Gamecocks vs Tennerr'see Game Thread

[Ward Jr]

If the mood in the fanbase changes, it definitely can definitely create a shorter leash for Beamer. You keep acting as if he's guaranteed to go 6-6 this year. If he loses this weekend, 4-8/5-7 will be looking more and more likely.



You're just being disingenuous about the difference in the eras. While the 0-6 end to season was disheartening after being ranked #6, there was still a lot of positivity in the fanbase. While we got embarrassed at Arkansas they had Darren Mcfadden and the crew, and UF was coming off a national title with a Heisman winning QB. We lost in OT to Tennessee. We also had a close 2-point loss to a top 25 Clemson. We had just been ranked #6, beat a UGA team that finished second in the country, and were coming off the greatest recruiting class in our history. One of which got several of the players you listed as reasons Spurrier had a trash season.

Let's see how this season turns out before we start comparing it to that year. We were competitive at times that season, but so far we haven't been competitive with any team with a pulse.

The only thing I'm comparing is your attitude to the situation. You would have been all over Beamer if he closed any season with 5 straight losses and kicked off that run with a loss to Vandy in Williams-Brice. Spurrier's branding is what gave yourself and the fanbase the resolve to stick it out.

 

[uscwatson21]

The only thing I'm comparing is your attitude to the situation. You would have been all over Beamer if he closed any season with 5 straight losses and kicked off that run with a loss to Vandy in Williams-Brice. Spurrier's branding is what gave yourself and the fanbase the resolve to stick it out.

Even if we ignore the reality that the eras felt different. Why wouldn't this be relevant? Why wouldn't Spurrier's proven success be relevant in whether he deserves a longer leash than someone with zero history of success?

Beamer wasn't qualified to be a HC of a serious SEC school. I'm not sure why you and @GoCocksFight2021 keep arguing that should just be ignored.

 

[Ward Jr]

Even if we ignore the reality that the eras felt different. Why wouldn't this be relevant? Why wouldn't Spurrier's proven success be relevant in whether he deserves a longer leash than someone with zero history of success?

Beamer wasn't qualified to be a HC of a serious SEC school. I'm not sure why you and @GoCocksFight2021 keep arguing that should just be ignored.

It's called accepting reality, Watson. Beamer is our coach and he's probably going to be here for at least another 2-3 years when you consider the buyout and the AD providing him room to succeed.

Every coach is considered unqualified at some point in their career. You obviously can continue to make excuses for why we win games and celebrate losses if you choose to. Just make sure you pack a lunch because it's going to be a minute.

 

[DarkHorse2001]

Beamer wasn't qualified to be a HC of a serious SEC school.

I can't argue with that. We are paying him while he learns the job. He has shown moments where he seemed to know what he is doing. So I guess there is hope.
He lost more talent than he gained in the portal last season. If that happens again his stay here will not last long.

 

[uscwatson21]

It's called accepting reality, Watson. Beamer is our coach and he's probably going to be here for at least another 2-3 years when you consider the buyout and the AD providing him room to succeed.

Every coach is considered unqualified at some point in their career. You obviously can continue to make excuses for why we win games and celebrate losses if you choose to. Just make sure you pack a lunch because it's going to be a minute.

This post really just sums up the problem, you've given up actually on winning at football and are just focusing on arguing with other fans. That's when you know it's time for a coaching change.

This 2-3 year support you're arguing for is paper thin at the moment. If we don't win Saturday, the fanbase is going to fall apart over the next few weeks.

 

[Ward Jr]

This post really just sums up the problem, you've given up actually on winning at football and are just focusing on arguing with other fans. That's when you know it's time for a coaching change.

This 2-3 year support you're arguing for is paper thin at the moment. If we don't win Saturday, the fanbase is going to fall apart over the next few weeks.

I'm focused on the reality of the situation. You're the one arguing with fans week in and out. Rooting for your team to fail is something different and that's what you've been doing for quite some time.

 

[uscwatson21]

I'm focused on the reality of the situation. You're the one arguing with fans week in and out. Rooting for your team to fail is something different and that's what you've been doing for quite some time.

Trying to defend your position of, "we're south carolina and will alway suck" as reality is quite nonsensical.

 

[Ward Jr]

Trying to defend your position of, "we're south carolina and will alway suck" as reality is quite nonsensical.

Then fix it, Waston. No one is standing in your way. If you want to pony for the buyout and convince the AD that's the right move, have at it. I just marvel at the fact that you believe a) what you're saying is novel and b) that you have the right answers for the program moving forward.

 

[uscwatson21]

Then fix it, Waston. No one is standing in your way. If you want to pony for the buyout and convince the AD that's the right move, have at it. I just marvel at the fact that you believe a) what you're saying is novel and b) that you have the right answers for the program moving forward.

