Muschamp has to go

[ShepCock]

Oh, and by the way, there is absolutely no one I would want to hire in the college football landscape to replace Muschamp this year, so Muschamp stays.  This is especially so because of the grace shown to so many for having to deal with COVID.

We pay down his contract another year, fire the DC, hire Derrick Mason as DC (who will also be fired by Vandy after going 0-10), and hope that the top 3 coaches who have been head coaches at other schools (Florida, Vanderbilt and Colorado State) can figure it out.

If the results aren't what you want, I think you move on after the 2021 season and hire someone else regardless.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Oh, and by the way, there is absolutely no one I would want to hire in the college football landscape to replace Muschamp this year, so Muschamp stays.  This is especially so because of the grace shown to so many for having to deal with COVID.

We pay down his contract another year, fire the DC, hire Derrick Mason as DC (who will also be fired by Vandy after going 0-10), and hope that the top 3 coaches who have been head coaches at other schools (Florida, Vanderbilt and Colorado State) can figure it out.

If the results aren't what you want, I think you move on after the 2021 season and hire someone else regardless.

My son works at USC in a staff/admin position that puts him in the know about certain things.  He assures me that barring Muschamp commiting a serious felony he will be back for 2021.

My point about clemson is in this day and age you have to push the envelope in terms of recruiting.   There's no way they're completely above board up there.

 

[Spur's Addiction]

My son works at USC in a staff/admin position that puts him in the know about certain things.  He assures me that barring Muschamp commiting a serious felony he will be back for 2021.

My point about clemson is in this day and age you have to push the envelope in terms of recruiting.   There's no way they're completely above board up there.

That's a given.

 

[gamecock88]

That's a given.

No its not and it makes Gamecocks look silly to keep stating it like its factual.  It may someday be proven true but is far from a given.  They're not a perennial blue blood no matter how much they want to consider themselves as one, yet.  But the recruiting and on the field success has been so good for so long now that they have definitely ruffled the feathers of those who are blue bloods.  Bama, UGA, OSU and So Cal, Michigan,Texas and others.  They've pulled players away from all of them and if something were going on those schools definitely have the pull and channels to the NCAA to get it looked into.  I believe that CU has done it the right way, for a certain type of player that fits their program.   They outwork most everyone and it shows.  Their players stay out of trouble and many come back even with the opportunity to leave early for million$.  As I've stated before, they attack on offense and defense and get young players early playing time.  That's attractive to HS players.  Putting up stats is as well.  Not whatever we are doing on either side right now.

 

[kingofnerf]

No its not and it makes Gamecocks look silly to keep stating it like its factual.  It may someday be proven true but is far from a given.  They're not a perennial blue blood no matter how much they want to consider themselves as one, yet.  But the recruiting and on the field success has been so good for so long now that they have definitely ruffled the feathers of those who are blue bloods.  Bama, UGA, OSU and So Cal, Michigan,Texas and others.  They've pulled players away from all of them and if something were going on those schools definitely have the pull and channels to the NCAA to get it looked into.  I believe that CU has done it the right way, for a certain type of player that fits their program.   They outwork most everyone and it shows.  Their players stay out of trouble and many come back even with the opportunity to leave early for million$.  As I've stated before, they attack on offense and defense and get young players early playing time.  That's attractive to HS players.  Putting up stats is as well.  Not whatever we are doing on either side right now.

Agree.

Both and Dabo and our own Dawn are the rare former players that have become successful HCs.

Both Dabo and Dawn hold players accountable for their mistakes right away on the sidelines after they come out. Muschamp just stands around on the sidelines and gives detailed schematic reasons for our mistakes later in the PG pressers.  The difference between the two coaching styles is the difference between winning and losing on game day.

This is how we lose 3 or 4 games early on.  Then there are the 2 or 3 potential losses in every season that every team runs into that are really just out of their control due to bad match-ups and dumb luck.  Adding those games together results in us being a consistent bottom-tier SEC team right now in terms of wins and losses.

