Spurrier lost to UK his last two years here when they were only 5-7....a worse record than the UK teams that Muschamp lost to.
Did anyone hear the Josh Kendall interview on the Paul Finebaum show?
- Thread starter FrankiegoestoDollywood
- Start date
Champ will get a reprieve this year,2020 will be the barometer just like Kendall told Finebaum .
Right. A year after the most experienced SEC quarterback in our history, we break in a new QB in 2020. That is a recipe for a barometer of success? If so Boom is in trouble.
He at least owns wins against Kentucky here. Including when they came in ranked #8. Muschamp can't say either.
Hope so....he was here long enough. And that UK finished the season unranked and we lost to a putrid Vandy team on the way to 5 straight losses to end the season,
Obviously. And I don't mind people pulling for him. Hell, I'M pulling for him. But I have very little faith he'll get it done here. I hope I'm wrong.
But I can't for the life of me understand how clearly intelligent people can honestly act like Muschamp can even carry Spurrier's jock. There is absolutely zero real evidence to support such a claim.
Better than not being able to get out of the jockstrap of a coach who runs back to his first love.
So did the one ranked team Muschamp beat. One thing you are ignoring is that not only did Spurrier also inherit a bare bones roster (like you claim Muschamp did), but he also had to overcome a losing culture and mindset and prove to everyone -- including his own team -- that yes, we can win big here. It took a while (and admittedly, some ugly losses) but he eventually did it. And he did it better than anyone else in our history. When Muschamp accomplishes something even close to that, then we'll talk.
Last edited:
I don't think Spurrier inherited a bare bones roster. Sidney Rice, Ko Simpson, Jonathan Joesph, Fred Bennett, lance Laury were NFL talent. Cory Boyd played several seasons in Canada. Blake and Syvelle were 4 stars top 150 recruits at QB. Ricardo Hurley was the #1 linebacker in the country out of High School.
Last edited:
He also lost to them the week after beating Alabama with a team that would go on to win the Eastern Division. Spurrier had three really good years here. The majority of his time looked JUST LIKE what we have now.
Paul FinebaumVerified account@finebaum"It's inexcusable for any team in the SEC to lose 5 straight games to Kentucky." -@JoshTheAthletic says it's vital for SC to beat UK this year
We've also borrowed a lot of money for those improvements. We are leveraged out, so it better be enough.
...If this season or next season turn into a crap show ( it wont) i guarantee you Muschamp wont quit on his team mid season and run home to some place where he's loved
I do agree this is just try and survive season but if the gamecocks come out flat and lose against a first year old coach with a no talent Tar Heel team that’s bad bad no matter how you look at it.
In my opinion and I know people won't like to hear this but I think we need to give muschamp a minimum of 6 or 7 years to turn things around. One thing we've done consistently in our history is fire coaches after 5 years. We're simply not a program that can turn things around that quickly. It takes time to build the kind of depth we need especially with what muschanp inherited. I dont even count the first recruiting class either because he had what, 30 days to put that class together? It takes time to build relationships with high school coaches and players and I believe we can see that improving in each year he's been here. I'm still not completely sold on his X's and O's but I believe he has learned a bit from his past mistakes, we have a good core of young coaches and players and are starting to get the horses we need to compete. I know it's difficult in today's world because everyone wants things to happen immediately but just try to be a little bit more patient.
If Muschamp not only doesn't show improvement in the win column, but shows regression, he'll be lucky to get 5 years -- and with good reason. His lack of any notable success is already being used against him on the recruiting trail. To his credit, he's pulled in some decent recruits. But that will begin to ebb if he doesn't start showing he can beat good teams. If he proves that he can't, keeping him here longer will just makes things that much harder to fix for the next guy.
This is an old thread bumped but Kendal was on this week again.
Said Muschamp does like this team better than the last two. Mentioned the other teams having energy vampires on them.
Said if you gave him truth serum he doubts Muschamp would say he expects a good record this year.
Kendal said HE expects anything between 6-6 and 8-4 so he predicts 7-5.
Said no chance Muschamp is on hotseat this year but if he has a bad season he will go into next year with the fans chirping.
Said Muschamp knows he has to beat KY this year and needs to beat clem soon. Needs to not get blown off the field against UGA and Bama.
Said Muschamp does like this team better than the last two. Mentioned the other teams having energy vampires on them.
Said if you gave him truth serum he doubts Muschamp would say he expects a good record this year.
Kendal said HE expects anything between 6-6 and 8-4 so he predicts 7-5.
Said no chance Muschamp is on hotseat this year but if he has a bad season he will go into next year with the fans chirping.
Said Muschamp knows he has to beat KY this year and needs to beat clem soon. Needs to not get blown off the field against UGA and Bama.
Muschamp has won more games in his first 3 seasons here than Spurrier did, and Spurrier didn't take over a team that went 3-9 and lost to the Citadel the season before.
You apparently have such little faith in Muschamp getting it done here that you refuse to give him credit for what he has already done. You can't tell me that you don't see that recruiting has improved tremendously. Don't throw out empty stats from ranking sights. Too many players from Spurrier's last few classes either never panned out, or transferred out of the program. The hit rate in those classes were extremely low, so the rankings might have looked decent at the time of signing, many of the higher ranked players never contributed. We've played underclassmen ever since Muschamp arrived because the talent level on the roster was lacking. He took over a 3-9 team and has had a winning record 3 consecutive seasons, including a 9 win season. The program is being rebuilt and we will field an extremely competitive team this season.
With the new 4 game rule that preserves a redshirt rule there is really no reason not to play Joyner or Helinski. But when it cones to QB play, Muschamp's record speaks for itself.
Totally agree. Muschamp has a proven record of playing the QB he thinks give Carolina the best chance to win the game.
Muschamp has been a general manager and talent developer the past 3 years. His hard work will be proven this season on the field of play. I like what we have on paper and hope expect good competition from the Gamecocks this fall.
If that field at Ole Miss had not injured 9 of our starters, our season could have ended with another 9 win team with wins over Florida and Virginia and a better fight at Clemson.
If that field at Ole Miss had not injured 9 of our starters, our season could have ended with another 9 win team with wins over Florida and Virginia and a better fight at Clemson.
Other schools are winning with true freshmen at QB. In year 5, an underclassman QB shouldn’t be that big of a detriment to your team. If QB’s not named Bentley dont get to play this year that’s on Muschamp. There should be 3 or more games where you don’t need Jake in the 4th.
All my Gamecocks brothers and sisters fighting with each other. Its Football season yall! Tailgaiting! 2001! Sandstorm! Keep your seats! Friends and Family gatherings! See you in Charlotte! Go Cocks!
First three years, Spurrier beat 4 ranked teams {including our rival} and was very competitive in the losses.
He was dealt Lou leftovers.
The games felt fun. You never knew what was going to happen.
You also felt the momentum - in recruiting and on the field.
He would love this pending setup with the schedule.
---------------------------------
Muschamp's head coaching career has much to be desired.
You have an experienced QB and "your guys."
No more references to the 3-10 "trainwreck" inheritance.
We've played like a poor man's version of the top teams and it's painful to watch.
His bank account is very healthy, but his reputation is far from it. {at least 50m in the bank alone from USC.}
With that said, I'm cautiously optimistic that he gets it going for it this year. What's to lose?
I agree. Might as well just take a pass this season and get extra workouts. Save the players for 2020
Then I realize this is a resurrected thread
*Sighs*
I don't know why I have to keep repeating myself to the Muschamp Fan Club, but you guys obviously refuse to acknowledge ALL the facts. Such as, Muschamp got to play a 12 game schedule all 3 of his first years. You think Spurrier wouldn't have beaten some scrub team that first year? And let's not act Spurrier inherited a loaded roster either. He got a team that had limited talent that Holtz had lost all control of. And he had to overcome that and the losing attitude of both our team and our fans. He also beat good and ranked teams his first year here. In his entire career here, Muschamp has beaten one. And you want to talk about empty stats?