I'm just curious if these pedantic arguments make you feel better?

But based on your political posts it kind of explains your sad view on life.

 

[turncock]

I'm just curious if these pedantic arguments make you feel better?

But based on your political posts it kind of explains your sad view on life.

This coming from someone who only criticizes the team and staff? We have never even won the SEC East and had a legendary coach at the helm while the top recruits in the country just happened to be coming out of SC. Now you want to blame fan acceptance of mediocrity as the issue? That is pretty lame and dimwitted.

 

[Ward Jr]

I'm just curious if these pedantic arguments make you feel better?

But based on your political posts it kind of explains your sad view on life.

Keep trolling if it makes you feel better.

 

[uscwatson21]

This coming from someone who only criticizes the team and staff? We have never even won the SEC East and had a legendary coach at the helm while the top recruits in the country just happened to be coming out of SC. Now you want to blame fan acceptance of mediocrity as the issue? That is pretty lame and dimwitted.

I don't criticize the team. It's not their fault the administration put them in a bad position. Why even be a fan if you don't believe we can do better?

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Even if we ignore the reality that the eras felt different. Why wouldn't this be relevant? Why wouldn't Spurrier's proven success be relevant in whether he deserves a longer leash than someone with zero history of success?

Beamer wasn't qualified to be a HC of a serious SEC school. I'm not sure why you and @GoCocksFight2021 keep arguing that should just be ignored.

Why would you expect a coach you that is inferior to Spurrier to get it done faster than Spurrier?

"Wasn't" qualified? Doesn't matter now. Last 2 years proves you wrong. Surpassed all expectations.

 

[Lurker123]

Why would you expect a coach you that is inferior to Spurrier to get it done faster than Spurrier?

Because we can build a team through the portal much faster now?

I think it's a bit foolish to put 5 or 6 year timeframe out there where we refuse to judge coaching staffs for no other reason than Spurrier. He earned extra consideration through his successes.

 

[Ward Jr]

Because we can build a team through the portal much faster now?

I think it's a bit foolish to put 5 or 6 year timeframe out there where we refuse to judge coaching staffs for no other reason than Spurrier. He earned extra consideration through his successes.

The NIL is a net negative for us in terms of competition in the SEC. If anything, the opposite would be true.

 

[Ward Jr]

I don't criticize the team. It's not their fault the administration put them in a bad position. Why even be a fan if you don't believe we can do better?

Critic is welcomed and is often the lifeline of sports forums. That's not what you're doing. You're actively cheering for the team to fail b/c of your disdain for a coaching staff and we're only 5 games into Year 3.

Your posting timeline looks like the apocalypse and your main argument is the age old "Gamecock Fans are too complaisant." That's why you're regularly called out.

 

[uscwatson21]

Why would you expect a coach you that is inferior to Spurrier to get it done faster than Spurrier?

I don't expect Beamer to get it done faster than Spurrier.

But I expect Beamer to show me that he's capable of getting it done by year 3. So far the only thing you've pointed out that shows Beamer is going to be more successful than Muschamp is that he beat UT and Clemson last year. But, we've already lost to UT this year. If we lose to Clemson, that talking point will be gone as well.

 

[Ward Jr]

I don't expect Beamer to get it done faster than Spurrier.

But I expect Beamer to show me that he's capable of getting it done by year 3. So far the only thing you've pointed out that shows Beamer is going to be more successful than Muschamp is that he beat UT and Clemson last year. But, we've already lost to UT this year. If we lose to Clemson, that talking point will be gone as well.

So if we lose to Clemson this year, it negates the fact Beamer beat them last year in their stadium? How exactly does that work Watson?

Muschamp's record against Clemson set records. That's a big part of his legacy at USC.

 

[Lurker123]

The NIL is a net negative for us in terms of competition in the SEC. If anything, the opposite would be true.

We could throw out the name Rattler and claim this team is winning the games it does because of the portal.

But honestly, do you believe coaches should not be judged until at least year 5 or 6? At all? Because Spurrier? Every single coach we ever hire is beyond reproach for 5 or 6 years for no other reason?

I know the little moron will argue this. I just wanted to know if you agree.

Edit: My opinion? You may not fire a coach after 3 years, but you can certainly starting seeing trajectory. And in some cases where it's deserved, I don't think 4 years is too short of a trial period.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

I don't expect Beamer to get it done faster than Spurrier.

But I expect Beamer to show me that he's capable of getting it done by year 3. So far the only thing you've pointed out that shows Beamer is going to be more successful than Muschamp is that he beat UT and Clemson last year. But, we've already lost to UT this year. If we lose to Clemson, that talking point will be gone as well.

