ADVERTISEMENT

The Problem w/ Ray

castlesl

Member
Aug 4, 2006
916
1,083
93
Ray is looking for safe hires, he isn’t willing to chase a guy who has more upside, but downside as well.

He hired Muschamp not b/c he thought he could necessarily win big, but b/c he thought he could stabilize the program, there wasn’t likely to be a big down side with him. It was a high floor/ low ceiling hire.

He could have hired Riley, but Riley would have been a high ceiling hire but also more risky. He couldn’t see beyond the inexperience in that hire to get a coordinator that was well thought of and has maintained and really improved on an already great program.

Same with Chadwell. The risk for it going wrong is bigger in Ray’s mind even though the ceiling is probably higher as well. Ray would rather go with a safer hire than Chadwell.

Chadwell is good and will likely be winning big at a P5 school by the time we are looking for the next coach. I could see VT hiring him.
 
Last edited:
Ray is looking for safe hires, he isn’t willing to chase a guy who has more upside, but downside as well.

He hired Muschamp not b/c he thought he could necessarily win big, but b/c he thought he could stabilize the program, there wasn’t likely to be a big down side with him. It was a high floor/ low ceiling hire.

He could have hired Riley, but Riley would have been a high ceiling hire but also more risky. He couldn’t see beyond the inexperience in that hire to get a coordinator that was well thought of and has maintained and really improved on an already great program.

Same with Chadwell. The risk for it going wrong is bigger in Ray’s mind even though the ceiling is probably higher as well. Ray would rather go with a safer hire than Chadwell.

Chadwell is good and will likely be winning big at a P5 school by the time we are looking for the next coach. I could see VT hiring him.
Do most believe Tanner made the hire? This doesn’t seem like a safe hire as Beamer doesn’t have HC experience. I’m not saying he will not be good or great, but it’s just a risk since he’s unproven. I ask if Tanner made the hire because his criteria at the beginning of the search was experienced head coach with an offensive mindset (or something along those lines). I don’t know if the president or board determined that USC did not want to pay for the experienced offensive minded head coach after eating the remainder of Muschamp and assistants contracts.
 
Ray is looking for safe hires, he isn’t willing to chase a guy who has more upside, but downside as well.

He hired Muschamp not b/c he thought he could necessarily win big, but b/c he thought he could stabilize the program, there wasn’t likely to be a big down side with him. It was a high floor/ low ceiling hire.

He could have hired Riley, but Riley would have been a high ceiling hire but also more risky. He couldn’t see beyond the inexperience in that hire to get a coordinator that was well thought of and has maintained and really improved on an already great program.

Same with Chadwell. The risk for it going wrong is bigger in Ray’s mind even though the ceiling is probably higher as well. Ray would rather go with a safer hire than Chadwell.

Chadwell is good and will likely be winning big at a P5 school by the time we are looking for the next coach. I could see VT hiring him.
All of his talk about hiring a proven head coach with an offensive background, and Ray the Rube does neither! Instead, just like last time, Tanner was conned by a coach’s agent into hiring a head coach that nobody, and I mean nobody, was really interested in hiring as a head coach. Ray took the easy or as you say, the safe way out. Mark my words, Napier and Chadwell will be successful head coaches at other power 5 schools, like Auburn and Tenn. Ray Tanner is in WAY over his head as AD, and super agent Jimmy Sexton has pulled the wool over Ray‘s eyes AGAIN. Incredible.
 
This is a riskier hire than Muschamp. But Tanner believes he is the safe hire because of how much support he has among former players and even donors and sports writers. If he fails Tanner doesn't believe he will take much heat because his defense will be, "but that's who everyone wanted."

Visionary ADs see beyond the tug of nostalgia and the popular choice. They reach out and instead of hiring someone who is the most popular or who reminds everyone of better days, and hires the guy with the guy who exudes winning - lives and breaths it.

That person was Jamey Chadwell.

It is possible that Shane Beamer has those same qualities. Only time will tell if the job is too big for him. The first 100 days is crucial.
 
Do most believe Tanner made the hire? This doesn’t seem like a safe hire as Beamer doesn’t have HC experience. I’m not saying he will not be good or great, but it’s just a risk since he’s unproven. I ask if Tanner made the hire because his criteria at the beginning of the search was experienced head coach with an offensive mindset (or something along those lines). I don’t know if the president or board determined that USC did not want to pay for the experienced offensive minded head coach after eating the remainder of Muschamp and assistants contracts.
When two of the others involved in this decision are above Tanner....only a fool would believe Tanner made this decision.

Also, we didn't pass on Riley....he withdrew before we could offer.
 
When two of the others involved in this decision are above Tanner....only a fool would believe Tanner made this decision.

Also, we didn't pass on Riley....he withdrew before we could offer.
I have to say, while I don't always agree with rogue, he was right about this hire, at least in general.

Tanner does not make this hire without approval of the BOT, prez, and boosters.

I faulted Ray for Muschamp. But if that was his fault, how do we let him do it again?

The culture problem is not just within the football program, it's the political nature that runs the school. The people that run our school and make the ultimate decisions don't have the school's best interest in mind. They are wasting money and they don't care. It's that simple.

Until that changes we'll never be the best we can be.
 
This is a riskier hire than Muschamp. But Tanner believes he is the safe hire because of how much support he has among former players and even donors and sports writers. If he fails Tanner doesn't believe he will take much heat because his defense will be, "but that's who everyone wanted."

Visionary ADs see beyond the tug of nostalgia and the popular choice. They reach out and instead of hiring someone who is the most popular or who reminds everyone of better days, and hires the guy with the guy who exudes winning - lives and breaths it.

That person was Jamey Chadwell.

It is possible that Shane Beamer has those same qualities. Only time will tell if the job is too big for him. The first 100 days is crucial.
Amen to Chadwell. The upside with him is much greater.
 
Guys, in truth this was the time for Ray to make any type of hire he wanted. He is 62. Beamer will be given a honeymoon because the program was a mess and because the media around Columbia seems to have a man crush. Or either they are so controlled by the USC PR machine that they won't makes waves, until at least after the 23 season. And even then he will be given the benefit of the doubt because he won't have all his own players. So Ray can ride this hire to retirement without consequence. I assume Beamer is a nice guy as that, and his last name, seem to be the most enticing part of his resume. But truthfully, he was also the cheapest hire. And I think that made all the difference
 
  • Like
Reactions: FightinRooster
This hire was driven by donors, former players, BOT. And the desire for Tanner and Caslen to present the thought that our school is a very desirable place to be. In other words, not another Tennessee dominoes falling coaching search.

We can stand mediocrity if it comes to that; we can't stand being treated like we are mediocre. Its bad marketing.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT