The season is already tanked. They are talking about getting ready for next year. The problem, of course, is that if Sellers is unsure of the portal then benching him would make up his mind.
Taneyhill on Sellers
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
The assumption that Sellers is already gone is part of the reason why I say just throwing their.last two games is a bad idea. You bench him and there is no turning back. If he leaves, then it's Woods and probably Duckworth in Spring practice. I see Noland transferring down to a lower level D-1. If you can't beat out Doty for the No. 2 spot out of the portal, I don't like your prospects as a P4 QB. If Sellers stays, let's see what it looks like with another OC. Best guy plays. The fact that Woods wasn't named #2 bothers me too. Are we trying to redshirt him? What are we doing?
I am just not ready to throw away Sellers because he had a season to forget under an OC that did a poor job.
100%. I'll pull for him regardless of his decision. There is no doubt that it's in our best interest for him to stay.
The bowl game is part of the season.
I wasn't suggesting we lay down and let Clemson roll us. I said start Sellers against Clemson. But as far as Coastal, there's really no way we're going to lose to Coastal no matter who the QB is. We will be able to run the ball against Coastal. If we can't beat Coastal with a 100% effort, no matter who the QB is....we need to just shut the whole program down.
Yes, this is one of those discussions where there's two answers.
One, what's best for us as a program. And two, what's best for the player. They dont always coincide.
If you are saying we can't lose to Coastal, you have not been a SC fan for long. Throwing any QB out there and losing to Coastal would be the most Gamecock thing ever. I have been in those stands when we lost to The Citadel twice and to Appalachian State. Our program is not strong enough to pull stuff like that. I wouldn't mind seeing Woods myself but not at the expense of blowing a game and embarrassing myself. If you want to see Beamer fired, have at it. I am not ready to face total embarrassment with a Coastal loss.
Last edited:
No doubt. That said, if we bring in the right OC, it could be a win-win.
If he's "risk adverse" as some are saying this year, do we NEED him to beat Coastal? Let him look at it as one giant slide a yard short of a first down. Besides, if he’s going to get hurt it's just our luck it would be against Coastal. Then we probably would be going against Clemson with Doty. And if he gets hurt?
Ok....I'll put it to you another way... If Woods can't beat Coastal with the other starters around him, there is NO WAY he will be able to beat pretty much any team next year. I maintain that it's best to find that out now, when this season is over and honestly, the Coastal game is meaningless. It's not an SEC game, wouldn't even matter if it was...it's a glorified scrimmage. - The following week at Clemson is a whole other story. Even though the season is over, that game is not meaningless. Give Sellers a week off to heal up before that game. He was a bit gimpy at times against A&M.
Either way, we're arguing a dead horse. It's not going to happen anyway. Beamer won't bench Sellers and isn't smart enough to sell it to the fans any other way than that if he did go with Woods for Coastal. So, it's all a mute point, really. What would not surprise me at all is to see Sellers play the whole game against Coastal, us win like 45-10 ish ....with the game never really in question and Woods never sees the field. That would be about the most Beamer thing ever. God forbid Sellers gets seriously hurt at the end of the 4th in garbage time... THAT would be the most Gamecock thing ever.
We have plenty of time to figure out if Woods can play. However, Coastal is a 6-4 ballclub with 5 Sun Belt wins and one over App. State. They can definitely beat us if we go in there playing around. This is where the players that hang in there with us be professional and get a victory. These two games are important for the coaching staff to see who the guys that will mail it in are. Those are the guys you have a meeting with about transferring. Go in there with your starters. Kick Coastal's a** for a half and then put Woods out there in the 3rd Quarter. That's the dream scenario as a coach to me.
Last edited:
The only way that compares is if Coastal was an SEC opponent. They are not so it doesn't even make sense.The Browns will be Browns.
Why do you assume the board would melt down? I hope he goes elsewhere and improves his draft stock. He was the biggest offensive piece to last season’s success. That was rewarded by poor coaching. He should try his luck elsewhere. May not work out but it won’t here.
if it can work somewhere else, why not here? At least there is some good film out there that says he can be a player. It looks some want to throw that away for something totally unproven. There are several reason for Sellers to stay. We have hung in there with him though good and bad. His brother is here and has made a few promising plays as a freshman. You would have experience with the receivers despite going into your 3rd OC. On the Sellers side, do you really want to try the NFL after a season like this? I see many reasons for Sellers to hang in there and come back with a better season here.
That's assuming we want him back. He's not even in the Top 50 of any QB stats nationally. If we cozy up to him, we're obligated to play him regardless of how he performs. Why would we paint ourselves into that corner & doom ourselves just because of one player?
IMO, we need a fresh start.
Anybody else Beamer is playing little brother more lately as a ploy to get LaNorris to stay next year? Not that Jayden isn’t playing ok, just a thought.
As a fan I would like for him to stay. From his perspective I think he should leave. He has no reason to think a serviceable OC will be brought in and who knows what the OL will be.
Nothing is certain but he’s getting short on time and he can’t wait for Beamer to figure out what so far he hasn’t been able to figure out regarding offensive assistants. So he should go elsewhere for his sake.
Last edited:
His accuracy has always been an issue. He's best when he's out of the pocket. The only in-pocket throws I've see him make are the long go routes to the sideline. Roll the tape on that. How many times has he thrown high over the middle from a clean pocket.
His two best throws Saturday were the bomb to Jacobs from the pocket and the throw to Harbor on the scramble near the end of the 1st half (before the stupid trooper thing). Other than that, last year he was just more escapable last year than this year. He held the ball just as long, but somehow found more running room. The first half Saturday we saw him run some zone-read, which seemed like the first dang time all season. There was more of that last year, but it seems Shula shelved it because he's "pro-style".
If a QB cannot make the plays with his arm when needed, then it affects the whole team.
He's not some generational talent that we need to coddle.
Steve would have benched Sellers.
Shula didn't shelve it. Opposing DCs adjusted their scheme to stop Sellers from taking off and scrambling for big yards. P4 DCs are not stupid and they watched the tape on Sellers from last season and saw how he scrambled for big yards. They all put a spy, sometimes two spies, on him and took away that scramble threat and made him actually be a QB, and Sellers isn't much of an actual QB.
The issue isn't the pro style offense. The issue is Sellers, the lack of a legitimate SEC RB and the OL. I watched the UGA/Texas game Saturday night and Bobo runs a pro style offense. The difference is, Stockton is a legitimate QB who can make the reads, make the throws and can also run the ball when he needs or wants to. Opposing DCs can't dedicate a LB or safety to spying on Stockton because that takes away a defender against the rest of the UGA offense, which is pretty damn good. A LB or safety standing around watching Stockton opens up the middle of the field for TE passes and takes away a player in run defense on outside runs. The UGA OL can actually protect the QB and open some holes for some real RBs. UGA runs a ton of RPO out of a pro set and are successful with it. Texas also runs a pro style offense but Arch Manning is a real QB who can read a defense, go through progressions and make throws.
Most college teams run a pro style offense. Changing the offense to try and accommodate a weak QB is a fools errand. The QB will still be weak.
Yes, the announcers noted in the Ole Miss game that there were two spies on Sellers, showing they weren't afraid of anyone else on our offense.
There are some people around here who refuse to believe their eyes when it comes to Sellers. It is the same situation with Harbor, he is not a good WR. He is fast once he gets going but he isn't scaring any DCs, yet lots of people are convinced he is going to turn into some sort of superstar WR. I don't know why those people aren't defending the OL and demanding that the coaches change the offense to play more to the OL strengths. The same concept applies.
The offense is definitely a one trick pony.
I don't disagree with you about Sellers not being as polished or accomplished as a QB as Stockton. Arch? Meh. Shula did shelve the zone-read and other QB run plays. It's really hard to compare Sellers to anyone who plays in a real offense. The mark of a good OC, though, is the ability to work with the pieces he has. Plenty of OCs do more with less. Under Beamer we have done less with more.
He also would have coached him up. He's a Garcia without the off-field issues.
We painted ourselves into a corner and were obligated to play Sellers regarless of his performance. Rookie mistake by the staff/hindsight is 20/20.
If Shane survives as a HC, this is one painful lesson he needs to learn (don't let hype + NIL force you down a path that you cannot exit from).
Going forward, Shane has to get some Spurrier in his blood and bench people when needed.
IMO, Beamer needs to wash his hands of Sellers and find a decent QB.
Just for clarity, I wasn't suggesting "benching" Sellers as in "he did bad things and he's going to be benched."
I just meant, Shane sells it to Sellers as "We're not going to get you hurt against Coastal and you've been beaten up all season. This is not a "Benching" - you will start the Clemson game for sure.....but this week, you're going to rest." - Type thing.