Evaluating Muschamp tenure at the helm so far

[Mr Ed]

It's only a shame if you love muschamp more than the football team. He's the same failure he was at Florida and for exactly the same reasons. 

Spork I respect your opinion.  You and I want the same things.  The only difference is I think it takes 6 years to build a program and expect to see ups and downs along the way.  Your time frame is 4 years and expect year after year improvement without excuse.  

I hate switching coaches every 4 years.  To me it’s counter productive and I believe schools that do so do it to their own detriment.  If we hire another coach I think we will be in the exact same spot 4 years from now.  The percentages are not in our favor if you look at new coach success rates.  Most will be fired by year 5.  It’s a revolving door and at some point programs need to get smart and realize that philosophy doesn’t work.  

 

[Cockyandproud]

Spork I respect your opinion.  You and I want the same things.  The only difference is I think it takes 6 years to build a program and expect to see ups and downs along the way.  Your time frame is 4 years and expect year after year improvement without excuse.  

I hate switching coaches every 4 years.  To me it’s counter productive and I believe schools that do so do it to their own detriment.  If we hire another coach I think we will be in the exact same spot 4 years from now.  The percentages are not in our favor if you look at new coach success rates.  Most will be fired by year 5.  It’s a revolving door and at some point programs need to get smart and realize that philosophy doesn’t work.  

I agree about switching coaches.  It is counter productive, and sets a program back again.  However, I don't know how much further we can be set back at this point.  I don't remember who on the board said it, but I think the  best option is to keep Muschamp, and the board get rid of both coordinators, and hire really good, proven coordinators, and pay them very well, at least 2 million each.  Let Muschamp know that he is to leave the offense alone, and let the coordinators do their jobs, and he will be a CEO coach like Dabo.

 

[TKE226]

Excluding Charleston southern we average 19.4 points per game this year

 

[Denny Crane]

Weve already had a head coach drive our car into the canyon, and get carried off the field on the players shoulders the next year as a Clemson coach.  So there’s that.

 

[Homebrewcock]

I disagree with the 4 year argument about switching coaches - in our scenario.  I don't think 4 years is enough, but Muschamp failed at UF and is failing here.  Why do we need to wait?  I see very little player development / improvement, I see an offense that absolutely sucks - same problem at UF and a head coach afraid to make changes.  I respect CWM, but he is not a head coach.  Why are we expecting something different at SC when at UF he could not win?  Repeating history makes no sense to me. 

I think we have some very good players but they hit their ceiling way too early.  The development of our team is pretty bad.  I see talent on this team, but the coaching is not pushing them to the next level.  Look at Trevor Lawrence at Tater Tech.  Early in the year he was throwing too many INTs but in the last 3-4 games, no picks. That is coaching (and some talent for sure), but I rarely see effective coaching from this staff.  It's always coach them up, make some plays, blah, blah, blah.  Spurrier said that same stuff but he won.  Lip service does not win games.  I am OK with giving CWM 1 more year if he hires new assistant coaches.  If he keeps the same staff, fire him because our coaching staff is not very good.

Very frustrating to watch this team.  I can't remember having an offense this inept in a long time.  A&M is a decent team, but talent wise, I think we matched up with them pretty well, yet we lost 30-6.  That's coaching and putting the right personal in the right position to win.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I agree about TA&M...they are no better than we are.  They just have an actual coaching staff.

 

[JimG]

This is someone else's comments that I think are on target: 

We've averaged a top 20 recruiting class the last 5 years yet Muschamp still can't field a top 25 team.


Hell, we haven't even finished the regular season and we have no chance for a bowl game. We lost to App State!!

At Florida they finished 2nd, 12th, 3rd, 4th, and 8th in recruiting from 2010-2014 and Muschamp lost to Georgia Southern and went 11-13 his last two seasons.

Recruiting isn't the problem. He has wasted whatever talent he has recruited at Carolina and Florida.

 

[JimG]

I disagree with the 4 year argument about switching coaches - in our scenario.  I don't think 4 years is enough...

It's more than enough to reveal incompetence.

If you want more of the same, retain. 

 

[Mr Ed]

Weve already had a head coach drive our car into the canyon, and get carried off the field on the players shoulders the next year as a Clemson coach.  So there’s that.

Haha.  Yeah wouldn’t that suck.  We fire Muschamp, Brent Venables finally takes a head coaching job and Clemson hires Muschamp as their defensive coordinator.    

 

[Schark]

Haha.  Yeah wouldn’t that suck.  We fire Muschamp, Brent Venables finally takes a head coaching job and Clemson hires Muschamp as their defensive coordinator.    

And we would be sending him buyout checks every year while he was up there... 

