Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You don’t need 4 years to beat UNC and Mizz. That is all.We aren't a blueblood so get over it
Its Gamecock football...you have already lived thru the glory years...why do you think we are any better than kentucky,vandy,mizzou...etc?You don’t need 4 years to beat UNC and Mizz. That is all.
You’re hiring a guy to take you to that level not just stay in mediocrity. If by year 4 your not bearing a first year rebuild then you’re not doing a good job.Its Gamecock football...you have already lived thru the glory years...why do you think we are any better than kentucky,vandy,mizzou...etc?
What level for gcock football are u talkin about?You’re hiring a guy to take you to that level not just stay in mediocrity. If by year 4 your not bearing a first year rebuild then you’re not doing a good job.
We aren't a blueblood so get over it
He has beaten Mizzou, UT, and Vandy 3 if the 4 years he has been here.I fully understand the argument that a coach needs time to get his players in and it's more difficult for a program that isn't a traditional blue blood, but one thing that has to be seen is growth and improvement throughout each year and from season to season. The inconsistency has plagued this team throughout the Muschamp era.
Gotta be able to beat the UK's, Vandy's, Mizzous, and Tenn (in their current state) by year four to be able to measure progress.
Game is looking good so far tonight after the debacle against Mizzou.
He has beaten Mizzou, UT, and Vandy 3 if the 4 years he has been here.
so are those other schools, damnYou’re hiring a guy to take you to that level not just stay in mediocrity. If by year 4 your not bearing a first year rebuild then you’re not doing a good job.
Don't worry....he has at least another year, more likely two. His contract will be rolled over at the end of the year, as all coaches contracts are.We aren't a blueblood so get over it
Kentucky rebuilding? In what year of Stoops tenure? And many of the fans calling for Muschamp's head were wanting to hire Stoops.Knew this would happen. We beat a terrible Kentucky team, who's clearly rebuilding, and now here comes the sunshine pumpers to proclaim we're fine. Let's keep Muschump for as long as possible. He'll turn it around, just you wait and see. No thanks. This win didn't change anything for me.
Kentucky rebuilding? In what year of Stoops tenure? And many of the fans calling for Muschamp's head were wanting to hire Stoops.
You can't make this crap up.
Oh, I know to what he was referring.I’m certain he is referring to rebuilding after losing their starting QB and phenom Benny Snell Jr. from a 10 win season where they beat us pretty soundly and beat Penn State in the Citrus Bowl. You’re comparing apples and oranges. The Kentucky team we beat tonight is a shell of last year’s team. On the positive side, it feels nice to finally end that streak.
I fully understand the argument that a coach needs time to get his players in and it's more difficult for a program that isn't a traditional blue blood, but one thing that has to be seen is growth and improvement throughout each year and from season to season. The inconsistency has plagued this team throughout the Muschamp era.
Gotta be able to beat the UK's, Vandy's, Mizzous, and Tenn (in their current state) by year four to be able to measure progress.
Game is looking good so far tonight after the debacle against Mizzou.
He's not being let go this year period...he has probably two more years before any decisions are made.These threads make me laugh.... "Need to give Muschamp time."
He has time. He has this season. Tanner wasn't going to fire him midseason. That was never even a thought. So what is point of that comment? He had 8 more games of "time" before tonight. Tonight was a positive. Now he has 7 more games of "time."
So how do you know we need to give him "more time" yet?? I am not saying it is likely but what if team loses every game by 25+ points the rest of the year? Every single game. We certainly wouldn't need more time. Or how about if the team wins every game of the year including Clemson?? Again, not likely, but if he did it would answer the question of "more time."
Again, he has 7 more games of "time" at this point. Up to him what he does with it.
Then at the end of the year, you count up the wins and losses and see where things stand.
He's not being let go this year period...he has probably two more years before any decisions are made.
Yes I do.You don't know that.. You simply don't. Now I will say tonight was a big step in the right direction, but you simply can't say definitely he isn't being let go. I remember people saying Kurt Roper would never get let go the year he was fired. Yes, people said it just like you. "no way he gets let go."
I just don't believe in talking in absolutes less than halfway through the season. I can PROMISE you with absolutely no doubt in my mind that if this team ended up 2-10 (crazier things have happened), he would not be back. If you think he would, well then let me just say you are wrong.
On the other hand, I can promise you that if somehow he wins out and goes 9-3, he would get a contract extension and a raise.
Both of those, while unlikely, are still possibilities. So you can't say definitely what is going to happen. You just can't.
Even using the word "period" doesn't make it more true.
Yes I do.
The first won't happen. And, yes, I do understand how this works. Name another coach? Arky and Vandy's current coaches. Regardless, that is not why.So if this team goes 2-10 and he loses the locker room, the players, and half the recruiting class, he will be brought back???
