Is There an Answer To The Real Issue

[midline]

Most who follow this forum know my feelings about the Beamer hiring. Thought it was done on the cheap in some desperate attempt to hire a hopeful Dabo 2.0. That aside, how do we fix the long range problem. And that issue is recruiting. Since Spurrier hit the gold mine with some SC recruits over a decade ago, USC just cannot recruit with anybody on the schedule that makes a difference. And 95% of the time, talent wins. Now we always have the sunshine pumpers that convince themselves that all of these 3 stars we sign are all diamonds in the rough that will play like 5 stars once in Columbia. We all know that view is naive. So what can be done? Our two biggest rivals in UGA and Clemson seem to select high 4 and 5 stars. Then you throw other SEC schools recruiting at a high level, not to mention UNC which has elevated their recruiting to a high level right in our backyard. Until USC can change this pattern, things aren't going to change very much. Winning 6-7 games will be a special year where you get to go to the low level bowl in Charlotte, or Birmingham. Any ideas?

 

[lowcountry_cock13]

Doesn’t matter who you put on the field with this offense. Byrnes (insert current for high school) could of had more than 6 total yards in the 3rd quarter against A and M. I’m not saying we should be scoring 30 points of game but what we have is pitiful.

 

[king ward]

It is futile. We have a particular type of DNA which cannot be overridden. I doubt we could ever attain to a level comparable with even Iowa State.

 

[lowcountry_cock13]

It is futile. We have a particular type of DNA which cannot be overridden. I doubt we could ever attain to a level comparable with even Iowa State.

I just want to be better than Coastal...

 

[hillstosea]

It is futile. We have a particular type of DNA which cannot be overridden. I doubt we could ever attain to a level comparable with even Iowa State.

Hate to hear you say that King. I certainly understand your apathy but I really believe things will get better. Great success,as we have seen, is attainable.

 

[Gamechamp]

Doesn’t matter who you put on the field with this offense. Byrnes (insert current for high school) could of had more than 6 total yards in the 3rd quarter against A and M. I’m not saying we should be scoring 30 points of game but what we have is pitiful.

Surely if we had a bunch of four and five stars in this offense, it would be more prolific. Players do make a difference.

 

[vidaliagamecock]

Most who follow this forum know my feelings about the Beamer hiring. Thought it was done on the cheap in some desperate attempt to hire a hopeful Dabo 2.0. That aside, how do we fix the long range problem. And that issue is recruiting. Since Spurrier hit the gold mine with some SC recruits over a decade ago, USC just cannot recruit with anybody on the schedule that makes a difference. And 95% of the time, talent wins. Now we always have the sunshine pumpers that convince themselves that all of these 3 stars we sign are all diamonds in the rough that will play like 5 stars once in Columbia. We all know that view is naive. So what can be done? Our two biggest rivals in UGA and Clemson seem to select high 4 and 5 stars. Then you throw other SEC schools recruiting at a high level, not to mention UNC which has elevated their recruiting to a high level right in our backyard. Until USC can change this pattern, things aren't going to change very much. Winning 6-7 games will be a special year where you get to go to the low level bowl in Charlotte, or Birmingham. Any ideas?

Well, we could jump on board with aspirational mediocrity, or quit football entirely. I see no third way. South Carolina just doesn't produce sufficient high level football talent to be a consistent winner and we refuse to spend money on national recruiting or effort into developing the talent that comes here. Our best recruiting years are when the flagship schools in other states are down, which is not a recipe for success. I don't know the answer, presuming there is one.

 

[gamecock stock]

It was very ignorant of people to believe that Shane Beamer had some sort of magic wand to attract a significant number of high quality recruits here, especially based om his time here as Recruiting Coordinator. Recruits coming here back in those days were coming to play for Steve Spurrier due to Spurrier's reputation as a big winner, proven on the field.

How do you turn recruiting around here at SC so as to compete with the "big boys"? First of all, it does not happen overnight. You need someone who is young and energetic as Head Coach who will be a workaholic in recruiting. Beamer checks that box. Secondly, you need a Head Coach who can prove, on the field, that he can win with lesser talent, that is, overachieve. If he can show that coaching ability, that will turn the heads of the more higher profile recruits. Unfortunately, if we are being honest, Beamer has not shown that ability through 8 games. If anything, it appears we are underachieving on the field. We barely beat mid-major teams from the AAC and Sun Belt conferences. And we escaped by the skin of our teeth at home against lowly Vanderbilt.

