Remember Tanner needs to go as well. He has no business hiring Muschamp's replacement. Package deal firing would be ideal.
If Muschamp gets canned in the next year or two
- Thread starter sclawman77
- Start date
Don't agree with this. Tanner in my opinion wants to win. How many AD's at all universities make the correct hire every time? Sure, this Muschamp hire will most likely not turn out as I would like it. Tanner made a decision to fire Holbrook which was not an easy easy decision based on what they had accomplished. I think he learned from that process. Sure, I will get roasted for my opinion but this is my 2 cents.
Whomever negotiated the buy out deal ($22-$18 millions) with a not very marketable former head coach, is highly suspect, IMHO. He definitely is not treating it like it is his money.
You know the hire maybe just maybe even after that debacle of a coaching search to end up with Muschamp maybe it's forgivable to some people.
However to make his buyout of $22 million which is over half of the gross profits for a year in football revenue is unforgivable. You can't just think AD is just to hire and fire but you must be smarter with the budget. Shame on Tanner
However to make his buyout of $22 million which is over half of the gross profits for a year in football revenue is unforgivable. You can't just think AD is just to hire and fire but you must be smarter with the budget. Shame on Tanner
Baseball program has sunk because of Tanner's hires. His only other hire is Muschamp. Major mens sports programs are underachieving on his watch.
Tanner is simply too nice of a coach. Any AD wants to win. That’s not a qualification. Tanner thinks he’s doing the coaches a favor by having their back in all circumstances. Reality is, sometimes they need a fire lit under their a$$.
Tanner wants to win? So,, because of that, we should continue to let the athletics programs sink? I bet King Dixon wanted to win. I bet Sparky, Brad, Steve Newton, and Darrin Horne all wanted to win, too.
Unfortunately, there's a bit more to it than just desire. Knowledge, know-how, ability...however you want to label it. But, I can't imagine why a guy who has been a baseball player/coach his entire professional career wouldn't know how to operate a multi-million dollar athletics program. Being able to teach kids to hit and throw has to translate into being essentially the CEO of a major company, right?
Apples and oranges. Expertise in one does not necessarily translate to the other. Decision to make Tanner AD emotional, rather than rational.
I guess either I forgot the sarcasm font, or you missed a statement like "Being able to teach kids to hit and throw has to translate into being essentially the CEO of a major company, right?"
My entire post is about nothing but how Tanner was/is completely unqualified to be AD
He's made too many bad decisions to be retained. I don't trust him to fire or hire anyone. Hire Danny Morrison as Interim AD and let him evaluate the football program and recommend changes. If he wants the job full-time then hire him.
No, I understood you exactly. I saw your sarcasm and agreed with it.
Of course hindsight is 20/20. However, the desire to reward Tanner by placing him into a position he wanted to excel in, but was not qualified for was not a good one and did Tanner a disservice.
Agree. Great, classy guy. Amazing baseball coach. Doesn't qualify him for the AD job.
What incentive does our board of trustees have for us to have a winning program? I really don't know. I know if they're not vested at all and it's a group of politicians wanting favors in return for their approval of things would be a disaster .
How does it work in that little town of Clemson?
How does it work in that little town of Clemson?
This does not get discussed enough.
My problem with the coaching search was that it appeared amateurish.
It was very leaky for one - remember at the end when the whole world knew who we were interviewing? Two, it felt like the agents were dictating the terms of the search to us more than the other way around and the whole thing became a way to get everybody a raise.
Third, it felt like we were in a panic after Herman and Smart fell through and we just ran to the safest option.
Fourth, it’s nice that we can finally discuss this without being accused as some sort of traitor.
It was very leaky for one - remember at the end when the whole world knew who we were interviewing? Two, it felt like the agents were dictating the terms of the search to us more than the other way around and the whole thing became a way to get everybody a raise.
Third, it felt like we were in a panic after Herman and Smart fell through and we just ran to the safest option.
Fourth, it’s nice that we can finally discuss this without being accused as some sort of traitor.
i too am more disappointed in the Baseball program. This was one of , if not the Elite, programs in College baseball just a few years ago, and only a few years removed from Back to Back national titles. BUT, In Football, I just feel the Spurrier (one of the best coaches ever at USC) left the cupboard quite bare IMO. Also in Football, it has to be much tougher to try and compete with the likes of SEC teams, and the taters, in recuiting and on the field. I too think Muschamp should have produced better improvements, well at least more RAPID improvements, and this loss to the Tar holes has me "steaming", but lets see how this season plays out.. Then they need to evaluate EVERYTHING....
Last edited:
Tanner has come out and said what we all thought he would say. "I am as confident in Will Muschamp now as I was the day I hired him.We knew this would take time - we had to build a little bit."
As to the buyout, "it's in line with other coaches."