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[JimG]

Haha.  Yeah wouldn’t that suck.  We fire Muschamp, Brent Venables finally takes a head coaching job and Clemson hires Muschamp as their defensive coordinator.    

...and whoever comes in behind Muschamp starts winning immediately with Muschamp's recruits. Then some will be able to say...."see, we should have given him more time". 

UF redux. 

 

[Schark]

...and whoever comes in behind Muschamp starts winning immediately with Muschamp's recruits. Then some will be able to say...."see, we should have given him more time". 

UF redux. 

That is indeed one potential outcome.

Another scenario could be looking at the Clemson model where they went with stability, made a significant investment in an audit of what was working and not working, then made an even greater investment in correcting their deficiencies. That model worked out better than UF's model so far. 

 

[Homebrewcock]

It's more than enough to reveal incompetence.

If you want more of the same, retain. 

I agree.  What I was trying to convey is normally I would give a coach more than 4 years, but with CWM, he has already proven to be a failure as HC at UF.  I think we have seen enough of what he can or can't do.  I don't need another year of him, but I think we will get it. 

 

[JimG]

I agree.  What I was trying to convey is normally I would give a coach more than 4 years, but with CWM, he has already proven to be a failure as HC at UF.  I think we have seen enough of what he can or can't do.  I don't need another year of him, but I think we will get it. 

I expect him to be fired in a few weeks. 

 

[Sporkgod50]

Spork I respect your opinion.  You and I want the same things.  The only difference is I think it takes 6 years to build a program and expect to see ups and downs along the way.  Your time frame is 4 years and expect year after year improvement without excuse.  

I hate switching coaches every 4 years.  To me it’s counter productive and I believe schools that do so do it to their own detriment.  If we hire another coach I think we will be in the exact same spot 4 years from now.  The percentages are not in our favor if you look at new coach success rates.  Most will be fired by year 5.  It’s a revolving door and at some point programs need to get smart and realize that philosophy doesn’t work.  

I also respect your opinions and if like to give champ 5 years but the problems with the team right now have less to do with personnel and more to do with coaching. It's a fine line between letting the coach go too early creating the revolving door that you fear versus letting the coach go too late and having recruiting plummet outing the next coach behind the eight ball creating a different type of bad cycle. 

 

[Sporkgod50]

Haha.  Yeah wouldn’t that suck.  We fire Muschamp, Brent Venables finally takes a head coaching job and Clemson hires Muschamp as their defensive coordinator.    

He wasn't very good in that position at Auburn. I would expect Clemson to be able to get a better d coordinator tbh

 

[gAmkok]

I expect him to be fired in a few weeks. 

He won't get canned unless Ray goes first. Their wagons are hitched together. And unless a replacement AD is already lined up and ready to step in immediately, having the interim AD fire Muschamp doesn't make sense. Who would hire the new FB coach? And what coach would come in knowing they get a new boss in a few weeks or months? If the answer is an interim coach for 2020 to let the new AD get his bearings and conduct a proper search, I'd rather just keep WM for another year and see what happens.

 

[AikenGameFan]

Bryan McClendon will continue to call plays for the Gamecocks in their final game of the season against Clemson, but Will Muschamp was non-committal in saying if McClendon would be back next season.

As the Gamecocks continue to be anemic offensively, questions about McClendon’s future as the team’s offensive coordinator are starting to pop up on social media and Muschamp was asked directly about it Sunday on his weekly teleconference if McClendon will return for the 2020 season. [COLOR= rgb(29, 41, 51)]“We’ll evaluate that when the season’s over with like we always do,”[/COLOR] he said.

....This is from Rivals site

If Champ doesn't fire B-Mac, then Champ need to go. But it is good to see maybe Champ is considering making a change.

 

[AikenGameFan]

The article also says this...

McClendon hasn’t met with the media since mid-August, a few weeks before the season started, and won’t until spring practice under Muschamp’s media rules.

He won’t appear on his regularly-scheduled, annual Carolina Calls appearance this week either, with Muschamp filling in for him after Muschamp’s schedule cleared up, he said.

Sounds like Champ decided to save the guy some harsh questions. To bad.

 

[Schark]

The article also says this...

McClendon hasn’t met with the media since mid-August, a few weeks before the season started, and won’t until spring practice under Muschamp’s media rules.

He won’t appear on his regularly-scheduled, annual Carolina Calls appearance this week either, with Muschamp filling in for him after Muschamp’s schedule cleared up, he said.

Sounds like Champ decided to save the guy some harsh questions. To bad.

What purpose would it serve to subject McClendon to a public ass beating on a call in show prior to the Clemson game?