I'd almost assume you're arguing that coaching has no impact, if I didn't know better.
Kansas beat Oklahoma
- Thread starter bayrooster
- Start date
I'd almost assume you're arguing that coaching has no impact, if I didn't know better.
It certainly has an impact. Just not nearly as much as most believe. And the significance of their role in the equation of success has been further diminished with the advent of the NIL.
You are stating the quiet parts out loud. The Athletic Department would far prefer fans target the coaching as the primary issue. This way they can continue to sell the hope of tomorrow. Most of our football coaches have served as handsomely paid pinatas.
That’s exactly what happens in FCS, ans G5 FBS. The budgets may be smaller but college football in D1 is cut throat at all levels. Places like Coastal, Charleston Southern, Citadel have angry fan bases and fire their coaches also.
That was the #1 thing I think made Chadwell so appealing. ALL of his success was done in this state, at NGU, CSU and CCU, since 2003. 2 decades building relationships with SC HS coaches. Every 5 and 4 star that he would have recruited played for coaches that he already knew when recruiting their 1 and 2 stars to Coastal and CSU. No relationship building needed
There's more much more room for coaches to operate and make an impact. That's the difference.
As it stands today, the best players at the top are vying for teams who can make the playoffs and pay them well. And unfortunately, the teams who typically have a shot at the playoff are also the ones that can pay them well. It's squashing any form of parity which once existed.
One example -- Many of our best players in history have come from GA - typically around the Atlanta area. In many cases, it came down to us vs. UGA. Our selling point was that the player who have a chance to play and showcase their skills immediately versus a wait behind UGA's multi-layer talent wall. With the NIL, these players are obviously going to choose UGA now if they are offering more than we can.
Chadwell isn't really having to deal with the money game. He also wasn't recruiting against Clemson, UGA, UNC, FSU etc.
Last edited:
That is at least an opinion worthy of defending. As long as it's applied evenly, win or lose.
And if it's the case, we did well to hire on the cheap with Beamer, a coach that wouldn't have gotten a sniff at any other school.
But we F'd up giving him any sort of raise, as we are now overpaying for something of minimal impact.
That money, millions of dollars, could be going somewhere it actually makes a difference. Like women's basketball.
Me personally, I'd rather hire a coach that I feel can make a positive impact. They do exist.
I disagree. FCS and G5 recruiting now is about how can you develop them into a viable Power 5 transfer to get NIL, like we landed Juice Wells and FSU landed superstar Jared Vearse from Albany State. So id argue its even harder. At Coastal or CSU they compete with App State, Furman, etc for recruits. But also compete to keep their best players from going to FBS. Its almost easier being USC or UGA bc theres only a handful of teams to truly compete with. In FCS and G5 you’re having to compete with every major program who may want your FCS All American QB, or just your great DB to immediately fill a void. At Coastal he had Grayson McCall at QB, Sun Belt Player of the Year, he entered the portal and had lots of teams from ACC, Big12, SEC, etc interested and he had to recruit against them to keep him, while also competing with App State and FCS teams to fill his roster. Id say it’s actually harder.
Last edited:
Yeah - we're going to have to agree to disagree here in a big way. The best recruits in D1 are now getting courted from all angles by donors and schools with a lot to throw at them as well as those who don't. Who knows if Chadwell could do well in the SEC? But to argue that it's tougher to build a quality team at that level is competition is quite a stretch.
Yeah we can agree to disagree. I played FCS and follow it very closely, and the NIL/portal has wrecked FCS stability. Those coaches obviously have their traditional recruiting to do. But now, if they get a guy who is All-Anything in FCS, they have 50-60 FBS programs trying to poach them. Winning is hard everywhere, and in FCS its with smaller budgets and fewer resources. The portal/NIL has basically made FCS the equivalent of AAA minor league baseball with guys constantly moving up and down, its very hard to create a stable winning environment.
Id argue that at USC, if we land a freshman All American, realistically how many programs do we truly have to fight off in the portal wars? A dozen or so that could offer him something better. An FCS All American however is MUCH more difficult to keep because theres 100+ FBS teams who would take them and usually would be a step up.
Furman is currently #3 in the nation in FCS and I imagine their staff is fighting their tails off trying to prevent portals to FBS bc they have some great FBS caliber guys
Isn't your base argument in this case that Chadwell would come in and recruit better classes than Beamer?
I have no doubt they have a few players from those schools who eventually get bought and move up.
However, they don't have the issue of having to compete with big money schools when recruiting the vast majority of their team.
Also, big schools first shopping stop is going to be the best teams who can't compete from a money standpoint. Not only are they going to be players who have played against similar talent and speed, but they also are kids who could potentially compete against the same schools who are interested in purchases their services.
Chadwell's 2024 competition in recruiting starts around #70 in ranked App State. Liberty is currently #92. They are in a completely different pool of talent. Coaching is far more impactful when you move out of the Top 30 - much less out of the Top 70 in recruiting classes.
It's far easier to go from a 90th ranked class to a 70th ranked class than go from a 18th ranked class to a #10 ranked class. Everything bottlenecks as you move closer to the top. Look at the classes Spurrier was bringing in at the peak just to break us into the Top 10. The stars had to completely align -- and this was before you could buy recruits.
Spurrier mentioned that teams like USC were going to have it rough once the NIL kicked in. It's a rich get richer scheme to further ensure that the big money market teams are in the spotlight all year.
Last edited:
If we moved out of the SEC and could maintain bringing in Top 20 recruiting classes like we have, chances are we would be ranked in the Top 25 on a regular basis.