No, he will not. You are making me laugh though. Some of you don't understand how this works.
Name me a single SEC coach (or power 5) that has been at a program at least five years that has gone 2-10 and been retained for the next season. A single one.
The first won't happen. And, yes, I do understand how this works. Name another coach? Arky and Vandy's current coaches. Regardless, that is not why.
Look at Pruitt's contract at UT.
Name me a single SEC coach (or power 5) that has been at a program at least three years that has gone 2-10 and been retained for the next season. A single one.
You keep changing the conditions. Tell you what, I'll bet you that Muschamp will be here at least through next year. How much do you want to lose?Tell me when Arkansas and Vandys coaches were at those schools at least three years and only won 2 games. I'm waiting.
Pruitt is in his second year. If he goes 2-10 next year, he isn't coming back. If you think that, you are delusional. You are so making me laugh though. This is good stuff. Keep it going.
You keep changing the conditions. Tell you what, I'll bet you that Muschamp will be here at least through next year. How much do you want to lose?
I hope UT is dumb enough to fire Pruitt, not because I think he's a good coach....but because it will completely destroy their program.
No. First you said add up the wins and losses mentioning nothing about all remaining games being losses. In your second post on the subject, you added the 2 win criteria....and I pointed out a current coach who was retained after only having 2 wins. Then you added the "after 3 years" criteria to the equation. So, yes, you have consistently changed the scenario.How am I changing the conditions? Explain that to me. I started by saying Muschamp, who is in his 4th year, wouldn't be back if they went 2-10. You said he would. You are wrong. I was talking specifically about Muschamps "condition" which is that he has been her 4 years. That is important.
To PROVE MY POINT, I asked you to tell me of a SINGLE other scenario where a coach that has been at the school 3 years has been retained after a 2-10 record. You can't come up with one. Because it doesn't exist.
As far your "bet." I never said Muschamp wouldn't be here. In fact, it is "much more likely than not" that he will be here. That is stupid bet for me then.
But I like to use my brain and not talk in absolutes. You said something stupid when you said he would be back no matter what. That is stupid. He could have a situation like Pellini had. He could go 2-10 like I already said. There are plenty of reasons that he wouldn't be back.
You keep changing the conditions. Tell you what, I'll bet you that Muschamp will be here at least through next year. How much do you want to lose?
I hope UT is dumb enough to fire Pruitt, not because I think he's a good coach....but because it will completely destroy their program.
No. First you said add up the wins and losses mentioning nothing about all remaining games being losses. In your second post on the subject, you added the 2 win criteria....and I pointed out a current coach who was retained after only having 2 wins. Then you added the "after 3 years" criteria to the equation. So, yes, you have consistently changed the scenario.
It is simple, absent some "morals clause" violation, Muschamp will be the coach here throughout next year....and more than likely, the year after that. That I do know.
Won't happen....but based on what I do know, I wouldn't bet against him being back. Look at Morris' and Pruitt's contract term....and note that most coaches we interviewed believed we were a more difficult rebuild than either Arky or UT. You may get an understanding of the term that was being requested of us. Term in this case being one particular....the number of years being demanded.So let me try to take a step back and ask this question again. Seriously. I am really interested in how you could think this.
So first lets get a few housekeeping things out of the way.
1. I am not saying SC will go 2-10. I think it is unlikely.
2. I am only questioning your remark that he would be back "no matter what." That is what I am questioning.
So let me ask you again. You really think that if SC lost every single game the rest of the year including App state and Vanderbilt that Muschamp would be back??? So stop and think to the future and think about what that would feel like at the end of the year if SC had lost the last 8 games of the season and was 2-10. You really think he would be back?
Open whose wallet?He does need to make some moves or be forced to at seasons end though...needs to open the wallet for an innovative offensive mind for oc
Won't happen....but based on what I do know, I wouldn't bet against him being back. Look at Morris' and Pruitt's contract term....and note that most coaches we interviewed believed we were a more difficult rebuild than either Arky or UT. You may get an understanding of the term that was being requested of us. Term in this case being one particular....the number of years being demanded.
Muschamp was always going to have at least 5 years to turn the program around...and more than likely 6. Others were demanding more.....a minimum of 7 is what I understood was the lowest.
Yes, I was a supporter of Roper....and didn't think he was the primary problem. I was fine with Muschamp changing him however. I also think TRob is doing better, but wouldn't be surprised to see Durkin on staff next year as a Co-DC with play-calling responsibilities.Rogue cock, what is so funny about this debate is you were one of the people who absolutely promised that Kurt Roper would be back too when I said he wouldn't 4 games into the year. I absolutely remember that.
You just don't learn do you?