I mean honestly, if you don't want him out, what's the point of everything you say?
CBS: ranking coaching hires
- Thread starter wentzel25
- Start date
Also, I never said pedigree, so I guess you're making things up unless you got me confused with someone else. I don't think his father matters I think his accomplishments and the people he's worked for do. But while we're on the subject of me not knowing anything, you still said Pickens is a DE and there's no difference between a 1-gap vs 2-gap scheme and it's hard to give you credit instead of just dog everything you say until you acknowledge that because otherwise it shows you're arguing from bad faith and name calling, kinda like a democrat.
Ok this is where your lack of objectivity creates bias in your own mind. Saying nothing indicates Beamer will be a successful HC. He has been successful EVERYWHERE he has been. If anything that indicates the likelihood of success instead of failure, otherwise every successful OC or DC has no indication of being a success as a HC. You can’t dismiss one while promoting the other.
Ok, I must have missed it. Please inform me where he has been a successful HC. I haven't seen that.
Once again, learning some reading comprehension would benefit you greatly. I didn't say you said pedigree. I said ".....garbage like "culture" and "pedigree" meaning those are examples of the types of things you've said. I also listed all the guys that I saw play DT during the year. You said I was wrong, but I saw what I saw and if you didn't, next time look more closely. I didn't even mention the fact that Kier Thomas played DT for 2 years which is not his natural position. He is DE in size and ability, not a DT.
It's pretty rich being called a democrat from the "Hope and Change" guy on here. LMAO.
What the hell kind of non-sense are you talking about with that hope and change crap? Having optimism dictates my politics? If anything leftism vis a very angry political belief system. I was just calling you out because you assumed I was a leftist before because of how I argue, which is funny because ad-homs are the domain of MSNBC anchors and you, putz. You said Pickens was a DE. You said we had undersized players and DEs playing DT. Burch and Enagbare were third down rush specialists at the DT position, which good teams do to help pass rush. You're either a liar or a putz if you refuse to recognize that we did the same thing when we were great.
I will provide that right after you provide the proof he will not be a successful HC
I'm not claiming he won't be. I'm saying there is no evidence that he will be. You don't just hire some random asst coach as a HC and pay him millions of $ without SOME indication he may be successful and yet that is exactly what we have done. You on the other hand are proclaiming he will be successful as a HC because you think he was a good asst coach elsewhere. Show us that proof that he will be a good HC.
Beamer is not some random asst coach. Every move he made was a step up. From Miss. St to SC to VT to UGA to OU. He learned from some of the best coaches in the business and he was successful at every position he coached. So there is ZERO reason to think he will not be a successful HC.
Poor JGH. Just know...it's not you...it's them.
I have never uttered this BECAUSE I'm not being negative....and there is much more where this came from - but these paid troll/former online protesters/movers into a city for 10 months pre-election types are pitiful...and the truth must be bestowed upon them.
You say he was successful at every position he coached. He HAPPENED to be at USC when SOS had set up a couple couple tough years post-Holtz and had everything rolling pretty good. Getting the coup "big 2"...Lawing, Graham and Ellis Johnson were responsible for those guys sent our program in another direction.
But, at VT...after the initial season of 11-3 when he JOINED and had nothing to do with the recruits on the field...VT subseqently went 7-6 about every year after that IN THE COASTAL DIVISION OF THE ACC!!!! So, yeah....some of us have reason to worry. Oh by the way...at VT he was the immediate "AHC" on these teams that his dad did for him because this HC future plan was in place... it wasn't earned after never having a O or D coordinator position prior to that appointment. More fun info: Bud Foster (yes that Bud Foster) didn't get an AHC designation until Frank Beamer had retired. I guess the over 35 year college coaching career the defensive coaching legend had wasn't good enough to best Shane's RB and CB position coaching done.
At least at GA he was the ST coordinator...that's something....but still not quite the importance of a coordinator position on either side of the ball. Careful what you say....it is never hard to pick it apart.
Ok. Stop with the bullshit about troll and being a paid poster. That is batshit crazy talk. I get it you hate the hire. Too damn bad. Get over it and man up. Beamer went from VT to UGA to OU...all steps in the right direction. He WILL be a better HC than Muschamp, and could prove to be just what our program needs.
Why are you spending so much time trying to convince people it’s a bad hire? It’s really strange.
To be fair, a golden retriever would probably be a better coach than Muschamp.
Somewhere Brad Scott and Richard Bell are saying “hold my beer”. Granted the bar isn’t extremely high but an improvement would be going in the right direction, which I predict will happen with Beamer
That's not the question. The question is what evidence is there that indicates he will be a successful HC? There is none. He has never moved UP - only sideways. Why?
When you graduated (assuming you did) from college was your first job a CEO position? Did you have several lower level jobs and then make CEO? In any profession there is a progression. You have to prove yourself at one level before moving to the next. It's called "climbing the ladder." But in this case, he seems to have been given a ride on an elevator.
