to Lattimore and Clowney over and over again. Right now we are talking about four big time recruits we’ve purchased and you keep comparing them to two people. 4 > 2 and that’s the depth that Spurrier would have loved to have.
Clowney was the crown jewel of that class. EVERYONE wanted him. ZERO chance we don't get outbid for his services. To suggest otherwise is just ludicrous.
And it's not just 2 players. The impact would have been felt down the entire roster. Anybody that was a star would have been at risk of leaving for more money. Even Saban, the GOAT, admitted this was a problem, saying all players asked at the end of the year was "What assurances do I have that I’m going to play because they’re thinking about transferring, and how much are you going to pay me?"
Spurrier was protected from all of this because openly purchasing players wasn't allowed and they had to sit a year if they transferred. No way he is successful in the NIL era. He just wanted to call plays. Didn't really even care about the defense. No way he would have dealt with all the stuff that coaches have to deal with now. We barely got him to recruit, and he gave up on that towards the end. The college model is now closer to the NFL model, and we saw how it went for him in the NFL.
You're a buffoon no matter what subject matter is at play.
Sellers was recruiting by virtually no one of relevance. Clemson didn't give him a glance.
Sanders had a grand total of 300 yards for Arkansas in 2023 and was injury-prone when we picked him up.
Rattler was a OU starter reject.
Spurrier's average recruiting rank his first 4 seasons was in the Top 20.
The household names on those teams are too many to mention. Take a peek.
Beamer's average recruiting rank his first 4 seasons in the NIL era has been outside of the Top 30.
He's had to deal with plug-and-play talent because he has lost some of his best players due to lack of NIL funding.
Beamer not only has more overall victories, he has more victories against ranked opponents over the same time frame.
He also has a better record against our ranked rival.
Your batting percentage is terrible.
It might be time to retire your account and try again at some point.
Last edited:
Stupid people who think NIL isn't THE factor or, even dumber, think it is an advantage for us, just look at Clemson.
Dabo has TWO National Championships and their fanbase has always given money.
From 2017-2020, Clemson pulled in 16 five stars.
Since NIL 2021-2024, Clemson has pulled in 4 five stars.
It's about the money. Period.
Dabo has TWO National Championships and their fanbase has always given money.
From 2017-2020, Clemson pulled in 16 five stars.
Since NIL 2021-2024, Clemson has pulled in 4 five stars.
It's about the money. Period.
Last edited:
Of course it's about money. But pretending we don't have any money is stupid when we've outbid Oregon (for Harbor) and most of the country for Stewart.
Yeah, that's going to be the question. Is Beamer a good coach or did he just get lucky? He didn't prioritize Sellers either until he missed on his other targets. We got lucky no one else wanted hi.
There is a reason both of these players required high 6 figure NIL deals to transfer.
I've been around for 20+ years. I don't run and hide like you and the others when you get things wrong.
Nobody said we don't have "any" money. Just not a much as many of the big names. That's just a fact.
How does that change the fact spurrier would have been able to buy players?
This is your problem. None of your arguments make sense when you take a step back and look at the bigger picture.
The big picture is we never would have gotten players like harbor, Stewart and rattler pre-nil
We never have and never will. And we have never been able to out recruit the big names consistently. That's not going to change. The key for us is to "fill our recruiting needs" with the limited resources we do have. Then get the job done on the coaching front.
Yet Spurrier got players their equal or better because other teams couldn't offer them tons of money. At least not within the rules.
Like I said, look at Clemson. In the 4 years before NIL, they got 16 five stars. Only 4 in the 4 years afterward. NIL is not a net gain for Clemson or South Carolina.
Clowney, Lattimore, Gilmore were all in state guys. You don't seem to grasp the difference that was all we could get because those were the kids we could actually pay under the table.
Comparing us to Clemson is dumb because everyone knows what made Dabo a good recruiter was his ability to pay players against the rules.
Him coming back to the norm is reflective of everyone else getting better. It isn't an indication of our ability to buy talent.
So Spurrier could pay players? And he had the top recruits right here in state. And Beamer still has the better record.
LOL
This is the lamest attempt at a gotcha ever. But it just shows you're incapable of legitimate discussion.
I've generally been right, but hopefully Beamer proves me wrong and we don't regress next year.
