ADVERTISEMENT

No ceiling for the Gamecocks

And this is where your argument once again falls apart.

Your entire argument relies on the assumption that Beamer is a competent coach who had unfortunate circumstances. Your argument falls apart quite quickly when faced with any scrutiny.
 
Your entire argument relies on the assumption that Beamer is a competent coach who had unfortunate circumstances. Your argument falls apart quite quickly when faced with any scrutiny.

He's two wins from our best start ever to spite the NIL. You really need a reboot Watson. Save this rhetorical chatter for later. Maybe it then will be more applicable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cockn'fyr
Right now the option is stop whining and accept your situation for what it is. We're an ACC team serving as bait for teams who have traditionally been superior and recently also got a big boost for further divide from the plebs via a screwy system.
Funny thing is I remember when we joined the SEC and how all that money was gonna put us light years ahead of Clemson. lol.
 
He's two wins from our best start ever to spite the NIL. You really need a reboot Watson. Save this rhetorical chatter for later. Maybe it then will be more applicable.

I applaud the troll job to stick with this argument even though you know you're really saying, "he's two wins worse than Muschamp."
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Lurker123
Funny thing is I remember when we joined the SEC and how all that money was gonna put us light years ahead of Clemson. lol.

Have you seen Clemson's yearly donations versus ours? We aren't even covering 10% of what they receive.

The problem is that it never should have been pure money game to begin with.

Yes, there were schools breaking the rules as always. But this situation is totally different.

Players should received some compensation in addition to their scholarships and housing but this is insane.

College is optional and they don't owe anyone anything. It's their league.

If the high school hotdogs want to try their hand in the NFL or some combine, let them have it.
 
I applaud the troll job to stick with this argument even though you know you're really saying, "he's two wins worse than Muschamp.

So the coach with the most wins ever after 3 seasons (Muschamp) was still a bum? His issue was Year 4 and 5.

You and sideways laugh Lurker need to find a new team based on that brain dead logic.
 
So the coach with the most wins ever after 3 seasons (Muschamp) was still a bum? His issue was Year 4 and 5.

You and sideways laugh Lurker need to find a new team based on that brain dead logic.

His issue was year 4 or 5? No, he issue was he couldn't hire assistant coaches.

Ultimately, you are what you are as a coach. You keep making excuses for them. Do you think Beamer is a better coach than Muschamp?
 
His issue was year 4 or 5? No, he issue was he couldn't hire assistant coaches.

Ultimately, you are what you are as a coach. You keep making excuses for them. Do you think Beamer is a better coach than Muschamp?

Have no idea what you're talking. You've moving into the delusional zone. He was the winningest coach of all time after 3 seasons regardless of how he got there.

Do you remember how many ups and downs Spurrier had until Season 6? Winning ugly was a big part of the equation at USC and he talked about it all the time.
 
Have no idea what you're talking. You've moving into the delusional zone. He was the winningest coach of all time after 3 seasons regardless of how he got there.

Was he a good coach? Or does this stat not reflect his actual tenure as coach.
Do you remember how many ups and downs Spurrier had until Season 6? Winning ugly was a big part of the equation at USC and he talked about it all the time.

Spurrier was a proven head coach and was worth the time. Do you think Muschamp would have been as good as Spurrier if given another 3-4 years?
 
Was he a good coach? Or does this stat not reflect his actual tenure as coach.


Spurrier was a proven head coach and was worth the time. Do you think Muschamp would have been as good as Spurrier if given another 3-4 years?

I'm not sure what you're even arguing for at this point? It doesn't make sense.

You and I both know they aren't going to fire Beamer in the near future based on over 100 years of history.

I've stated many times that I'm totally neutral and will just let reality play out.

What's the point you are trying to get across at this juncture?
 
I'm not sure what you're even arguing for at this point? It doesn't make sense.

You and I both know they aren't going to fire Beamer in the near future based on over 100 years of history.

I've stated many times that I'm totally neutral and will just let reality play out.

What's the point you are trying to get across at this juncture?
The guy just loves to troll. His material rarely changes much at all. He ropes people in and spins the conversation in circles to his delight.
 
You and I both know they aren't going to fire Beamer in the near future based on over 100 years of history. '

That's why you're being disingenous. You realize Beamer should be fired but you're just arguing he won't be fired. Even though he deserves to be fired if he goes 5-7 or worse this year.
 
The guy just loves to troll. His material rarely changes much at all. He ropes people in and spins the conversation in circles to his delight.

I never spin the conversation. I always point out what you guys are actually arguing then you realize how dumb it sounds and then don't want to own it.
 
I never spin the conversation. I always point out what you guys are actually arguing then you realize how dumb it sounds and then don't want to own it.
Then you're not doing a very good job. Your current convo with Ward had nothing to do with whether Beamer should be fired this season based on any performance. That's your spin cycle.
 
Then you're not doing a very good job. Your current convo with Ward had nothing to do with whether Beamer should be fired this season based on any performance. That's your spin cycle.

Our entire conversation is whether or not Beamer is a good coach and deserves more time...
 
Beamer is an upgrade from the previous version but he’s fighting an uphill battle against the more powerful football programs in the league.
 
Please ahow me. I see him arguing that Beamer isn't going anywhere because there is no cause for the AD to do a thing based on performance and history.

Are you legitimately trying to split hairs between ability and performance?

Are you saying that Ward agrees that Beamer lacks the ability to be a good coach?
 
Are you legitimately trying to split hairs between ability and performance?

Are you saying that Ward agrees that Beamer lacks the ability to be a good coach?
Ability is subjective. Performance is not. I think this is where I exit. Best of luck finding a new dance partner.
 
Ability is subjective. Performance is not. I think this is where I exit. Best of luck finding a new dance partner.

Because you've walked yourself into a corner where you're trying to argue the quality in performance between 5-7/6-6 isn't subjective...
 
Beamer is an upgrade from the previous version but he’s fighting an uphill battle against the more powerful football programs in the league.
He has less wins in his first 3 years. I guess I don't know the meaning of the word upgrade. Unless we really aren't serious about winning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscwatson21
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT