Here's Some Fun Speculation About our Football Job

[KingWard]

Some on here are too young to remember or know that the number 7 was the scarlet number of Carolina football for years. A lot was made of the fact that Carolina football could not win more than 7 games in a season. We hired a young proven, successful FBS Head Coach (Carlen) who did it twice at Carolina. Shortly after, he was fired for non-football reasons. Richard Bell, who had the reputation of being a strong recruiter was promoted and fired after one season. We then hired another young, proven successful FBS Head Coach, Joe Morrison. He led Carolina to their first Top 25 seasons ever, at the time, to numbers 11 and 15th in the nation. Shortly after, he died of a heart attack. Who knows what would have happened if Carlen and Morrison coached Carolina for decades (that's assuming Morrison would have survived the steroid issue; my guess is he would have since we already cut short a successful Head Coach in Carlen). We then hire 2 Head Coaches who had never been a FBS Head Coach, Woods and Scott. Both came in with reputations of being great recruiters. Both were fired. We then hired proven, successful FBS Head Coaches in Holtz and Spurrier. Lou produced the first Top 25 seasons (11th and 13th) since the Morrison era. Steve produced the first Top 10 teams (doing it 3 times) in Carolina history. The problem with Lou and Steve is that they were not young. They were near the end of their careers. They were not going to lead us for decades. We replaced Spurrier with Muschamp. He too came in with the reputation of being a great recruiter. Well, we all know how that ended.

We hired Shane Beamer, who too came in with the reputation of being a strong recruiter. He is young but, has never produced a successful program prior to coming to Carolina. In fact, he has never been a Head Coach of even a pee wee football team, much less a FBS team. His prior 3 recruiting classes finished 13th, 7th and 10th in the SEC. His current recruiting class is 12th in the now 16-team SEC. I know some will point to NIL as handicapping Beamer's recruiting. But Clemson is not that much better if any than us NIL-wise. Yet, their current recruiting class is ranked 4th in the NATION. If Beamer is going to succeed at Carolina, he will have to do "more with less". He is not getting the job done in recruiting. The numbers bear that out. He is going to have to get the job done from a "coaching" angle. This is the season to do that, his 4th. Drinkwitz and Kiffin produced Top 10 teams at Missouri and Ole Miss respectively in their 4th seasons. Missouri and Ole Miss did not and do not have Top 10 talent. Missouri last year beat Ohio State. Ole Miss last year beat LSU and Penn State. Does anyone believe that Missouri had better talent than Ohio State? Get real. Does anyone believe that Ole Miss had better talent than LSU and Penn State? Get real again. I'm not saying that I expect a Top 10 team produced this season. But, another mediocre season in Year 4 of Beamer's program as happened in Year 3 will be unacceptable. Beamer made new hires after last season because what happened on the field was unacceptable to him too. Hopefully he made good hires.

Great treatise overall. I must aver that, even though Morrison was retained after 1988, we were really terrible against anyone with a pulse that season, and recruiting was not at a level that was going to improve us. I posit that Joe's best days in Columbia were behind him, both personally and professionally.

 

[Rogue Cock]

Great treatise overall. I must aver that, even though Morrison was retained after 1988, we were really terrible against anyone with a pulse that season, and recruiting was not at a level that was going to improve us. I posit that Joe's best days in Columbia were behind him, both personally and professionally.

Have always held that Carlen was the coach that could've been big. Hate what Holderman did to him. Everyone always says that Beamer loves the school more than any other coach we've had, but having had the opportunies to talk to Carlen I'm not so sure. Carlen loved Carolina.

 

[KingWard]

Have always held that Carlen was the coach that could've been big. Hate what Holderman did to him. Everyone always says that Beamer loves the school more than any other coach we've had, but having had the opportunies to talk to Carlen I'm not so sure. Carlen loved Carolina.

We had corrupt leadership in the president's office. Carlen saw it, but the BOT bet on the wrong horse.

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

With the SI article that came out recruiting was dismal.Had Morrison not passed easy I think a coaching change was inevitable.

 

[Rogue Cock]

We had corrupt leadership in the president's office. Carlen saw it, but the BOT bet on the wrong horse.

