Beamers First Year Grade
- Thread starter uscfutbol
- Start date
a 3 star QB that played in his offense for years
a 4 star QB on the bench with a year of SEC experience
a healthy 4 star Doty ready to play
NFL receiver Shi Smith
a healthy Harris
My completely unqualified (like all the others here) grade is 75.
I give Coach Beamer a 90 for results. Guy won 6 games and beat UF and Auburn. Damn good IMO.
I give him a 60 for execution. We looked completely uncoached over and over AND FREAKIN OVER this year. We looked like uncoached SHT in the last game of the year with a full season on TraineeShanes wonderful coaching.
His choices in an extremely important and loaded transfer market were pathetic. Clearly either has no clue what to look for or couldn't convince the good players to come.
His choices for assistant coaches seem to be bad. Clearly couldn't get top end coaches to come work for a trainee.
75 for me hoping for at least that next year...... you asked.
I give Coach Beamer a 90 for results. Guy won 6 games and beat UF and Auburn. Damn good IMO.
I give him a 60 for execution. We looked completely uncoached over and over AND FREAKIN OVER this year. We looked like uncoached SHT in the last game of the year with a full season on TraineeShanes wonderful coaching.
His choices in an extremely important and loaded transfer market were pathetic. Clearly either has no clue what to look for or couldn't convince the good players to come.
His choices for assistant coaches seem to be bad. Clearly couldn't get top end coaches to come work for a trainee.
75 for me hoping for at least that next year...... you asked.
lol are you guys really counting Collin Hill as a positive now?
Epitome of arguing in bad faith.
It depends on what you are grading him on. I completely ignore wins and losses. I never once commented on how many wins or losses we should or might have since preseason. I knew as does anyone with a small amount of football IQ that this team was not good and probably wouldn't have a lot of wins.
The barometer for how well he has done rests with how well did he coach, how well did the team compete, and how much improvement did we see in the play on the field. First, he failed in building a quality coaching staff. Second, he fielded a team that simply was not ready to play football for the first 8 games of the season. The team regressed in their play from the last year, especially on the oline. They did seem to improve a little over the next few games, but then regressed again against Mizzou and clemsux. Erratic play is not a sign of good coaching. Neither is lack of focus or direction as we saw many times during the year, especially with the oline. We had essentially the same oline and running backs as the previous year and went from a team with the SEC's leading rusher to one that most games could not manage to rush for 100 yds. That is not improvement. Struggling against vastly inferior teams like Troy, ECU, and Vanderbilt is not improvement. Allowing 6 of the 12 teams we played to score on their very first possession is not improvement.
To be fair I will say I saw our defensive backfield show improvement over the year. They were pretty bad in the early part of the season, but played hard and covered well the last half of the season. Their only weakness was that they were not very good at tackling - like the rest of the defense. The other area that looked pretty good was special teams. Our kicker and punter did a good job all year.
As a HC I would give him a D+ at this point. There is a lot of improvement that needs to be made.
The barometer for how well he has done rests with how well did he coach, how well did the team compete, and how much improvement did we see in the play on the field. First, he failed in building a quality coaching staff. Second, he fielded a team that simply was not ready to play football for the first 8 games of the season. The team regressed in their play from the last year, especially on the oline. They did seem to improve a little over the next few games, but then regressed again against Mizzou and clemsux. Erratic play is not a sign of good coaching. Neither is lack of focus or direction as we saw many times during the year, especially with the oline. We had essentially the same oline and running backs as the previous year and went from a team with the SEC's leading rusher to one that most games could not manage to rush for 100 yds. That is not improvement. Struggling against vastly inferior teams like Troy, ECU, and Vanderbilt is not improvement. Allowing 6 of the 12 teams we played to score on their very first possession is not improvement.
To be fair I will say I saw our defensive backfield show improvement over the year. They were pretty bad in the early part of the season, but played hard and covered well the last half of the season. Their only weakness was that they were not very good at tackling - like the rest of the defense. The other area that looked pretty good was special teams. Our kicker and punter did a good job all year.
As a HC I would give him a D+ at this point. There is a lot of improvement that needs to be made.