I have watched good football from non-SEC teams all day today.  The losing teams still played better than we do every game the past several years.  I just don't get it anymore. I really don't.

 

[Ledcock]

I'm beginning to believe USC is a dinosaur in the way we do things regarding athletics.  This video clip of a recruit from IMG a couple of years back keeps resonating in my head.  He had just committed to the taters and his reasoning was that the tater's did things the way IMG did things.  What is IMG known as?  A football factory.  I just think they have structured things there for their football players in particular to be able to concentrate on football only and not have to worry about school, at all.  UNC did it with their teams and literally got away with it when caught.  I'm not completely naive enough to know that all schools do it to some degree and it's been going on since the beginning of time.  But somehow the taters have taken it to the next level and it's not just bagmen attracting the big time recruits.  There's a reason blue bloods haven't been beating down Dabo's door.  His game day coaching is not the reason for their success.  Players are having too much success at that school.  Their facilities and resources are not better than ours.  Coaching has a little to do with it, bagmen help, but the other intangibles, I believe, are what sets them apart.    

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I'm beginning to believe USC is a dinosaur in the way we do things regarding athletics.  This video clip of a recruit from IMG a couple of years back keeps resonating in my head.  He had just committed to the taters and his reasoning was that the tater's did things the way IMG did things.  What is IMG known as?  A football factory.  I just think they have structured things there for their football players in particular to be able to concentrate on football only and not have to worry about school, at all.  UNC did it with their teams and literally got away with it when caught.  I'm not completely naive enough to know that all schools do it to some degree and it's been going on since the beginning of time.  But somehow the taters have taken it to the next level and it's not just bagmen attracting the big time recruits.  There's a reason blue bloods haven't been beating down Dabo's door.  His game day coaching is not the reason for their success.  Players are having too much success at that school.  Their facilities and resources are not better than ours.  Coaching has a little to do with it, bagmen help, but the other intangibles, I believe, are what sets them apart.    

Winning cures a lot.  We're not winning.  We're staring right down the barrel of a 2-3 win season.  Prospects for next year aren't much better.

 

[Ledcock]

Winning cures a lot.  We're not winning.  We're staring right down the barrel of a 2-3 win season.  Prospects for next year aren't much better.

Proof that we're not doing something right is not winning many games in year 5 of the Muschamp era.  I just think the taters have gone the semi-pro route and that's the real reason for their success.  Do they have anything close to what Carolina has with the Dodie?  

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Proof that we're not doing something right is not winning many games in year 5 of the Muschamp era.  I just think the taters have gone the semi-pro route and that's the real reason for their success.  Do they have anything close to what Carolina has with the Dodie?  

I'm sure they do.  They have the best of everything up there.  They're serious about winning from the top to the bottom.  They play an exciting brand of football and waltz through a line up of cupcakes in their conference that virtually guarantees them 7-8 wins a year even if they suck.  Dabo is the perfect fit for that fan base.  If he stays there (and I don't think he's stupid enough to leave there for any job) he'll likely go down as one of the greatest college football coaches of all time.  (I just threw up a little bit in my mouth admitting that).

Having said that there's still no reason why we can't have a successful football program at the same time.  I just don't think Muschamp can get us there, I'd love to be wrong.  

 

[Ledcock]

I'm sure they do.  They have the best of everything up there.  They're serious about winning from the top to the bottom.  They play an exciting brand of football and waltz through a line up of cupcakes in their conference that virtually guarantees them 7-8 wins a year even if they suck.  Dabo is the perfect fit for that fan base.  If he stays there (and I don't think he's stupid enough to leave there for any job) he'll likely go down as one of the greatest college football coaches of all time.  (I just threw up a little bit in my mouth admitting that).

Having said that there's still no reason why we can't have a successful football program at the same time.  I just don't think Muschamp can get us there, I'd love to be wrong.  