The issue is that we have 8 or 9 SEC teams (on average) who out recruit us year in and out. When you play those same SEC teams each year who out recruit you -- your record is not going to be ideal, and it's certainly not going to gel with your recruiting rank.
The issue is that we have 8 or 9 SEC teams (on average) who out recruit us year in and out. When you play those same SEC teams each year who out recruit you -- your record is not going to be ideal, and it's certainly not going to gel with your recruiting rank.
Recruit better? No not necessarily. Probably not actually. Beamer has recruited well. Chadwell would get far more out of the roster and most likely outperform or beat teams with more talent. He did that in D2, FCS and FBS for 18 years so no reason to think that would change.
The SEC obviously has the best talent in America, top to bottom. In my opinion the talent difference between the top 2 SEC teams and the 9th or 10 SEC teams is far SMALLER than the top 2 vs 9/10 in any other conference. So a coach who maximizes production will succeed even more at a mid or lower tier SEC team. Its probably why so many different SEC teams have won NCs or finished in the top 5, compared to Big10 or Big12 where its 1-2 teams that are vastly more talented than the rest of their conference.
Look how closely success is tied to recruiting (and now NIL money) when you get to the top of D1. If you do a 5-year recruiting average, its really easy to see. Allegedly, the best coaches in the country are also at the top of D1.
This isn't the case with teams downstream with teams outside of the Top 50 in recruiting. There's more slack in the system for good coaching to shine.
WE are at a disadvantage due to NIL money. That's hard to deny. That is why I believe that it's imperative for South Carolina to have a coach who can "do more with less". Steve Spurrier and Joe Morrison were not consistently the strongest of recruiters. They did recruit some "blue-chippers". But overall, no one can say, with a straight face that they were elite recruiters. There were VERY good "game day coaches". They were the two best Head Coaches we have ever had here. Hopefully, Shane Beamer will prove to be such a Head Coach.
A coach that can "do more with less"? That just another way of saying a very good, top level coach.
Who doesn't want that? Seems like everyone would want that, including programs that are a lot more attractive than us.
Who doesn't want that? Seems like everyone would want that, including programs that are a lot more attractive than us.
We already have a coach that has proven he can do more with less. Did it for two years. No need to dump him in an emotional tantrum at the first sign of adversity. Give him time, support, and resources to prove he can build something. Not going to happen without a dump truck of NIL money, no matter who the coach is.
Never said we should dump him. As I've said in the past, he will get into the 2025 season. I agree that he did do "more with less" in his first two years. I have also said that in the past. But this year, he has underachieved. As I ended, I hope he turns out to be a "Joe Morrison/Steve Spurrier" type of coach (who were not the strongest of recruiters but were successful here) when it's all said and done. Why? Because we are at a disadvantage when it comes to NIL. Hopefully, Beamer's first two seasons here turn out to be the norm, whereas this season is an aberration.
Last edited:
Interesting that the coach who is so "proven" is 2-6 right now.
He certainly did do it for two games, but those victories are fading from memory fast, and seem more and more the outlier to anyone looking objectively. (Admittedly, this eliminates overly emotional hissy fit throwing posters)
And if it's not going to happen without the dump truck of NIL, there was no need to give e Beamer a raise at all. We are stuck where we are and a highschool volleyball coach can do as well.
Of course, we'd have to ignore other coaches out there who actually "do more with less".
He certainly did do it for two games, but those victories are fading from memory fast, and seem more and more the outlier to anyone looking objectively. (Admittedly, this eliminates overly emotional hissy fit throwing posters)
And if it's not going to happen without the dump truck of NIL, there was no need to give e Beamer a raise at all. We are stuck where we are and a highschool volleyball coach can do as well.
Of course, we'd have to ignore other coaches out there who actually "do more with less".
Beamer can't be a Spurrier type coach though. He's "ceo", and cheerleader. Spurrier was the opposite, surviving on his coaching, not in spite of it.
If Beamer wants to be long term, he needs to spend some of that "SEC cash" on coordinators. Or just hope we continue to lower expectations and murmur "NIL....NIL" as the losses add up.
Morrison and Spurrier were from different eras. Spurrier saw what was going to happen to college football from a mile away as the NIL approached.
As far as game day coaching, it mostly goes like this -- Coaches receive a computer printout of the plays the opposing team typically runs by %, the success rate of those plays, and key players who make those plays successful. They also receive the best defensive alignments to stop those plays. And vice-versa for the offense. The advent of AI software will make this even far more refined.
I agree we should continue to pursue position coach excellence for player development purposes. What you don't want to do is keeping throwing $12-15+mil at buyouts hoping to hit the head coaching wheel of coaching fortune. The role of head coach is not that important outside of recruiting and getting a quality staff in place.
Well in hindsight, A&M and Kentucky lost their QBs and anyone being honest knows it crippled those teams. And its also OBVIOUS now that Michigan stole signals from Tennessee and Clemson then shared them with us. Again, anyone following that story knows its true.
So yes we did more with less, but that deserves some asterisks.
It's probably hard to get up for Jax State when you're 2-6. It's not like playing Furman at the beginning of a new season. I think they'll turn it on in the 2nd half though. We'll see.
Spot on, my friend.
You probably don't remember him. But there was a coach at Washington, Don James (I'm showing my age). He was not a great recruiter. He was a CEO-type coach who hired Coordinators who could do the X's and O's. That's what we need. Tanner needs to break out the wallet.
We lack a quality staff. Tanner needs to open the wallet. There's so much deadwood on the staff, you could not start a fire with a truckload of gasoline.
No, you need actual better Xs and Os. Top coordinators don't come to teams with average or below average talent. They want to win big and take the step up to the big money as a head coach.
Similar threads
