So, our football recruiting class is ranked 30th overall and 12th in the SEC.

[Ward Jr]

Yes, winning national titles requires VERY good talent. That has been shown with the average recruiting rankings of winners over the years.

But forget national titles. We're not in that realm, and really won't be. No one here is seriously talking about winning national titles anyway, so that's a moot point.

Think Spurrier at Duke, Chadwell at coastal, meyer at Utah, think any coach that has succeeded at a lower level (lesser talent).

One thing you should stop doing though, is arguing that coaching makes no difference. Is the concept of multiple factors really that far beyond your grasp? Must there really only be ONE thing that impacts success in your mind?

We're in the SEC and the year is 2024. Everything is maximized. You need a good CEO that can bring in the best talent you can and competent staffing just to keep pace. If you don't have that, then you would need to move on. However, there's little to no evidence to suggest that right now for Beamer. It could be on the way though. We have to wait and see.

 

[Ward Jr]

Before you hold those up as average coaches, you should look at their OC's. Maybe you're arguing that head coaching can be mediocre if made up for with good coordinators.

I'd agree to that.

That reminds me of the talk when we hired Beamer. We went cheap on Beamer with the idea he could hire a great staff. I always wondered what those people think now.

We went cheap on Paris too and no one liked the hire at the time. Let things play out first.

 

[Ward Jr]

We cannot outrecruit the top of our conference. NIL is consistently held up as a weakness for our program, so I'm confused why it's suddenly seen as our savior.

Perhaps the difference is, you and I are talking about the reality of the program, and is weaknesses, and others are talking about what they wish would happen on order to make us this magical national title contender suddenly.

Sometimes it's best to hold serve. If teams like UT, UK, UF and Missouri begin struggling again like they did during the Spurrier era, that's 1000% more effective than chasing some alleged dream coach that the rest of the world hasn't found yet.

 

[gamecock stock]

Nobody is saying that player talent is not important in college football. Nor is anyone saying that player talent is not the most important thing in college football. But if there is any sport that coaching can make a difference, it is football.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Nobody is saying that player talent is not important in college football. Nor is anyone saying that player talent is not the most important thing in college football. But if there is any sport that coaching can make a difference, it is football.

Of course, but not enough to win the SEC or NC. Elite players can win both, even with average to bad coach.

 

[Lurker123]

Of course, but not enough to win the SEC or NC. Elite players can win both, even with average to bad coach.

Like i said. Some of us are talking about how to make our team better, and some are in fairy tale land talking about us being a national title contender.

Interestingly, they seem to be the same ones who think losing seasons are okay.

 

[gamecock stock]

Of course, but not enough to win the SEC or NC. Elite players can win both, even with average to bad coach.

Does that not depend on how much player talent you have? Regardless, I've said on multiple occasions that I do not expect us to ever win the national championship nor even the SEC. Would love to be wrong though. Regardless, it's just entertainment. Nothing more.

 

[Ward Jr]

Like i said. Some of us are talking about how to make our team better, and some are in fairy tale land talking about us being a national title contender.

Interestingly, they seem to be the same ones who think losing seasons are okay.

How do you make it better right now Lurker? You haven't provided a shred of evidence of anything.

Last season, we were either beating or within 3 points of all but 3 teams we faced at halftime -- including UGA. Teams just had the extra horses to pull away in the 2nd half.

That's actually evidence of good coaching when you've lost 4 out of 5 of your best guys to a silly money game.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

The only fairy tale here is that the same people that realize we can't get the top talent on the field think we are somehow going to get the top coaching talent on the sidelines.

Same market. They go hand in hand.

 

[Lurker123]

The only fairy tale here is that the same people that realize we can't get the top talent on the field think we are somehow going to get the top coaching talent on the sidelines.

Same market. They go hand in hand.

Perhaps you're just whining about someone else, because I've said the OPPOSITE. And I even repeated it for you. Here you go again.

If I understand the meme queens question though, she's complaining that if we can't afford the best players, we can't expect to afford the best coaches. (I'm sure even if that's what she meant, she'll deny it just because I said it)

But that is a true point. We're not going to go out and buy the best coach. Imo, our best bet is identifying a good young/up and comer/innovative coach and ride their success till they are poached for a bigger program. Our position in the SEC should allow for a good stepping stone for coaches wanting to move up.