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/s...ut-talk-remains-confident-in-gamecocks-coach/
As to the buyout, "it's in line with other coaches."
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/s...ut-talk-remains-confident-in-gamecocks-coach/
Tanner is either a babbling moron or an unbelievable genius.
Muschamp wants to win too, however there is a difference in wanting to win and actually winning.
Lot's of armchair QBs in here.
I look at it this way, with hiring coaches, you have to see if it was a great hire AT THE TIME, not necessarily whether it did or didn't work out as planned.
1. Muschamp was probably one of the best who was available that wanted to come here or we had a reasonable chance to get. Kirby Smart was going to go to UGA all along, USC had no chance at him. That was a no brainer. Looking at some other big names or big schools who made changes... Tom Herman was never coming here (went to his dream job, Texas). Justin Fuente to Va. Tech - team has declined since year one.Other big schools: LSU took Ed Orgeron (not too many were sold on him there). Willie Taggart at Fla. State (not working out so well)
Muschamp took a 3-9 team that was in the dumps and made it bowl eligible in his first year. He won 9 games in year 2 and won a bowl game. Last year wasn't great but still a winning season and bowl appearance. Recruiting has been very good and improving each year. This year's opener sucked all around, no doubt. But barring a complete collapse this year, I feel like Muschamp will get USC back to the point where expectations for 8-9 wins most years in reasonable. Is he a guy that will win us an SEC title, maybe not, but NO COACH has ever taken us there. In 100+ years of football, Spurrier gave us the greatest stretch in school history and it took him until year 6 to win 9 games and get USC to SEC championship game. (And despite the drop off at the end, Spurrier is a legendary coach). RESULT IMO: Muschamp was a decent hire at the time he was hired. Time will tell if he's decent like Holtz was or a step above. Muschamp's biggest "sin" is that he came on board at the time that Clemson is enjoying it's greatest success in history. If Clemson was a 7-6 type of team, people wouldn't be freaking out as much.
2. Holbrook was absolutely the right hire AT THE TIME HE WAS HIRED. Ultimately it did not work out, but USC fans would have revolted if the guy (Holbrook) who was coveted as a head coach all around the country at the time was allowed to go elsewhere when Ray stepped down. He won 43 and 44 games in first 2 years, then missed NCAAs in year 3. Rebounded nicely to get team back to Supers in year 4 so things seemed ok, but then it fell apart in year 5 and team missed NCAAs again and he was gone. To me, Ray made the right hire at the time and also made the right decision to let him go when he did (wouldn't have made sense to fire him after a Super Regional year IMO.
3. Kingston hire: I recall many college baseball experts were saying this was a very good hire because Kingston won a Division 1 schools that didn't have many resources. Florida coach was on the list, but he ends up winning CWS and UF promises to build him facilities and throws more money so he stays put (makes sense.) It takes time to build, especially in baseball which, due to scholarship limitations, is sometimes a tougher job because you aren't just competing with the big schools for top players (look how many good players go to small D1 schools). To early to call, but at THE TIME OF THE HIRE, this seemed good.
I know from a reliable source that Ray was instrumental in keeping Staley here a few years ago when another big D1 school came calling. For what it's worth, Ray hired the volleyball coach last year and he brought team to NCAA for the first time in more than a decade. Also, facility projects are keeping us on the level with the top schools in the country so we have a chance to be relevant.
I look at it this way, with hiring coaches, you have to see if it was a great hire AT THE TIME, not necessarily whether it did or didn't work out as planned.
1. Muschamp was probably one of the best who was available that wanted to come here or we had a reasonable chance to get. Kirby Smart was going to go to UGA all along, USC had no chance at him. That was a no brainer. Looking at some other big names or big schools who made changes... Tom Herman was never coming here (went to his dream job, Texas). Justin Fuente to Va. Tech - team has declined since year one.Other big schools: LSU took Ed Orgeron (not too many were sold on him there). Willie Taggart at Fla. State (not working out so well)
Muschamp took a 3-9 team that was in the dumps and made it bowl eligible in his first year. He won 9 games in year 2 and won a bowl game. Last year wasn't great but still a winning season and bowl appearance. Recruiting has been very good and improving each year. This year's opener sucked all around, no doubt. But barring a complete collapse this year, I feel like Muschamp will get USC back to the point where expectations for 8-9 wins most years in reasonable. Is he a guy that will win us an SEC title, maybe not, but NO COACH has ever taken us there. In 100+ years of football, Spurrier gave us the greatest stretch in school history and it took him until year 6 to win 9 games and get USC to SEC championship game. (And despite the drop off at the end, Spurrier is a legendary coach). RESULT IMO: Muschamp was a decent hire at the time he was hired. Time will tell if he's decent like Holtz was or a step above. Muschamp's biggest "sin" is that he came on board at the time that Clemson is enjoying it's greatest success in history. If Clemson was a 7-6 type of team, people wouldn't be freaking out as much.