Well, he's already shown you that he can far exceed EVERONYE'S expectations. Including the expectations YOU publicly stated here on this board.

So why are you crying like a damn litle nancy kerrigan constantly? Why doesn't he get a chance to continue to improve this team?

 

[uscwatson21]

So if we lose to Clemson this year, it negates the fact Beamer beat them last year in their stadium? How exactly does that work Watson?

Yes, it becomes the same thing as Muschamp beating UGA, except last year's Clemson team was worse than that UGA team.

Muschamp's record against Clemson set records. That's a big part of his legacy at USC.

And you're just being disingenuous comparing those Clemson teams to the past three Clemson teams.

 

[uscwatson21]

Well, he's already shown you that he can far exceed EVERONYE'S expectations. Including the expectations YOU publicly stated here on this board.

So why are you crying like a damn litle nancy kerrigan constantly? Why doesn't he get a chance to continue to improve this team?

We are finding out now if last year was the norm or if it was just a fluke.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Yes, it becomes the same thing as Muschamp beating UGA, except last year's Clemson team was worse than that UGA team.


And you're just being disingenuous comparing those Clemson teams to the past three Clemson teams.

No it doesn't "become the same thing". Muschamp beat Georgia, and then lost 5 of the next 6, include to APP ST. I repeat, he lost to APP ST. AT HOME.

Beamer beat Tennessee. And when you and the other howling monkeys claimed it was a fluke, he beat Clemson AT CLEMSON in one of the biggest rivalry win in history. Then, had a chance to beat Notre Dame in a bowl.

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

We are finding out now if last year was the norm or if it was just a fluke.

One year won't tell you that. That's not how it works. He's exceeded expectations, even YOUR OWN expectations, BOTH years. The first sign of adversity doesn't suddenly negate all that just because you dislike him. You can't declare EVERY success a fluke and then, as soon as something goes wrong, declare THAT the norm.

 

[uscwatson21]

One year won't tell you that. That's not how it works. He's exceeded expectations, even YOUR OWN expectations, BOTH years. The first sign of adversity doesn't suddenly negate all that just because you dislike him. You can't declare EVERY success a fluke and then, as soon as something goes wrong, declare THAT the norm.

He went 6-6 his first season, 8-4 the second season. If he finishes 6-6 this season, wouldn't 6-6 be the norm?

 

[Ward Jr]

We could throw out the name Rattler and claim this team is winning the games it does because of the portal.

But honestly, do you believe coaches should not be judged until at least year 5 or 6? At all? Because Spurrier? Every single coach we ever hire is beyond reproach for 5 or 6 years for no other reason?

I know the little moron will argue this. I just wanted to know if you agree.

Edit: My opinion? You may not fire a coach after 3 years, but you can certainly starting seeing trajectory. And in some cases where it's deserved, I don't think 4 years is too short of a trial period.

Rattler was a great pickup and obviously never happens without the OU/Beamer connection. Hence, a bit of an aberration.

We typically are only as good as the health of our 1st team. We just don't have the depth to consistently compete otherwise. I think this season and our offense would look completely different if we had Wells healthy. We need that balance at WR to keep the defense honest. Also, we still haven't filled the holes of losing Bell and Lloyd to the NIL/Portal. Anderson is starting to come along though.

In terms of time, really hard to say. If Wells returns and we look anything like we did at the end of last season, I think Beamer deserves more time - at least 4 to 5 years. These coaching contracts are brutal. It eliminates any plug and play aspect except for those with very deep pockets. IMO, Beamer's teams have been more enjoyable to watch than Muschamp's by a significant margin.

 

[Ward Jr]

Yes, it becomes the same thing as Muschamp beating UGA, except last year's Clemson team was worse than that UGA team.


And you're just being disingenuous comparing those Clemson teams to the past three Clemson teams.

So Jake Fromm imploding in the midst of an otherwise terrible season for us is the equivalent of beating Clemson at Clemson after an 7-year stretch and on the heels of beating #5 UT? I don't think so.

It doesn't matter the difference in those Clemson teams - we got demolished time and time again. There's no metric available in which to measure as those affairs were so lopsided. Savannah State could have done what we did against Clemson under Muschamp.

 

[uscwatson21]

So Jake Fromm imploding in the midst of an otherwise terrible season for us is the equivalent of beating Clemson at Clemson after an 7-year stretch and on the heels of beating #5 UT? I don't think so.

No, the UGA win was a much better win as they finished ranked 4th in the country while Clemson finished 12th, and was probably overrated there.

It doesn't matter the difference in those Clemson teams - we got demolished time and time again. There's no metric available in which to measure as those affairs were so lopsided. Savannah State could have done what we did against Clemson under Muschamp.