But then, I am "settling" on the notion that we are a stepping stone, and not a destination school.


So, serious question. Did you just miss this the multiple times it was posted, are you intentionally making up falsehoods about what I said? I know which one I think is correct.

 

[Ward Jr]

Perhaps you're just whining about someone else, because I've said the OPPOSITE. And I even repeated it for you. Here you go again.

If I understand the meme queens question though, she's complaining that if we can't afford the best players, we can't expect to afford the best coaches. (I'm sure even if that's what she meant, she'll deny it just because I said it)

But that is a true point. We're not going to go out and buy the best coach. Imo, our best bet is identifying a good young/up and comer/innovative coach and ride their success till they are poached for a bigger program. Our position in the SEC should allow for a good stepping stone for coaches wanting to move up.

But then, I am "settling" on the notion that we are a stepping stone, and not a destination school.


So, serious question. Did you just miss this the multiple times it was posted, are you intentionally making up falsehoods about what I said? I know which one I think is correct.

First you have to rule out that Beamer isn't a good coach. 1) How have you ruled that out? and 2) Why should the AD try to chase down a "good young/up and comer/innovative coach" which would cost well over $15mil right now when you haven't ruled out that you don't have a good coach to begin with?

Why can't you back up these assertions with evidence? Otherwise, you're just another Watson character. Watson can't back anything he complains about either. He just knows he hates Shane Beamer.

 

[gamecock stock]

The only fairy tale here is that the same people that realize we can't get the top talent on the field think we are somehow going to get the top coaching talent on the sidelines.

Same market. They go hand in hand.

Here is a fact of sports life: just like not all player talent is equal, not all coaching talent is equal either.

 

[gamecock stock]

We are never going to get the best players nor best coach. All we can do is get the best we can in both parts of the game. If a player is not performing, get him out of the game and replace him. If a coach is not performing, replace him. In today's collegiate game, you get the best player you can afford to get through NIL and the best coach you can afford to pay. It's elementary.

 

[Ward Jr]

Here is a fact of sports life: just like not all player talent is equal, not all coaching talent is equal either.

It's very similar in the SEC or you get exposed. Jimbo wanted his $77 million buyout from A&M and made sure he got it through piss poor coaching. Beamer might get exposed at some point - but that hasn't happened yet.

Do you believe we should spend $15+mil to spin the coaching wheel again right now?

 

[Lurker123]

We are never going to get the best players nor best coach. All we can do is get the best we can in both parts of the game. If a player is not performing, get him out of the game and replace him. If a coach is not performing, replace him. In today's collegiate game, you get the best player you can afford to get through NIL and the best coach you can afford to pay. It's elementary.

That's now both of us that have said we can't afford the best players OR the best coach.

Want to wager on if a certain poster retracts the statement claiming we were saying the opposite?

 

[gamecock stock]

I know we all can agree that we need to do better than

It's very similar in the SEC or you get exposed. Jimbo wanted his $77 million buyout from A&M and made sure he got it through piss poor coaching. Beamer might get exposed at some point - but that hasn't happened yet.

Do you believe we should spend $15+mil to spin the coaching wheel again right now?

No, no, no. I have repeatedly said here and elsewhere that Beamer needs to be given as much time as Muschamp was given. And as I've said here, I like 75% of the new hires he has made. I do think we need to up our game in recruiting, if that's possible (maybe under NIL, it's not possible; not sure about that).

 

[Ward Jr]

That's now both of us that have said we can't afford the best players OR the best coach.

Want to wager on if a certain poster retracts the statement claiming we were saying the opposite?

How can your viewpoint be taken seriously when you don't provide any evidence of anything?

Once again, please provide evidence that Beamer is underperforming.

Also, do you believe we should spend $15+mil to spin the coaching wheel again right now?

 

[Ward Jr]

I know we all can agree that we need to do better than

No, no, no. I have repeatedly said here and elsewhere that Beamer needs to be given as much time as Muschamp was given. And as I've said here, I like 75% of the new hires he has made. I do think we need to up our game in recruiting, if that's possible (maybe under NIL, it's not possible; not sure about that).

I guess I'm confused then at what you and Lurker are aiming for here? What's the point of all of this until the Beamer situation plays out?

 

[gamecock stock]

I guess I'm confused then at what you and Lurker are aiming for here? What's the point of all of this until the Beamer situation plays out?