Sadly, I don't think you'll be wrong.  He's a good ice salesman and that's it.  We need to take advantage of his recruiting, like Mcelwain did at UF, but bring in a good coach that can teach these kids how to be champions.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Sadly, I don't think you'll be wrong.  He's a good ice salesman and that's it.  We need to take advantage of his recruiting, like Mcelwain did at UF, but bring in a good coach that can teach these kids how to be champions.

I agree, look at what the new coach at Arkansas has done with them.  They went into College Station last night and put up 31 points.  I'll be shocked if we match that playing at home.  He obviously has that "it" factor, Muschamp doesn't.

 

[Ledcock]

I agree, look at what the new coach at Arkansas has done with them.  They went into College Station last night and put up 31 points.  I'll be shocked if we match that playing at home.  He obviously has that "it" factor, Muschamp doesn't.

A&M is better than LSU.  Arkansas is looking impressive with new coach but let's let that play out.  Muschamp looked good his first year at Carolina as well.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

A&M is better than LSU.  Arkansas is looking impressive with new coach but let's let that play out.  Muschamp looked good his first year at Carolina as well.

Good point.

 

[Hoganman1]

So many good points here. I'm like everyone else. Why can't we win more games? It has to be coaching. Granted we don't have the talent of Clemson, Alabama, Ohio State or Oklahoma, but we have some excellent athletes. Spurrier was able to win with three and four stars. Once we started winning, we got Lattimore, Jeffrey, Clowney and Gilmore to commit.  I just don't see that happening now.

 

[Texas Rifle]

What coach would be the best choice to take over South Carolina?

 

[Denny Crane]

We are 2-3 and our remaining schedule is:

vs A&M

@ Ole Miss

vs. Missouri

vs UGA

@ UK

The optimist says all but UGA are winnable, but the realist says A&M will be tough, I don't like our D against Ole Miss and I think Kiffen destroys us. Maybe we beat Missou, and I don't like UK to end the season by that point their season may still be worth something, whereas ours will have gone down in flames. 

So yea 3-4 wins. I just dont see how we can point to beating Auburn and saying that's a program building win if we only win 3 or 4 games. Cut ties and move one. And please for the love of god, do not hire as HC anyone on this staff. 

Don’t fool yourself.

 

[Longhaul]

What coach would be the best choice to take over South Carolina?

I think you have to take a hard look at Chadwell, if you want someone that will stay for some time and won't jump ship as soon as they get the next best offer.  So far most of the big names I heard thrown around when we were looking last time have not exactly been successful.  Fuente has not done well at VT in a very weak ACC, Herman has not done crap at TX with all of the resources in the world.  Can't remember who else was thrown out at the time, but these two were names you heard constantly.  

 

[gamecock88]

SDS picked us to beat Ole Miss, Mizzou, and UK.  That would be a big turnaround considering how things look right now.  Not playing any other QB in meaningful snaps hurts us this season and next.  Almost every other coaching staff in the country can see that.  Continuing to play the same base defense is also questionable.  We need to change to fit the personnel we have.

 

[Texas Rifle]

I think you have to take a hard look at Chadwell, if you want someone that will stay for some time and won't jump ship as soon as they get the next best offer.  So far most of the big names I heard thrown around when we were looking last time have not exactly been successful.  Fuente has not done well at VT in a very weak ACC, Herman has not done crap at TX with all of the resources in the world.  Can't remember who else was thrown out at the time, but these two were names you heard constantly.  

I don't know who it is off the top of my head but what about Florida's offensive coordinator?   They have built a good team on that side of the ball.

 

[STS]

I don't know who it is off the top of my head but what about Florida's offensive coordinator?   They have built a good team on that side of the ball.

Personally I want someone who has done more with less...I would love to say that one's success at big recruting school like Florida will translate to success at USC, but we have seen time and time again that not to be the case...CWM could not get it done at UF and I guess surprisingly to Ray Tanner he can not get it done at USC either...time to give someone outside who has a proven track record as a head coach the chance to step up