You act like Clemson didn't beat Beamer 30-0 with a Clemson team worse than any of the teams Muschamp played. It's honestly impressive how many bad faith arguments you can make.

 

[Ward Jr]

No, the UGA win was a much better win as they finished ranked 4th in the country while Clemson finished 12th, and was probably overrated there.


You act like Clemson didn't beat Beamer 30-0 with a Clemson team worse than any of the teams Muschamp played. It's honestly impressive how many bad faith arguments you can make.

It doesn't matter what the rank was. UGA played a terrible game and it wasn't due to us. The turnover margin was 4-0 and they still had significantly more yardage in the game.

We beat Clemson last year after 7 years. Clemson was at home and in the Top 10 when we did. IMO, the most important aspect is that it was on the heels of a big win. We never do that. Ever.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

The NIL is a net negative for us in terms of competition in the SEC. If anything, the opposite would be true.

Hilarious how people are dumb enough to think NIL gives US an advantage. Last I saw, our NIL collective was 10th...in just the SEC.

You have to buy it now. No free rides.

 

[Lurker123]

Rattler was a great pickup and obviously never happens without the OU/Beamer connection. Hence, a bit of an aberration.

We typically are only as good as the health of our 1st team. We just don't have the depth to consistently compete otherwise. I think this season and our offense would look completely different if we had Wells healthy. We need that balance at WR to keep the defense honest. Also, we still haven't filled the holes of losing Bell and Lloyd to the NIL/Portal. Anderson is starting to come along though.

In terms of time, really hard to say. If Wells returns and we look anything like we did at the end of last season, I think Beamer deserves more time - at least 4 to 5 years. These coaching contracts are brutal. It eliminates any plug and play aspect except for those with very deep pockets. IMO, Beamer's teams have been more enjoyable to watch than Muschamp's by a significant margin.

So we're both saying at least 4 years, right?

I agree every situation is different, but I can't write off 5 years and pretend no one can judge until after that.

Also, have to agree with Watson on those clemaon teams. Beamer is benefitting from their demise, and not having to play national title contenders.

 

[Lurker123]

He went 6-6 his first season, 8-4 the second season. If he finishes 6-6 this season, wouldn't 6-6 be the norm?

That sounds reasonable and logical. She will dismiss it for that reason.

 

[Ward Jr]

So we're both saying at least 4 years, right?

I agree every situation is different, but I can't write off 5 years and pretend no one can judge until after that.

Also, have to agree with Watson on those clemaon teams. Beamer is benefitting from their demise, and not having to play national title contenders.

I think he'll get five because of the contract. However, he probably would deserve only four if we're not trending in the right direction.

 

[Ward Jr]

So we're both saying at least 4 years, right?

I agree every situation is different, but I can't write off 5 years and pretend no one can judge until after that.

Also, have to agree with Watson on those clemaon teams. Beamer is benefitting from their demise, and not having to play national title contenders.

Muschamp sucked too bad against Clemson to even make a comparison. Our point loss margin against them was worse than any other team they faced over the period - including the bottom of the barrel in the ACC. It was also the worst margin in the history of our program versus any other team.

 

[uscwatson21]

I think he'll get five because of the contract. However, he probably would deserve only four if we're not trending in the right direction.

We're staring at a losing season next year. You think he will get a fifth season if we go 4-8 or 5-7?

 

[uscwatson21]

So we're both saying at least 4 years, right?

I agree every situation is different, but I can't write off 5 years and pretend no one can judge until after that.

Also, have to agree with Watson on those clemaon teams. Beamer is benefitting from their demise, and not having to play national title contenders.

It's honestly impressive how he can look at 4 games, three of which involved Trevor Lawrence and Deshaun Watson and just pretend it didn't make the game even the slightest bit harder.

 

[Ward Jr]

We're staring at a losing season next year. You think he will get a fifth season if we go 4-8 or 5-7?

Unless you get another frustrated benefactor to pony the bailout. It would be about 17 mil next year.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

He went 6-6 his first season, 8-4 the second season. If he finishes 6-6 this season, wouldn't 6-6 be the norm?

If you flip a coin 3 times and it comes up heads twice, do you declare heads the norm? Of course not.

 

[Ward Jr]

It's honestly impressive how he can look at 4 games, three of which involved Trevor Lawrence and Deshaun Watson and just pretend it didn't make the game even the slightest bit harder.

It doesn't matter who was on the team. Look at the collective point margin in those games. Again, worse that any other team in the ACC (or otherwise) they faced over the same time frame. That's really hard to do.

 

[uscwatson21]

If you flip a coin 3 times and it comes up heads twice, do you declare heads the norm? Of course not.

Now you're displaying a lack of knowledge of basic probability fundamentals.