and if it wasn't for Spurrier's great run we'd have an all time losing record. Tell me again why you think that'll ever change?
We have the 84th worst record in college football after playing for 114 years
- Thread starter rockingamecock
- Start date
Fold the program then. I think the benefits of having a football program are outweighed by the costs incurred in putting a crappy product on the field. Why try anymore?
84th worst? That doesn't sound bad. do you mean 84th best? Are there 83 teams worse, or 83 teams better?
That’s why I like the Beamer hire. Instead of doing the same old thing, USC mixed it up a bit and hired in a forward-thinking manner toward a growing trend for success (culture/CEO head coach vs. X’s and O’s coach).
I agree. I'm to the point where I'm just hoping for a bowl game. I've stopped hoping for SEC championships, so why not try something new.
It wont chane until we exclude the politically driven BOT. They are the biggest hurdle. Its how Clemson overcame being the second tier program. They dont allow political powers in the athletic program. Even Spurrier said it was pathetic that a state run institutions hierachy relied so heavily on what a bunch of politicians had to say. FIRE THE BOT!!!!
The problem is the school is I'm a government city with a lot of politician BOT members. While Clemson is a state supported school the politicians have stayed out of CU more than USC. The 2 schools operate much differently.
Other flagship universities like Bama, UGA, UT, Arkansas, and Kentucky don't have the capital of their state in the backyard
Other flagship universities like Bama, UGA, UT, Arkansas, and Kentucky don't have the capital of their state in the backyard
Nebraska hasn't historically been hurt by that and neither has Texas, FSU, LSU or Arizona State.
We will change from a losing culture to a winning culture if fans stop accepting mediocre results. (I’m talking to you sUnShInE pUmPeRs) Florida, LSU fans go scorched earth if leadership isn’t meeting expectations. And, BAM, changes are made. We raise expectations and hold coaches, athletic directors accountable. I have no problem complaining about coaches or directors doing a lousy job and worry about hurting feelings. These are people who have no allegiance to the Gamecocks if they aren’t collecting a paycheck. And long after they are gone I’ll still be here.
Last edited:
I have no idea how their BOTS are structured, but there is no doubt politicians are far too involved with USC. No one would argue that. Also, we have seen recently that the wrong people get involved at 3 of those 4.
This begs the question - what comes first? A winning product wherein you can go scorched earth on coaches and expect any new coaches to build instantly on guaranteed tradition, fanbase, donors, facilities, etc. Or do you need to fire everyone quickly in hopes of finding that coach that will therein build all the things that traditional powers have?
A loser that keeps firing coaches without a chance to build tradition seems like it will always be a loser hoping to catch lightning in a bottle. Is that the only way, or can you be smart about things and try and create a winner?