2. Holbrook was absolutely the right hire AT THE TIME HE WAS HIRED. Ultimately it did not work out, but USC fans would have revolted if the guy (Holbrook) who was coveted as a head coach all around the country at the time was allowed to go elsewhere when Ray stepped down. He won 43 and 44 games in first 2 years, then missed NCAAs in year 3. Rebounded nicely to get team back to Supers in year 4 so things seemed ok, but then it fell apart in year 5 and team missed NCAAs again and he was gone. To me, Ray made the right hire at the time and also made the right decision to let him go when he did (wouldn't have made sense to fire him after a Super Regional year IMO.
3. Kingston hire: I recall many college baseball experts were saying this was a very good hire because Kingston won a Division 1 schools that didn't have many resources. Florida coach was on the list, but he ends up winning CWS and UF promises to build him facilities and throws more money so he stays put (makes sense.) It takes time to build, especially in baseball which, due to scholarship limitations, is sometimes a tougher job because you aren't just competing with the big schools for top players (look how many good players go to small D1 schools). To early to call, but at THE TIME OF THE HIRE, this seemed good.
I know from a reliable source that Ray was instrumental in keeping Staley here a few years ago when another big D1 school came calling. For what it's worth, Ray hired the volleyball coach last year and he brought team to NCAA for the first time in more than a decade. Also, facility projects are keeping us on the level with the top schools in the country so we have a chance to be relevant.
I would be interested to know who would have come here besides Muschamp.
If we are saying that this job can’t atteact anybody then I think there are deeper issues to be discussed.
No one is saying it won't attract anyone. However, we are not going to attract one of those "name" coaches that would unify and satisfy the whole fan base...or probably even garner a consensus. A Saban or a Meyer will not come here....they don't need to prove anything and they will have much more enticing options.
Just as a matter of warning, if or when Muschamp is let go, whomever his replacement is will be criticized by a portion of the fans on this site....some very heavily....because he will not have the perfect and unassailable resume.
Champ isn't going anywhere except Atlanta in the next year or two so y'all might as well let Tanner and champ handle their business.
I was okay with the hire at the time. Muschamp had everything to prove. We're probably the last team willing to give him a chance as head coach. But so far, I'm seeing the same underachieving results (no quality wins) that he brought to UF. We still have a lot of season left but the UNC game was a horrible start to the year.
My post was more about the reality of any future coaches.
Stating that, I haven't completely given up on Muschamp's ability to turn it around, but I am not as vocal in my support of him as I once was. I don't know if he is a Beamer/Bowden type who simply has a learning curve but once he makes it he's golden....or a Weis type who comes in for a couple of good years and then simply declines. I like some of the changes he has made, but thought there should have been additional ones...like bringing Durkin in last year.
Year or two my ass. He should be out now!
Champ is going to Atlanta? He gonna be a defensive analyst for the falcons of something ?
The last thing I want is a name coach. You trade a couple years of success for a slow decline because the guy gets old and loses energy for the job, and has plenty of money so he’s not hungry anymore.
My candidates last time were guys like Herman, Campbell, and Brohm. Guys that were on their way up and had something to prove. We need to think in terms of Meyer after Utah, Spurrier after Duke, Lou after Arkansas, Saban after Michigan State.
Yes I know this is more of a crap shoot, but the tired guy looking for a place to retire route doesn’t work long term.
I agree....and my point still stands. That will satisfy a portion of the fanbase, but another portion will be there with torches and pitchforks.
Remember....Saban didn't set the world on fire at MSU. In almost no way could his tenure there forebode the success he had at LSU and, especially, Bama.
True, plenty of armchair quarterbacks but that’s to be expected. However you don’t need to be very astute to realize that Muschamp is getting paid way too much to do as poorly as he is doing here. His second season here had a better record than the team should have had. It wasn’t a very good team. He’s won a single game vs ranked opponents and has lost many that he was favored to win. For 5 plus million a year, fans should expect better than that.
Yes. No hire will be well received by all. But I do have to defend our fans a little. They have been pretty supportive of the current staff. At least who I talk to.
Thanks for joining the conversation. Didn't think both threads would be at the top of the board by now
Last edited:
No, its damn serious. Paying someone this kind of money for average results is poor business. Maybe they turn it around this season and next but the signs are not good.
Thanks. Just trying to start up valid points of conversation. Obviously any negativity (even if it's reality) ruffles some feathers around here.
Latest posts
-
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: Gamecocks Name QB Starter? Crucial Baseball Series- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: Gamecocks Name QB Starter? Crucial Baseball Series
- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
