We are at an all time low in them. something needs to change.....bad when best sports are all womens.
Big 3 mens sports...
- Thread starter cockymark
- Start date
It all starts at the top folks. Carolina usually has problems transitioning to new coaches, but football and baseball REALLY got dropped on their heads by the Administration, ex. the SOS 'In 3 or 4 Years' and the Tanner 'I Know I Can, I Know I Can (be an AD)'. We got screwed. They got millions $$$.
Far from an “ all time low” unless you only been keeping up with gamecocks a short time
Assuming you don’t know brad scott or Steve newton
Point is we have had much more “ lows “ in our major sports
At moment we have gone to 3 straight bowls under a coach who inherited little Talent
We are recruiting strong at QB and lines of scrimmage
Baseball is on coach second year Guess you assumed instant major success ?
Not realistic
Basketball has had some of our best years recently and seems to be finally getting on solid ground
So all time low? Far from it
Last edited:
Those in charge are too comfortable and secure in their positions. I realize there is a lot to be said for continuity, BUT at some point someone is going to have to step up and start running our athletics department like the big business that it is. And, anyone who runs a successful big business is always held accountable and is ultimately judged on results at the end of the day.
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
This. Let's not forget:
- Kingston took his first team to a Super Regional last season - baseball's equivalent of the Sweet Sixteen - and was one game from Omaha. Last year's team overachieved, but make no mistake about it, Kingston faces a rebuilding job.
- In the last four seasons, Coach Martin and our men's basketball team has set a school record for number of wins (2016), gone to the school's first ever Final Four (2017) and is second only to Kentucky in SEC wins.
- Coach Muschamp is the winningest coach after three seasons in program history - this, after inheriting the train wreck left to him by Spurrier.
I can promise you, nobody wants greater success more than our coaches, players and administration. The difference between now and the truly bad days of the early to mid 90's - we have the budget and facilities to continue this climb.
Last edited:
We only have one long term coach between the men's top 3 sports. You are going to have to give the other 2 time to turn it around as neither stepped into the best of circumstances from a talent standpoint. Or you don't, and then have to pay some young up-and-comer retirement-level money to try to attempt a turnaround in 3 years or less. Only one coach should be on the hot seat....and he needs to get it done next year or cut ties.
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
I would say around 91 or 92 was when things were at their lowest. None of the teams now are awful, but they just aren't all that good
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
Don't disagree, although most all of the 90's was pretty bad. Isn't ironic that '90-'91 was when we were invited to join the SEC? How fortunate for an athletics program really down almost across the board.
Everyone wants success. Attaining it is another. Muschamp has racked up very few quality wins and isn't even remotely competitive with Clemson. He has two more years to prove himself. Martin has been here seven seasons and regularly misses the postseason. I'll give Kingston a pass still.
GandBinNC
GarnetTrust.com Member/Supporter
You mean the Clemson which has won two national championships during Muschamp's three year tenure at USC? It's good to have high expectations. Unreasonable expectations are a different thing altogether. Like it or not, Clemson has become an elite program over the last three years. One of the two best programs in the country, as much as it pains me to say.
And I would argue that Carolina was competitive with Clemson this last November. Carolina had two first and tens stall with zero points. Convert those to even field goals and the complexion of the game is vastly different. And Clemson had a late trash time touchdown to extend the margin from 14 to 21. Anyone who watched the game knows Carolina was competitive.
Granted, 21 point losses to our arch rival, no matter how good they are, won't get it moving forward, and Muschamp does need to begin wracking up some quality wins. And God knows that debacle against UVA was inexplicable. But three years in, considering what he inherited, I am generally pleased with Muschamp.
Last edited:
Yep the King Dixon 2.0 experiment ain’t working
I’ve said it a few times but I think there are a couple of major factors making these past seasons feel worse-
-From 2010-2014 was the greatest run in our athletic history and we have since taken a nosedive back to mediocrity (which is frankly better than we’ve been historically). This swift regression has made things seem worse than they are.
-Cannot beat Clemson in anything.
-Clemson is the second best football program in the country and probably will be for next decade
-From 2010-2014 was the greatest run in our athletic history and we have since taken a nosedive back to mediocrity (which is frankly better than we’ve been historically). This swift regression has made things seem worse than they are.
-Cannot beat Clemson in anything.