Yessiree.

 

[gamecock stock]

Yessiree.

Seems like a constant at our beloved university is that the "powers" shoot USC in the foot. I learned a long time ago that intelligence does not always result in good judgment.

 

[mickray]

"Some are educated beyond their intelligence"

 

[KingWard]

Think Lou wanted and expected Skip to succeed him. It was for the best that did not happen. I cannot think of any son of a legendary coach ever succeeding.

Skip had a better head for contemporary offense than Lou. He had done pretty well at Connecticut. What those attainments would have translated into, I don't know.

 

[gamecock stock]

Skip had a better head for contemporary offense than Lou. He had done pretty well at Connecticut. What those attainments would have translated into, I don't know.

I would have gladly taken Skip over Shane. The odds of him succeeding would gave been much higher than Beamer. I think Skip also had success at East Carolina.

 

[Rogue Cock]

Skip had a better head for contemporary offense than Lou. He had done pretty well at Connecticut. What those attainments would have translated into, I don't know.

IIRC, Lou pretty much ended Skip's chance to succeed him when Lou took over the offense and play calling.

 

[KingWard]

IIRC, Lou pretty much ended Skip's chance to succeed him when Lou took over the offense and play calling.

That's right, to no good effect.

 

[ScWildthing61]

If you take out Lou's 0 - 11 first season, his record is 60%. I know all games count but he was handed a flaming pile of dog crap from Fat Brad.

Which why I laugh when our fans and/or fans of other schools try to tell me Holtz was the worst thing to ever happen to our program. They either don't know anything about our program or don't remember Brad Scott "The Benedict Arnold of South Carolina football".

 

[ScWildthing61]

Lou Holtz South Carolina Introductory News Conference:

Fan to Lou: I've been going to Carolina football games since the 1950s. What do you think of that?
Lou: I think you've been seeing a lot of bad football.

That makes me think we need not just proven coaches, but proven coaches with personality.

I honestly believe that neither Urban Meyer or Nick Saban would've succeeded here, they don't have the personality that our job demands.

 

[ScWildthing61]

Lou Holtz South Carolina Introductory News Conference:

Fan to Lou: I've been going to Carolina football games since the 1950s. What do you think of that?
Lou: I think you've been seeing a lot of bad football.

2000(with the reporters after wins over New Mexico State and then #9 Georgia to go to 2-0): Do you(Coach Holtz) think South Carolina should be ranked now?

Lou Holtz: I think we're one of the two best teams in South Carolina.

 

[ScWildthing61]

If Shane has the coaching chops of Frank, that could be the best thing for us. I know....that's a "Duh" statement. But, if you think about it, ,we have never been a recruiting powerhouse. Richard Bell, Sparky Woods, Brad Scott and Will Muschamp were all reputedly strong recruiters. All got fired. Carlen, Morrison, Holtz and Spurrier made their reputations from a "coaching" standpoint. Yes, it was not always great under the later 4. But I believe if you compare the tenures of the later 4 to the other 4, we had way more success under Carlen, Morrison, Holtz and Spurrier.

Our successful teams were close enough to the "powerhouse recruiting schools" in talent i.e. Georgia, Tennessee, Florida, Alabama. The two Outback Bowl teams under Holtz it was running the ball out of the spread formation(the spread was mostly a passing offense back then) and on defense it was a 3-3-5 blitzing scheme similar to what Mississippi State was also running at that time(I think they were a 4-2-5 defense though) that drove these "more talented" schools nuts. The only team we didn't match up well with in those two years was Florida, but look who was coaching them. Then under Spurrier(the Florida coach who kicked our butts those two years) we're running zone-read running game on offense with opposing defenses trying to stop that while being cognizant Spurrier's got something up his sleeve. And Ellis Johnson got us running a 4-2-5 that was causing problems for opposing offenses. Carolina football success= close enough in talent+ different style of play+ excellent coaching in the style of football we play.

 

[atl-cock]

Sorry, but I don't understand what your point is.

More opportunities to win 8+ games a season.

 

[mickray]

Good luck...