I think it was a stupid hire. Paid 12m to fire a coach and you get Beamer. We could have gotten him for a pack of gum. That said, it is what it is and you hope for the best. He may turn out to be great. I actually felt better about the Beamer hire when Bobo left. I saw Bobo being forced on him by Tanner and the board to save $$$. Now, he can get who he wants for his staff. In 5 years if he sucks SC will get someone else if he doesn’t then it worked. Worked means winning though. If he is mediocre in 5 years it was a waste.
Because he wasn’t a DC or OC? The last time we hired a DC or OC for HC we got Bell and Scott. The fact is Beamer was successful at every position he coached. EVERY SINGLE ONE. So there is NOTHING to suggest he won’t be successful as a HC.
Is that a fact? Because it seems to be repeated, but I'm not really sure it can be proven or disproven.
Was he ever fired or reassigned a position? Did he ever move to a lower school?
No, he moved up. He improved players at every position he coached. It isn’t rocket science....
Ah yes. "He improved players at every single position he coached". I remember when you tried to pass that opinion off as "fact" too.
Seriously, you would berate any negative poster who tried to pass of similar statements as "facts".
In his bio....
And if he hadn’t improved them he would have been let go or reassigned to another position. That never happened. Again, this isn’t rocket science. Alas, some people only see the negative in EVERYTHING.
Yes, and I linked his bio, but it didn't back up your statement. You then claimed it was some other bio, but were unable to provide any link to that supposed bio.
I could just as easily say that he didnt improve his units, therefore he was never promoted and simply allowed to move on to another team. Never good enough for promotion, but never bad enough for firing. I could then say it's easy to see, not rocket science and that some people just cant see the truth.
But that would be ridiculous, right? Pretty thin reasoning, and not really proof of anything.
That is nonsensical reasoning. When you are hiring you don't look for reasons why the candidate won't be successful, you look for reasons why they WILL be successful. There are none.
I agree. But, keep in mind you are discussing this with wingchuncock who appears to be Beamer’s brother. I cannot confirm, though! 😊
BS. You and others will not accept this hire no matter what. You’re just looking for reasons to complain, such a sad way to look at things. Always finding the most negative thing and only focusing on that
And I told you the bio I was referring to was on the GoGamecock site, it’s no longer up as that article was posted 3 months ago. So how long are you and your posse of negative nellies going to keep throwing a temper tantrum?
Now! Now! Behave yourself. You never seemed logical and now you add personal attacks to that. Shane won’t like that!
As I said. A bio that you conveniantly cant provide, that supposedly backs up your statement.
I'm sure youd buy that excuse of it was coming from someone you were arguing with.
Of course I accept the hire. Its a done deal. I just don't accept it as a good hire. It's not negative or positive. Those words should not even be used in this debate. Those are subjective, emotional terms. It's factual, based on available information. It is like most other Ray Tanner hires. Not good and lacks any sound judgement or reasoning - like you. Will Muschamp ring a bell?
You quote 2 pitiful examples of USC hires from years ago and think that is representative of the norm. It is not. How about these guys: Nick Saban, Urban Myer, Bob Stoops, Mark Stoops, and Ed Orgeron? They were all coordinators before becoming head coaches. And the list could go on and on. Almost every successful HC was at some time a coordinator before they were hired as a HC. Even Shane's father Frank was a DC before ever becoming a HC Another thing most of these guys have in common is they started their HC coaching careers at small schools and after proving themselves moved up to larger schools. They "climbed the ladder". Are you not sensing a trend here?
Outside of Muschamp where have the bad hires been? Are you claiming Kingston was a bad hire?
I understand that is the norm, Pruitt was a DC before a HC. Look how that worked out. It is always a gamble with ANY hire. There are just as many bad hires with Coordinators as HCs as there are good hires. Dabo wasn’t a coordinator, nor the coach at Arkansas. So while hiring a OC or DC as HC may be the norm, it isn’t exclusive.
If Beamer had been an OC somewhere before being hired you would have approved of the choice?
Meyer was NEVER a coordinator before becoming a HC.
- St. Xavier HS (1985)
Defensive backs coach - Ohio State (1986–1987)
Graduate assistant - Illinois State (1988)
Outside linebackers coach - Illinois State (1989)
Quarterbacks and wide receivers coach - Colorado State (1990–1995)
Wide receivers coach - Notre Dame (1996–2000)
Wide receivers coach - Bowling Green (2001–2002)
1984 Northwestern State (GA)
1985 McNeese State (GA)
1986–1987 Arkansas (Asst. Strength)
1988–1992 Miami (FL) (DL)
1994 Nicholls State (LB)
1995–1997 Syracuse (DL)
1998–2004 USC (AHC/DL/RC)
2005–2007 Ole Miss (HC)
You are correct about Urban. I was looking at another coach when I noted that. He did however rise through the ranks from smaller schools before being hired at UF.
Ed Orgeron was promoted to Interim Head Coach, which I was considering even a step up from coordinator, where he proved himself before being hired as the HC. The point stands regardless of minor semantics.
At LSU when Les Miles was fired. After proving himself in that role he was made HC.
SMH, he was HC at Ole Miss before that! Look at the timeline I posted!
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
It sickens me when I realize Muschamp ran our program so far into the ground it's going to take- Latest: Southern Fried Chicken
-
-
-
-