That's why I wanted someone like Napier or Chadwell. They are young, have recruited well at their levels and have taken lesser talented teams and beaten teams above their level.

Our best hope right now is that Beamer will do a "do over" on his offensive staff, bringing in some proven assistants to help him "overachieve" on game day.

 

[JGH 35]

If you recruit great players, who is going to coach them? Certainly not this current group. Recruiting is not going to fix this problem. A hiring mistake was made. How do you fix it? You correct the mistake. If your car runs out of gas, you don't fix it by buying new tires.

 

[king ward]

Hate to hear you say that King. I certainly understand your apathy but I really believe things will get better. Great success,as we have seen, is attainable.

On the occasions we have had it, it came about by boldness. I'm not seeing any boldness.

 

[Elgringo]

Most who follow this forum know my feelings about the Beamer hiring. Thought it was done on the cheap in some desperate attempt to hire a hopeful Dabo 2.0. That aside, how do we fix the long range problem. And that issue is recruiting. Since Spurrier hit the gold mine with some SC recruits over a decade ago, USC just cannot recruit with anybody on the schedule that makes a difference. And 95% of the time, talent wins. Now we always have the sunshine pumpers that convince themselves that all of these 3 stars we sign are all diamonds in the rough that will play like 5 stars once in Columbia. We all know that view is naive. So what can be done? Our two biggest rivals in UGA and Clemson seem to select high 4 and 5 stars. Then you throw other SEC schools recruiting at a high level, not to mention UNC which has elevated their recruiting to a high level right in our backyard. Until USC can change this pattern, things aren't going to change very much. Winning 6-7 games will be a special year where you get to go to the low level bowl in Charlotte, or Birmingham. Any ideas?

I’m afraid our BOT is so gleeful over us being a WBB school that they don’t have the intestinal fortitude to make football competitive. I think they live in the Diversity and Inclusion eco chamber. When football attendance dips below 50% they may start being proactive, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

 

[BobbyBReloaded1975]

Winning and doing it in an exciting fashion goes a long way . To do that before you have 4 and 5 star recruits you gotta have coaches who can beat more talented teams . In Spurrier’s first few years the UF , UGA , UT , even Clemson teams were head and shoulders better than us on paper but he still beat them because he was a hell of a coach . That builds buzz and momentum and that is 90% of recruiting . You gotta win and show you can but guys in the NFL . That’s the bottomline . You gotta win with less until you start turning heads and from what I’ve seen so far is Beamer the kind of coach that can do that ???

 

[Dizzy01]

Surely if we had a bunch of four and five stars in this offense, it would be more prolific. Players do make a difference.

How many do you want? A whole starting lineup of them? We have those guys at various offensive positions and they either aren’t making a difference or aren’t seeing the field. 4 star QB played with no results. 5 star RB plays with mixed results. 4 star RB produces but doesn’t play for games at a time. 4 star WR leads the team and 2 others don’t see the field. 4 star TE doesn’t play either.

It’s not like everyone on the offense was a 2 star guy they are just trying to flounder along with. You could bring in any OC with a pulse and see better results with this roster. We ended up with a guy who carried the clipboard for a guy who was known for his offense and it looks like the clipboard was probably more qualified for the position.

 

[gr8spur]

When football attendance dips below 50% they may start being proactive, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Proactive, or reactive? Or maybe "concerned" or "desperate." Almost anything other than "proactive."

 

[gamecock stock]

How many do you want? A whole starting lineup of them? We have those guys at various offensive positions and they either aren’t making a difference or aren’t seeing the field. 4 star QB played with no results. 5 star RB plays with mixed results. 4 star RB produces but doesn’t play for games at a time. 4 star WR leads the team and 2 others don’t see the field. 4 star TE doesn’t play either.

It’s not like everyone on the offense was a 2 star guy they are just trying to flounder along with. You could bring in any OC with a pulse and see better results with this roster. We ended up with a guy who carried the clipboard for a guy who was known for his offense and it looks like the clipboard was probably more qualified for the position.

Spot on there, Diz. Spot on.