-Clemson is the second best football program in the country and probably will be for next decade
That’s not bad; it’s bad that our men’s sports are not as competitive as we’d like.
YES! ANOTHER "LET'S BASH ALL MENS SPORTS AND OUR AD" THREAD! THANKS SO MUCH FOR THIS!
The question is why was our program allowed to slip so far why Clemson was stockpiling talent? Like someone else said, it all starts at the top. I would argue that the biggest hire since Spurrier was the AD after Hyman left. Predictably, our BOT went the good ol' boy route and made a feel-good hire instead of hiring someone that was ready, experienced and most importantly, had the chops to handle a HOF coach and his inevitable retirement. Ray was none of these.
As for Muschamp, he's still only beat one ranked team since he's been here and with the exception of the Clemson game this past season, his teams often don't even look like they belong on the same field as the ranked teams they play. And judging by our play after that game against the taters, I think it's pretty safe to say that they were overlooking us while Jake played out of his mind.
Next year will be his fourth season here. If he still can't show he can outcoach a ranked team to a win, I will have seen all I need to see from him.
I like him but jury is still out. We lose a lot of guys after 2019 too so 2020 excuse is now rebuilding. 2019 built in excuse is tough schedule.
If you think this is the all time low you ain't from 'round here.
grasshopper, "real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance." ~ confucius
AD doesn't recruit. The answer is in your second sentence after the highlighted question.....Spurrier. Spurrier and his staff sat on their laurels and failed to recruit his last 3/4 years while Clemson stockpiled the talent that got them to the playoffs and won the NC. Look at when the starting players Clemson had on that NC team were recruited.......right from under Spurrier's nose.
And that's why I said we needed an AD with the chops to handle Spurrier and his inevitable retirement. I dare say Hyman would've at least questioned Spurrier's lack of recruiting (more so of that numbnuts son Spurrier put in charge) and would have been privately discussing Spurrier's exit with him while building a list of names to contact when that day came. Ray seemed to have been completely caught flat-footed and -- yes, it's true -- had to settle on Muschamp.
We are USC.....our history didn't have the chops to fire a HOF coach regardless of the AD. That's the problem with a school have zero reputation hiring a HOF coach....you can't fire him when you know he doesn't have it anymore. Hell, we couldn't even fire McGuire without suffering consequences and he WAS our program history.
Heck, Clemson suffered when they fired Ford and they had more history than we did.
It's not about firing. It's about handling. Big difference.
How would you have handled a HOF coach, whose reputation far exceeds the schools? And whose success at your school is seen by most as the ONLY success your program has ever had?
BTW, don't say not try to convince him to stay since it is well-documented that was Spurrier's wife, not Tanner.
Did you read my earlier post? I already said how I would handle it. If you want actual conversation quotes, that's ridiculous. Everything would depend on what was said at the moment. And no, I would not try to convince him to stay. On the contrary, I was an advocate that Spurrier should've retired after beating Miami and ridden off into the sunset a winner. And Hyman was the kind of guy who could've tacitly suggested that while playing to Spurrier's ego.
Who knows? Maybe we could've landed Tom Herman or some other rising star a year sooner and made them feel at home before they got starry-eyed.
Who knows? Maybe we could've landed Tom Herman or some other rising star a year sooner and made them feel at home before they got starry-eyed.
I get how hard it is to compete for football recruits in the crowded SE part of the country with so many good nearby teams, Alabama, Florida, FSU, Georgia, etc. I can also see SC isn't a traditional men's basketball school and it is hard to compete with Duke, NC, NC State, etc so close. But for the life of me, I can't explain how your baseball team isn't better this year when teams like Coastal Carolina and East Carolina are tearing things up. There is no excuse for SC to not be out performing those schools.
At about the very same time that Spurrier bragged about not working near as hard as Saban (this was coming off our 3 straight 11 win seasons), I heard Tanner on 107.5 bragging to Jay Phillips about having spending the least amount on recruiting in the SEC.
I don't like Muschamp, but there are signs his recruiting is picking up steam. However, I am not convinced he can get a team prepared on game day. Martin can coach, but he will be gone next year without a post season appearance. I like Frank, so I hope it's better next year. Kingston is in a tough position because he is having to rebuild a program that was literally at the top. He is also in the wake of a coach who lost the fan base and caused a ton of negativity around the program. He has my full support although I could do without all this exit velocity crap.