Long story short: Spurrier was a Hall of Fame coach before he got here and beat more an better teams and pretty much owns our entore record book. Let me know when Muschamp even gets half of that done. And -- whether you believe it or not, I really don't care -- I actually hope he does.
(Note to self: Save this post so you won't have to rewrite it every time someone wants to deny reality. It's really tiresome.)
hmm, is this the bama board? it hasnt been all hunky dory for sure but one thing is for sure...the east isnt down like it was in 2010 thru 2013. and muschamp has still won more games in the first 3 yrs of any coach we have ever had even tho he started with a depleted roster. yet people on here wanna start over because they are convinced that theres people out there that would not only love to be at carolina but would also win ten plus games a year and take bama and clemson down in their first 2 years. also every coach at carolina loves tanner because he gives them what they need to be successful even if they havent gotten there yet.he also is very good at raising money for facilities so someone please give me a reason to think we can do better than what we have and we are building towards because i think yall are absolutely clueless
Calm down. You're responding to a comment I made in the spring. I'm ready for football. Don't understand why people won't let some threads die.
I look at it like this, we have a SR QB in his 16th year that we still collectively gasp when he drops back. Yes WR’s need to catch more balls, but I watched some UGA highlights, and a lot of tipped balls means you’re sometimes throwing harder than necessary. All fixable. And we need to get not give turnovers, fixable. And hopefully we have an improved running game. Thinking about what that UK fan was saying in that other thread, beating UK isn’t optional. I mean seriously. Like say Boom isn’t coming to the post game presser serious only to find out he’s gone Saturday evening. I’m not joking. The dude listing UK’s records vs. the Big 3 in the East reveals a pattern we are on the wrong side of. Kirby would be gone before the game was over if he was staring at a 3rd loss in a row to UK. Kiffin style. The bus left you behind intentionally style. Coaching carousels aren’t a good thing necessarily, but those programs are still way ahead of us in many ways, and they don’t accept losses to UK. All that said, no “practice” seasons. This is year 4, he has many of his own players, has a hopefully improved staff, all the facility upgrades we wanted, SEC $$$$, and a very questionable raise. In the real world you (should) get a raise because of results. Those are pending apparently, but it means to me you win anyway, and right now.
Last edited:
Muschamp's recruiting has improved tremendously over the final years of Spurrier's staff's recruiting, because Spurrier's staff wasn't recruiting worth spit during the final years. They gave up. They stopped. Spurrier's staff overall was slightly above mediocre as a recruiting staff, and their best years were when they had both Ward and Beamer as the primary recruiters. Then the run of good fortune where SC produced fantastic in-state talent, combined with the transition from Tommy Bowden to William Swinney. But overall, we're talking about 3-5 years in the middle of Spurrier's 11 years - not that special.
What Spurrier and crew did in those years, IMO ANY good hard-working recruiting staff should be able to do at USC in most years, and without the need of a once in the generation run of in-state talent like Jeffery, Gilmore, Lattimore, and Clowney. This isn't our grandfather's Gamecocks football program anymore: the SEC is the premier CFB league, we have great revenue flowing in, and our facilities are centuries beyond what they once were when Spurrier first came in.
Plus we've had some decent degree of success during his time, that recruiting promises to prospects aren't as "pie in the sky" as they were once perceived to be. So, all Coach Muschamp and staff have done, is get the program close back to where Spurrier's staff had the roster talent. Which is at worst IMO is at the level any quality CFB staff should have the program. It's just that Spurrier let the bag drop at the end. All CWM has done is pick it back up off the ground. He'll truly start raising the bar when he gets the classes to consistently top 15 or better. Add to that some consistent success above 6-7 wins a season, and then we'll have something...