As I said earlier, my question in the beginning was do you all think that Beamer has the coaching ability to win more than his recruiting results. I can go back to look but I'm pretty certain that we are in the lower half of the SEC each year he has been here. I know we have only one commitment thus far, putting us near or at the bottom. That will hopefully change. The point is I want Beamer to be the one. I don't want to see us make another coaching change.

 

[Ward Jr]

As I said earlier, my question in the beginning was do you all think that Beamer has the coaching ability to win more than his recruiting results. I can go back to look but I'm pretty certain that we are in the lower half of the SEC each year he has been here. I know we have only one commitment thus far, putting us near or at the bottom. That will hopefully change. The point is I want Beamer to be the one. I don't want to see us make another coaching change.

Other than the Spurrier 3-year surge, we've always been in the lower half of the SEC in recruiting. The NIL and portal have only made that more difficult for Beamer.

 

[Lurker123]

As I said earlier, my question in the beginning was do you all think that Beamer has the coaching ability to win more than his recruiting results. I can go back to look but I'm pretty certain that we are in the lower half of the SEC each year he has been here. I know we have only one commitment thus far, putting us near or at the bottom. That will hopefully change. The point is I want Beamer to be the one. I don't want to see us make another coaching change.

And it's a good question. One would think discussion is a good thing...on a message board.

 

[gamecock stock]

Other than the Spurrier 3-year surge, we've always been in the lower half of the SEC in recruiting. The NIL and portal have only made that more difficult for Beamer.

Spurrier did get us 3 Top 10 finishes. Holtz got us one Top 20 and one Top 15 finish.

If I read between the lines I think you are implying not to get my hopes up.

 

[Lurker123]

I know we all can agree that we need to do better than

No, no, no. I have repeatedly said here and elsewhere that Beamer needs to be given as much time as Muschamp was given.

I also find it interesting that you can type this out in plain English, and I can repeatedly type out that Beamer should be given at least this upcoming year, and only be fired if the wheels come off. (Meqning he gets 5)

Yet it seems some people seem to think we want Beamer fired now. I think they see Watson type this, and take a short cut of just lumping anyone they argue with into the same boat.

 

[gamecock stock]

And it's a good question. One would think discussion is a good thing...on a message board.

I'm getting at the age where I don't want anymore coaching changes. Win now. That's why I asked the question to start the thread. I do not recall anyone giving me any encouragement. But I might have missed a response.

 

[Ward Jr]

Spurrier did get us 3 Top 10 finishes. Holtz got us one Top 20 and one Top 15 finish.

If I read between the lines I think you are implying not to get my hopes up.

The Spurrier surge was a combination of his branding, SEC East being in the tank, and not having to deal with the best team money can buy and no-wait portal. It was a perfect storm and all of us would love to reconstruct if we could.

 

[gamecock stock]

I also find it interesting that you can type this out in plain English, and I can repeatedly type out that Beamer should be given at least this upcoming year, and only be fired if the wheels come off. (Meqning he gets 5)

Yet it seems some people seem to think we want Beamer fired now. I think they see Watson type this, and take a short cut of just lumping anyone they argue with into the same boat.

Exactly. And I meant to add ONLY if the wheels fall off this coming season. I don't think they will. In fact, I think we are going to surprise. Maybe I'm just trying to be positive?????

 

[gamecock stock]

The Spurrier surge was a combination of his branding, SEC East being in the tank, and not having to deal with the best team money can buy and no-wait portal. It was a perfect storm and all of us would love to reconstruct if we could.

It could be that we might have to settle for mediocrity. That's sad.

 

[Ward Jr]

"IF the wheels come off, then what we really need to do is find a young, hip up and coming coach because we can't do much about the talent or money thing?"

As if all of the top schools don't try to do this?

And if you believe the talent-to-coaching impact ratio is anything close to 50-50, that is bonkers. It's more like 80-20 at best. Coaching in the SEC is mostly automated and a routine at this point. Either you're an SEC-caliber coach or you get exposed.

So far, Beamer has held serve so we'll have to wait and see versus throwing another $15mil is blind hope.

 

[gamecock stock]

I think they see Watson type this, and take a short cut of just lumping anyone they argue with into the same boat.

Watson is definitely anti-Beamer, for whatever reason.

I was not for the Beamer hire. But I got on board quickly after the hire (hoping he is a "chip off the old block").