 

[gamecock stock]

Not that it matters now, because the horse has gotten out of the barn: but, I'm curious as to who were the former players pushing for Beamer? They might have done as much damage to the football program as McMaster did to the University as a whole by pushing the General on us.

 

[Legendary Cock]

Proactive, or reactive? Or maybe "concerned" or "desperate." Almost anything other than "proactive."

Good point. It's been a long time since we've been proactive with our major men's sports.

 

[boy among men]

1 or 2 high profile transfers can make a world of difference.

can temporarily carry any offense
attract good surrounding HS talent
use NIL to improve their own/USC brand

How many do you want? A whole starting lineup of them? We have those guys at various offensive positions and they either aren’t making a difference or aren’t seeing the field. 4 star QB played with no results. 5 star RB plays with mixed results. 4 star RB produces but doesn’t play for games at a time. 4 star WR leads the team and 2 others don’t see the field. 4 star TE doesn’t play either.

It’s not like everyone on the offense was a 2 star guy they are just trying to flounder along with. You could bring in any OC with a pulse and see better results with this roster. We ended up with a guy who carried the clipboard for a guy who was known for his offense and it looks like the clipboard was probably more qualified for the position.

 

[OldWiseCock]

Most who follow this forum know my feelings about the Beamer hiring. Thought it was done on the cheap in some desperate attempt to hire a hopeful Dabo 2.0. That aside, how do we fix the long range problem. And that issue is recruiting. Since Spurrier hit the gold mine with some SC recruits over a decade ago, USC just cannot recruit with anybody on the schedule that makes a difference. And 95% of the time, talent wins. Now we always have the sunshine pumpers that convince themselves that all of these 3 stars we sign are all diamonds in the rough that will play like 5 stars once in Columbia. We all know that view is naive. So what can be done? Our two biggest rivals in UGA and Clemson seem to select high 4 and 5 stars. Then you throw other SEC schools recruiting at a high level, not to mention UNC which has elevated their recruiting to a high level right in our backyard. Until USC can change this pattern, things aren't going to change very much. Winning 6-7 games will be a special year where you get to go to the low level bowl in Charlotte, or Birmingham. Any ideas?

I was thinking about this post over my second cup of coffee this morning.

Which would you rather have? (and I don't mean you personally, but the board in general) Great coaches and average players (who can be coached up) or average coaches and great players?

Personally, I think a great staff can get more out of average players and make them competent. Average coaches may actually hold good or great players back. There are plenty of examples even in SC football history.

Jim Carlen followed Paul Dietzel and won with his players and used those wins to recruit at a higher level. Joe Morrison followed Richard Bell (1 year - so he really followed Carlen) and won with his players and leveraged those wins to recruit.

Look at Matt Campbell at Iowa State and Mark Stoops at UK as other examples.

An average (or worse) staff can do less with more. Lots of examples of weak coaches and staffs dragging a program down. Sparky Woods and Brad Scott are examples in our own history. Alabama and Tennessee both made poor hires which dragged successful programs down.

Sometimes there are other factors besides coaching and talent, but I think 90% of the time it starts with a top notch staff who, given enough time, will build the program and recruit better players each cycle. In most cases, you see the potential early - sometimes in the first year.

 

[importcock]

I say this only partially joking. We need to cheat. We need to pay top dollar to get the best players possible. Look what it's done for Clemson, and others. Hell, Auburn literally bought a national championship in the name of Cam Newton. Be careful and don't get caught. After a while if we get good enough, we can back off on the payments since players will want to come here. And if we do get caught what's the worst thing that can happen to us? They'll put us on probation and we'll probably only be able to win 2-4 games a year. Wait, what?

 

[uscnoklahoma2]

I say this only partially joking. We need to cheat. We need to pay top dollar to get the best players possible. Look what it's done for Clemson, and others. Hell, Auburn literally bought a national championship in the name of Cam Newton. Be careful and don't get caught. After a while if we get good enough, we can back off on the payments since players will want to come here. And if we do get caught what's the worst thing that can happen to us? They'll put us on probation and we'll probably only be able to win 2-4 games a year. Wait, what?

Cheating has now been given a stamp of approval with the NIL. We are now in the same boat with everyone else.