Tanner may have said that, but all the coaches say they get everything they need plus some. I think that comment was tongue in cheek.
I assure you, it was not tongue and cheek. Several others on this board heard the interview.
You get it.
Problem is most of our big money donors are not like the ones in Texas. Ours don’t care about wins and losses they just enjoy the country club environment. Same with the BOT. We don’t demand results
Our AD and coaches make elite money and that comes with expectations. If they don't the heat, win some games and beat your rival or coach at Presbyterian.
Clemson owns us in the men’s big 3 sports. We should just stop playing them since we proven we can’t keep up with their athletic programs.
The idiocy on this board never ceases to amaze.
Football: bad end to the year, but Muschamp has re-energized a 3-9 program ... 3 straight bowl trips. It's not a dumpster fire. Uphill mountain this coming season with the schedule. But our football program in its history has an overall .500 record (give or take a game or 2), so to say this is its lowest point is dumb. We don't have the history you think we do.
Basketball: Same thing. Some great moments in our history 50 years ago. Not much in between. Disappointing losses in Nov. and Dec., but if you can't see the exciting young players we have coming back and the ones who could not play this year, then you're missing out. Again, not much of a good history with the program, but since joining SEC in '92, USC has 6 winning seasons in conference play.... 3 of those have come in the last 4 years. We are 2 years removed from our first trip to Final 4 and first win in NCAA Tournament in a generation... and you want to fire that coach?
Baseball: Team is not very good this year. This is certainly the program with the most history. With limited scholarships in the sport it's probably the most difficult to be consistently elite. Makes you appreciate how good Tanner was as a coach. Kingston brought team to Supers JUST LAST YEAR! In recruiting sports such as baseball and softball, most of those kids commit early in high school careers. His best players are not going to be the ones that committed last year, this year or next year. The best ones are probably still freshman or sophomores in high school. Right now he's patching it together. Oh, and the man did bring the team to Super Regionals last year. Team may not be good this year, but that doesn't make the program at an all-time low.
Football: bad end to the year, but Muschamp has re-energized a 3-9 program ... 3 straight bowl trips. It's not a dumpster fire. Uphill mountain this coming season with the schedule. But our football program in its history has an overall .500 record (give or take a game or 2), so to say this is its lowest point is dumb. We don't have the history you think we do.
Basketball: Same thing. Some great moments in our history 50 years ago. Not much in between. Disappointing losses in Nov. and Dec., but if you can't see the exciting young players we have coming back and the ones who could not play this year, then you're missing out. Again, not much of a good history with the program, but since joining SEC in '92, USC has 6 winning seasons in conference play.... 3 of those have come in the last 4 years. We are 2 years removed from our first trip to Final 4 and first win in NCAA Tournament in a generation... and you want to fire that coach?
Baseball: Team is not very good this year. This is certainly the program with the most history. With limited scholarships in the sport it's probably the most difficult to be consistently elite. Makes you appreciate how good Tanner was as a coach. Kingston brought team to Supers JUST LAST YEAR! In recruiting sports such as baseball and softball, most of those kids commit early in high school careers. His best players are not going to be the ones that committed last year, this year or next year. The best ones are probably still freshman or sophomores in high school. Right now he's patching it together. Oh, and the man did bring the team to Super Regionals last year. Team may not be good this year, but that doesn't make the program at an all-time low.
I wonder if Alabama fans wanted to fire Saban after they lost to Clemson? They were not competitive.
Last edited:
Whatever it was, it doesn't matter, because the coaches, Muschamp in particular, have said that whatever they ask for, they get.
Also, the Spurrier situation didn't seem as bad as it was until it was too late. You can't have an AD that micromanages everything that the HC does. Otherwise, you'll have a very unhappy HC. However, Spurrier did a piss poor job of managing his coaches. For one thing, after we were successful and we started losing coaches he either promoted or hired people who were horrible. He then delegated more responsibilities to them. I've said it before and I'll say it again. After the A&M game I think Spurrier was as surprised as we were that his defense was so bad. He didn't have a clue what was going on. In all honesty he should have been allowed to retire after that season but the damage was already done. Nothing could have salvaged the next season. We had become a very bad football team, 2 seasons removed from consecutive top-10 finishes.
Similar threads
