Yeah, I'm still angry too! I'm not angry with Spurrier, nor Tanner, but with the head coach of our football team. I didn't want Muschamp for a coach when he was hired, but his (and the staff's) hard work at recruiting won me over. As this season progressed, I began to suspect that the man really doesn't have a concrete plan for coaching or improvement other than recruiting. I've seen lots of very talented teams in multiple sports, at multiple levels, who could not win against lesser talent with superior coaching (see Clemson v. Spurrier, 2009-2013). From the beginning of the season, Muschamp would make a definitive statement about team personnel, the offensive or defensive schemes, stand by it for a week, then do a complete 180 on the issue. That did not inspire confidence with me. As the season wound down, we watched that horror show with UF, WCU, and then the Clemson massacre. I really got a chuckle out of how some of these eternal optimists kept reassuring us that the WCU game was just an anomaly, and not a predictor of things to come. What really led me to fall off the Muschamp wagon was the Clemson game. Some of our players later said that they were ready to play against Clemson. Really? Did it look like that to you? It falls on the head coach to have his team prepared for WCU or Clemson. Muschamp didn't - and they weren't! After watching the game twice, I was disgusted by his idea of putting Orth in the game with 3 or 4 minutes left to just hand off and run out the clock. I guess he was shooting for respectibility ... how did that work out? I'm not impressed with Muschamp anymore, but I'll continue to hope our Gamecocks improve and win next year. If they don't, we'll suffer with this regime for a couple more years, then get a real teaching coaching staff to complement these wonderful athletes that the present staff is so intent on recruiting. Guess I'll be good either way, just with less passion for the football program, as it now stands.