 

[midline]

Well, we could jump on board with aspirational mediocrity, or quit football entirely. I see no third way. South Carolina just doesn't produce sufficient high level football talent to be a consistent winner and we refuse to spend money on national recruiting or effort into developing the talent that comes here. Our best recruiting years are when the flagship schools in other states are down, which is not a recipe for success. I don't know the answer, presuming there is one.

But it can be done. I look back on Dabo's era at Clemson. Clemson was rather mediocre, and came close to getting fired after losing to USF in whatever bowl they had a Charlotte at the time. And in the midst of losing 5 straight to Spurrier. Georgia was recruiting just as well then as they are now. The state of SC was still small. Doesn't produce enough talent to stock one Power 5 team, much less two. But yet during that era was when they laid the groundwork through recruiting that paid off in their recent success over the last few years. The numbers published about USC's recruiting budget is troubling when compared to our rivals, so maybe that is an issue. But they play that off that not every expense is listed under football like they do at other schools. And Ray swears that Muschamp got everything he wanted as far as recruiting budget. But maybe that is smoke and mirrors and things aren't funded properly. But with the right leadership, Clemson proved that things can be turned around

 

[vidaliagamecock]

But it can be done. I look back on Dabo's era at Clemson. Clemson was rather mediocre, and came close to getting fired after losing to USF in whatever bowl they had a Charlotte at the time. And in the midst of losing 5 straight to Spurrier. Georgia was recruiting just as well then as they are now. The state of SC was still small. Doesn't produce enough talent to stock one Power 5 team, much less two. But yet during that era was when they laid the groundwork through recruiting that paid off in their recent success over the last few years. The numbers published about USC's recruiting budget is troubling when compared to our rivals, so maybe that is an issue. But they play that off that not every expense is listed under football like they do at other schools. And Ray swears that Muschamp got everything he wanted as far as recruiting budget. But maybe that is smoke and mirrors and things aren't funded properly. But with the right leadership, Clemson proved that things can be turned around

Well Clemson was never this mediocre. They were middling, we're getting close to hitting bottom, if we haven't already bottomed out. We are doing at the worst possible time in college football history because NIL deals are going to benefit schools with lots of money. We aren't one of those schools.

 

[TAV31]

Money, money, and more money. We can't spend a 1/4 the amount on recruiting compared to the other big name programs and expect big results.

 

[king ward]

I just want to be better than Coastal...

You have a ways to go.

 

[Carolina Doc]

It is futile. We have a particular type of DNA which cannot be overridden. I doubt we could ever attain to a level comparable with even Iowa State.

I think its one of the immutable laws of the universe.

 

[king ward]

I think its one of the laws of the universe.

Which are incontrovertible.

 

[Lakecock1]

Hate to hear you say that King. I certainly understand your apathy but I really believe things will get better. Great success,as we have seen, is attainable.

Attainable maybe. But it has NEVER been sustainable.

 

[SOSUSC]

Most who follow this forum know my feelings about the Beamer hiring. Thought it was done on the cheap in some desperate attempt to hire a hopeful Dabo 2.0. That aside, how do we fix the long range problem. And that issue is recruiting. Since Spurrier hit the gold mine with some SC recruits over a decade ago, USC just cannot recruit with anybody on the schedule that makes a difference. And 95% of the time, talent wins. Now we always have the sunshine pumpers that convince themselves that all of these 3 stars we sign are all diamonds in the rough that will play like 5 stars once in Columbia. We all know that view is naive. So what can be done? Our two biggest rivals in UGA and Clemson seem to select high 4 and 5 stars. Then you throw other SEC schools recruiting at a high level, not to mention UNC which has elevated their recruiting to a high level right in our backyard. Until USC can change this pattern, things aren't going to change very much. Winning 6-7 games will be a special year where you get to go to the low level bowl in Charlotte, or Birmingham. Any ideas?

Not recruiting. We have poor coaching. You give this crew all 5-stars and they will still lose. Our big problem is coaching hires (Ray).

You have to correctly identify the problem to fix it.

 

[Pauliecock]

I was thinking about this post over my second cup of coffee this morning.

Which would you rather have? (and I don't mean you personally, but the board in general) Great coaches and average players (who can be coached up) or average coaches and great players?

Personally, I think a great staff can get more out of average players and make them competent. Average coaches may actually hold good or great players back. There are plenty of examples even in SC football history.