I believe constructive criticism is good. It helps prevent complacency. I make mistakes. And I want them pointed out. That's the only way to get better.

 

[Lurker123]

Watson is definitely anti-Beamer, for whatever reason.

I was not for the Beamer hire. But I got on board quickly after the hire (hoping he is a "chip off the old block").

I believe constructive criticism is good. It helps prevent complacency. I make mistakes. And I want them pointed out. That's the only way to get better.

Agree completely. Any good staff does self evaluation. Self scouting.

I freely admit I didn't like the Beamer hire. Other than 8 days a little over a year ago, I haven't seen anything that changes my mind at all. Those 8 days count, a lot. But that goodwill is quickly dwindling once we followed it up with a losing season.

 

[Ward Jr]

Watson is definitely anti-Beamer, for whatever reason.

I was not for the Beamer hire. But I got on board quickly after the hire (hoping he is a "chip off the old block").

I believe constructive criticism is good. It helps prevent complacency. I make mistakes. And I want them pointed out. That's the only way to get better.

Constructive criticism is good when you can actually support your argument.

 

[gamecock stock]

Constructive criticism is good when you can actually support your argument.

I always try to do that. You may not agree with my point of view, but it's honest and I try to be fair. I have praised Beamer when I can (even on this thread if you have read all my posts) and criticized when it's merited. I've never been a "yes man". I just call them as I see them and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[Ward Jr]

I always try to do that. You may not agree with my point of view, but it's honest and I try to be fair. I have praised Beamer when I can (even on this thread if you have read all my posts) and criticized when it's merited. I've never been a "yes man". I just call them as I see them and let the chips fall where they may.

Your initial premise is legit. We obviously don't need to be losing ground in recruiting (beyond these new issues with the NIL/portal.) However, much like a record or schedule, that ranges over time periods so we'll have to wait and see if it becomes a trend.

 

[gamecock stock]

. However, much like a record or schedule, that ranges over time periods so we'll have to wait and see if it becomes a trend.

I'm not going to take the time to go back up this thread to find it, BUT when you first said this, I agreed with you. I'm not unreasonable,

 

[uscwatson21]

But what makes you think that if we can't get the best players, that we can get the hottest coaches? Every team wants a coach that can do more with less talent. What makes you think those same teams won't get those coaches, just like they get those players?

So you don't want to try to be good? You're content with losing?

 

[uscwatson21]

Nope. Gene Chizik. Ed Orgeron.

Both aren't needed. Average coach can get it done with elite talent. Name all the great coaches with average talent that won the National Championship?

It's crazy that you're calling Chizik an average coach but nothing on Beamer's resume shows he's even in the same category as Chizik.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

So you don't want to try to be good? You're content with losing?

No, that's you. I know what it takes. Money. That's why I started giving to the GT. We aren't coaching our way to titles. It's going to happen by putting the best players on the field. If you are content with losing, you can keep refusing to give and hope for a fairy tale.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

It's crazy that you're calling Chizik an average coach but nothing on Beamer's resume shows he's even in the same category as Chizik.

Chizik won the Cam Newton lotto. Which proves my point. There is a reason he won a NC at Auburn and nobody has offered him a head coaching job since.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

SC is ranked 30 because it only has 16 recruits. They rank by top 20, so four "zeros" are being added in. Add four anybodies and the ranking would look much better. I think a 5-star and nine 4-stars is a pretty good haul.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

As I said above, you need to have both coaching and recruiting ability. You have to HOPE that you have BOTH. One alone won't work, unless you are a SEC-type school in a basketball-first conference. We have always recruited at about the same level, TO THIS DAY. And that's something that some fail to acknowledge. Is NIL money important? Today it is. Is Clemson NIL-richer than us? I don't know. Maybe they are. One thing is for sure: they are "killing" it so far this year in recruiting.

The only reason Clemson is #3 in 2025 for now is because it is early and they have a bunch of committed recruits. Not one 5 star, after years of multiple 5 stars. Volume of recruits skews those rankings. They won't be anywhere close to that when all is said and done.

Look at last year. They ended up 11th with 22 recruits. We ended up 22nd with 16 recruits. But when you look at the average score for the players, for them it was 90.64. For us, it was 90.74.

And again, Clemson proves my point. Elite talent all over the field had them consistently in the playoffs and won them national championships. Now that others are purchasing that talent, they are back to reality.