Jim Carlen followed Paul Dietzel and won with his players and used those wins to recruit at a higher level. Joe Morrison followed Richard Bell (1 year - so he really followed Carlen) and won with his players and leveraged those wins to recruit.

Look at Matt Campbell at Iowa State and Mark Stoops at UK as other examples.

An average (or worse) staff can do less with more. Lots of examples of weak coaches and staffs dragging a program down. Sparky Woods and Brad Scott are examples in our own history. Alabama and Tennessee both made poor hires which dragged successful programs down.

Sometimes there are other factors besides coaching and talent, but I think 90% of the time it starts with a top notch staff who, given enough time, will build the program and recruit better players each cycle. In most cases, you see the potential early - sometimes in the first year.

We’re never going to have enough top players to compete with the big boys. So we need great coaches with a system, that can recruit specific individual players that make a difference. Game changers. We need a Spurrier that can recruit like a Dabo. That’s all🤷‍♂️

 

[DeBoer31]

But it can be done. I look back on Dabo's era at Clemson. Clemson was rather mediocre, and came close to getting fired after losing to USF in whatever bowl they had a Charlotte at the time. And in the midst of losing 5 straight to Spurrier. Georgia was recruiting just as well then as they are now. The state of SC was still small. Doesn't produce enough talent to stock one Power 5 team, much less two. But yet during that era was when they laid the groundwork through recruiting that paid off in their recent success over the last few years. The numbers published about USC's recruiting budget is troubling when compared to our rivals, so maybe that is an issue. But they play that off that not every expense is listed under football like they do at other schools. And Ray swears that Muschamp got everything he wanted as far as recruiting budget. But maybe that is smoke and mirrors and things aren't funded properly. But with the right leadership, Clemson proved that things can be turned around

Yeah but Clemson has several things that we don’t have that are crucial to their success IMO.
1- schedule /weaker conf. Foes. The ACC is just good enough to be P5, but their recent run has come during very low points in otherwise traditionally powerful programs (fsu, Miami, va tech, Georgia tech) being as low as could be in the last 30-40 years.
2- IpTay and the church. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not/ not having direct affiliations with the university for the “fundraising” arm of a football program is a huge/smart advantage. IE- an LLC that owns the property , machines and building....owned and run by the same people who own the company so that if trouble arises the two can be split and avoid worse damage. I think that plays into the recruiting budget a good bit- which is an issue we have at USC. I think that’s partly HOW they turned it around to quickly. Also part of a commitment to winning football program that we haven’t gotten in line with as a fanbase .
3-Luck in recruiting. If dumb&ss bobo wants d. Watson.....he goes to Georgia and CU doesn’t have a generational QB show up. Without him and that initial resurgence/success leading to a NC...probably second (back to back) generational Qb (Lawrence) doesn’t show up. Still today, that one position - qb1- makes a huge difference in any football team at any level . They struck gold for 7-8 consecutive years .

 

[FORKCOCK]

But it can be done. I look back on Dabo's era at Clemson. Clemson was rather mediocre, and came close to getting fired after losing to USF in whatever bowl they had a Charlotte at the time. And in the midst of losing 5 straight to Spurrier. Georgia was recruiting just as well then as they are now. The state of SC was still small. Doesn't produce enough talent to stock one Power 5 team, much less two. But yet during that era was when they laid the groundwork through recruiting that paid off in their recent success over the last few years. The numbers published about USC's recruiting budget is troubling when compared to our rivals, so maybe that is an issue. But they play that off that not every expense is listed under football like they do at other schools. And Ray swears that Muschamp got everything he wanted as far as recruiting budget. But maybe that is smoke and mirrors and things aren't funded properly. But with the right leadership, Clemson proved that things can be turned around

I've said this a few times on here.

During our 3 year run with Spurrier where we won 11 games, the HBC bragged about not working hard and made a joke about the fact that Saban did.
At the same time, I heard Ray Tanner, live on 107.5, bragging about finishing ranked #4 in the country with the smallest recruiting budget in the SEC. He was giddy.

I knew right then and there that we were a house of cards.

 

[world famous 3rd base hecklers]

It was very ignorant of people to believe that Shane Beamer had some sort of magic wand to attract a significant number of high quality recruits here, especially based om his time here as Recruiting Coordinator. Recruits coming here back in those days were coming to play for Steve Spurrier due to Spurrier's reputation as a big winner, proven on the field.

How do you turn recruiting around here at SC so as to compete with the "big boys"? First of all, it does not happen overnight. You need someone who is young and energetic as Head Coach who will be a workaholic in recruiting. Beamer checks that box. Secondly, you need a Head Coach who can prove, on the field, that he can win with lesser talent, that is, overachieve. If he can show that coaching ability, that will turn the heads of the more higher profile recruits. Unfortunately, if we are being honest, Beamer has not shown that ability through 8 games. If anything, it appears we are underachieving on the field. We barely beat mid-major teams from the AAC and Sun Belt conferences. And we escaped by the skin of our teeth at home against lowly Vanderbilt.

That's why I wanted someone like Napier or Chadwell. They are young, have recruited well at their levels and have taken lesser talented teams and beaten teams above their level.

Our best hope right now is that Beamer will do a "do over" on his offensive staff, bringing in some proven assistants to help him "overachieve" on game day.

I trust Beamer to get the job done in time. I never said we would win 6 games, hell I was pretty bold saying we would win 3 games this year and surpassed that by 1 game... If anyone with a brain can look at this program over the years can tell we don't have the caliber SEC players on the team, may 5 players total on each side of the ball...

The offensive and offensive line under Muschamp really sucked and you can't fix that over night...
We don't have true WR's who have actual game experience to catch the frecking ball...
We didn't have an QB with actual game experience.. Three games don't make game experience...
Our linebackers and DB's were question marks before the season

All of that would make a piss poor year for any coach with 5-10 years+ struggle to win 4-6 games this year...

I trust Beamer to get the job done because the former Carolina players under Spurrier recommended Beamer to Tanner and said he is a good coach and Beamer recruited them and coached them under Spurrier... Remember, Spurrier isn't a recruiter, he is a game day coach, very rear to find today... Spurrier has said he hated recruiting and rely on other coaches the bring in players..

I trust the former Carolina players under Spurrier to say Beamer is their guy and can get the job done over any of Tanner's picks 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.. If after 4 more years under Beamer and we still suck, then let's talk..

I trusted Beamer to get the job done despite the hatred coming from the minority of Carolina fans who think they are the majority of Carolina fans...

 

[Robhawk29]

Looking at 24/7 the state of South Carolina has 0 players listed in the top 150. When Spurrier made his run it was with a splash of great instate players. SC is not a national team so chances of recruiting top notch talent from out of state is not good. A good staff is needed to achieve this along with an uptick in on field production. Both are lacking right now. Next year will be no better then this year without some changes I think all would agree. Looking at the current recruiting class doesn't give a lot of hope for change. Chances are this is going to be a long rebuild or a 4 year bust.

 

[JGH 35]

I trust Beamer to get the job done in time. I never said we would win 6 games, hell I was pretty bold saying we would win 3 games this year and surpassed that by 1 game... If anyone with a brain can look at this program over the years can tell we don't have the caliber SEC players on the team, may 5 players total on each side of the ball...

The offensive and offensive line under Muschamp really sucked and you can't fix that over night...
We don't have true WR's who have actual game experience to catch the frecking ball...
We didn't have an QB with actual game experience.. Three games don't make game experience...
Our linebackers and DB's were question marks before the season

All of that would make a piss poor year for any coach with 5-10 years+ struggle to win 4-6 games this year...

I trust Beamer to get the job done because the former Carolina players under Spurrier recommended Beamer to Tanner and said he is a good coach and Beamer recruited them and coached them under Spurrier... Remember, Spurrier isn't a recruiter, he is a game day coach, very rear to find today... Spurrier has said he hated recruiting and rely on other coaches the bring in players..

I trust the former Carolina players under Spurrier to say Beamer is their guy and can get the job done over any of Tanner's picks 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.. If after 4 more years under Beamer and we still suck, then let's talk..

I trusted Beamer to get the job done despite the hatred coming from the minority of Carolina fans who think they are the majority of Carolina fans...

So said the blind man. It makes no difference what any player or anyone else said BEFORE the hire. All but the blind have seen with our own eyes what has happened AFTER the hire. This staff simply cannot coach. It is clear a mistake was made. What do you do when you make a mistake? You fix it. You don't wait 4 years to see if it goes away when you already know what the problem is.

 

[DeBoer31]

So said the blind man. It makes no difference what any player or anyone else said BEFORE the hire. All but the blind have seen with our own eyes what has happened AFTER the hire. This staff simply cannot coach. It is clear a mistake was made. What do you do when you make a mistake? You fix it. You don't wait 4 years to see if it goes away when you already know what the problem is.

Ditto

 

[DeBoer31]

Also...tired about hearing we had a good 3 year stretch of players in SC. Yes...we did get several Mr. Footballs and more other good SC players. There are still good SC HS players to get....ESPECIALLY now that Clemson has recruited nationally over statewide the last 5-6 years.
More importantly....SOS owned the state of NC for 2-3 years which helped fill out the rosters we needed to make that run and surround the other SC high profile recruits. We always dip into FL and GA....but getting NC talent was a lynchpin that we have not re-visited since. I have mentioned this many times.....we need to get back and own the "diamond" area around Charlotte.
Go look at Clemson's 81 NC team.....plenty of NC starters on that team, plus reserves.
Lastly...when I started hearing of the "DMV" area that Beamer was goin to target...I knew we were sunk. You are skipping over an entire state of (better) football and more players to choose from, and WAY closer? SMDH. I mean sure...recruit the DMV and get a couple guys...but target NC, SC and GA most heavily.

 

[biting curve]

Not recruiting. We have poor coaching. You give this crew all 5-stars and they will still lose. Our big problem is coaching hires (Ray).

You have to correctly identify the problem to fix it.

I know you love bashing our coaches and bashing Ray, but I disagree. I think these guys are by and large being coached up very well.

We knew coming into this season we were weak and short of talent at LB, WR, QB, and the entire D Backfield.

I’m still not sure why some people thought our OL was going to be good, they’ve been a weak spot for years. I know some KY fans who are now expressing buyers remorse over getting Wolford.

Harris ran for a lot of yards out of the I formation last year, with the benefit of a NFL caliber FB opening holes. This year he had back surgery, caught Covid, hasn’t had Prentice blocking, and hasn’t looked the same.

Bobo slightly improved our offense last year. His first season at Auburn, with better players has delivered a much improved offense.

We’re probably the only team in SEC history that’s pulled a member of the coaching staff and started him at QB. We’re undoubtedly the only team in NCAA history to have a coach step in at QB and lead the team to a final drive victory with 97 seconds left and no time outs.

Yes, the offense has featured some strange calls, but there have also been a lot of good calls that weren’t properly executed. The defense has improved, they’re just gassed and beat up from spending too much time than the field. The WR play has slightly improved.

IMHO this staff has done a pretty good job making the best of a bad situation.

 

[king ward]

I know you love bashing our coaches and bashing Ray, but I disagree. I think these guys are by and large being coached up very well...

I'm not saying you're wrong but I don't know how you can tell.

 

[biting curve]

Also...tired about hearing we had a good 3 year stretch of players in SC. Yes...we did get several Mr. Footballs and more other good SC players. There are still good SC HS players to get....ESPECIALLY now that Clemson has recruited nationally over statewide the last 5-6 years.
More importantly....SOS owned the state of NC for 2-3 years which helped fill out the rosters we needed to make that run and surround the other SC high profile recruits. We always dip into FL and GA....but getting NC talent was a lynchpin that we have not re-visited since. I have mentioned this many times.....we need to get back and own the "diamond" area around Charlotte.
Go look at Clemson's 81 NC team.....plenty of NC starters on that team, plus reserves.
Lastly...when I started hearing of the "DMV" area that Beamer was goin to target...I knew we were sunk. You are skipping over an entire state of (better) football and more players to choose from, and WAY closer? SMDH. I mean sure...recruit the DMV and get a couple guys...but target NC, SC and GA most heavily.

We were lucky in a lot of ways getting that bumper crop of talent. Swearinger decommitted from UT when Fulmer was canned. We had a few guys leaning to Clemson when Bowden was canned. Alshon decommitted from SoCal. Ellington decided to quit basketball. Stephen Davis helped steer Marcus here, when he went to sleep the night before signing day he was leaning to Auburn. We haven’t had a run of instate talent like that since.

The state of NC is certainly important. But if you look at UNC’s commits, they currently have more commits from Virginia than NC.

We need talent....doesn’t matter where it comes from.