Started By
Message
I'm okay with the team right now.
Posted on 9/25/16 at 11:44 am
Posted on 9/25/16 at 11:44 am
Think about something guys. 1999 we went 0-11 with one of the top defenses in the country, but literally NO offense. 6.5ppg is not offense, it's a FG kicker. The whole offense was injury riddled and full of talented freshman over their heads and not ready.
2000, we went 8-4, one of the biggest turnarounds in CFB history. The talented freshman became more experienced sophomores, began to gel together, get healthy, and we got pretty good. Beat the hell out of Ohio State in the bowl game.
2001: 9-3, top 15 ranking at the end of the year, with only losses being to the top 5 teams. Offense was really good, defense stayed great under Charlie strong.
The similarities are totally all there. This year for us is the equivalent of 1999, without the extreme embarrassment. A highly recruited QB, a dangerous running back that's injured, an offensive line that can't block and can't gel plus being chock full of injuries. It's a year for everyone to grow and mature and build for the future. I don't like losing, but I would rather go 4-8 now and be much better later, then I would go 7-5 every year for the future. So just sit back guys, calm down, and let the team grow, support them, and watch the growth.
2000, we went 8-4, one of the biggest turnarounds in CFB history. The talented freshman became more experienced sophomores, began to gel together, get healthy, and we got pretty good. Beat the hell out of Ohio State in the bowl game.
2001: 9-3, top 15 ranking at the end of the year, with only losses being to the top 5 teams. Offense was really good, defense stayed great under Charlie strong.
The similarities are totally all there. This year for us is the equivalent of 1999, without the extreme embarrassment. A highly recruited QB, a dangerous running back that's injured, an offensive line that can't block and can't gel plus being chock full of injuries. It's a year for everyone to grow and mature and build for the future. I don't like losing, but I would rather go 4-8 now and be much better later, then I would go 7-5 every year for the future. So just sit back guys, calm down, and let the team grow, support them, and watch the growth.
1
Posted on 9/25/16 at 11:48 am to chawk195
Let me get what you're smoking. Maybe Spurrier spoiled me or some shite? But we should be able to win at least 8 games a year playing in the east and I don't see that happening anytime soon. I'm afraid Muschamp will set this program back 10 years. 10 fricking years of losing seasons staring me in the fricking face. Idk how you older fans did it before Holtz and Spurrier. I just can't.
Posted on 9/25/16 at 12:01 pm to Gcockboi
I'm not old. Lol. I'm 21, I just do my research. During the 1999 season I was 4. Although I did go to the SC/Clemson game that year. My dad is a Clemson fan... I have to hear him talk shite every weekend now. Used to he didn't say nothing. Sigh.
Posted on 9/25/16 at 12:03 pm to Gcockboi
And if you go back and look at our history... as much as I dont want to say it, we've always been middle of the pack or worse. Spurrier did spoil all of us.
I'm not a bandwagon, I've liked Carolina as far back as I can remember.
I'm not a bandwagon, I've liked Carolina as far back as I can remember.
Posted on 9/25/16 at 12:12 pm to Gcockboi
quote:
But we should be able to win at least 8 games a year playing in the east and I don't see that happening anytime soon. I'm afraid Muschamp will set this program back 10 years.
Muschamp is going to set us back 10 years? Hello? Did you not see last year. We were 3-9 with a home loss to the Citadel and Muschamp was nowhere around here. Muschamp isn't the one that set us back. Spurrier and his lazy recruiting and tolerance of shitty coaches set us back. Muschamp may not be the one to get us out of this funk, but he isn't the cause.
Posted on 9/25/16 at 1:52 pm to chawk195
I vividly remember the Brad Scott years and what got us in trouble heading into the '98 season - which carried over into the '99 season and became what Holtz had to overcome.
We had never lost to Vandy until that '98 season and I remember vividly riding down in the elevator at Vandy with Mike McGee and steam was coming out of his eyes ... no, make that blood steam.
3 pt loss .... I think the next year Holtz lost to them by 1 point. But that '99 season, Holtz's first year, he did a masterful job of coaching. I was sitting with him in a room at a table one day, just he and I, and we were talking about something random I remembered from his days at NC State and I told him I thought that '99 year might have been his best job of coaching ever ... because he really coached that team. Didn't win a game, but he had nothing much to work with ... yet those kids competed - our offense was just atrocious, you're right.
We could play a little D but inevitably, against Arkansas especially, we just wore out.
This team, this year, is not nearly as lacking as that '99 team was ... but I do agree, there are some similarities, mainly along the OLine. We've got better QBs now, more depth at certain positions, we're still very young.
There is no doubt that Spurrier left us in the lurch - but there is no excuse for this OLine problem we are having.
What got Brad Scott fired was his shitty OLines. He had fire years and our OLines never improved.
Shawn Elliott has been coaching OLines for six years and our OLine is a mess right now ... with his recruits.
What got Brad Scott fired was his refusal to make needed changes on his staff ... infighting and back biting was the norm on his staff. Eason and Reeves in particular hated each other. Wally Burnham was a LB coach who couldn't recruit and couldn't run a defense.
That's basically where Spurrier's downfall began as well ... he was too loyal to several of his coaches.
Holtz had some issues there as well.
Muschamp cannot afford to make the same mistake.
Here's the problem.
Elliott is entrenched here with the high school coaches and Muschamp is going to be reluctant to screw with that. Elliott has actually recruited fairly well at the position, he's just failed to develop the talent he brings in. So Muschamp has to make a decision. Either get Elliott up to SEC standards coaching that OLine, and he is sure being paid enough to expect that, or take the risk of firing him and pissing off some high school coaches and then have Elliott go somewhere else and come back here sniping players out of SC.
Elliott was the one coach on the last staff that caused some internal back biting issues ... he was resented for some of his sneaky back stabbing moves by the other coaches. If he is allowed to stay-on here, he will do the same thing with this staff and this staff will begin to bail on Muschamp.
So everything has to be weighed and a decision is going to have to be made eventually.
How might Muschamp get Elliott to raise his coaching game? Send him to camps, send him to schools, work with him one on one. Hire an analyst with some serious OLine experience to work with Elliott - a trusted sage out there somewhere.
Somethings got to give.
We had never lost to Vandy until that '98 season and I remember vividly riding down in the elevator at Vandy with Mike McGee and steam was coming out of his eyes ... no, make that blood steam.
3 pt loss .... I think the next year Holtz lost to them by 1 point. But that '99 season, Holtz's first year, he did a masterful job of coaching. I was sitting with him in a room at a table one day, just he and I, and we were talking about something random I remembered from his days at NC State and I told him I thought that '99 year might have been his best job of coaching ever ... because he really coached that team. Didn't win a game, but he had nothing much to work with ... yet those kids competed - our offense was just atrocious, you're right.
We could play a little D but inevitably, against Arkansas especially, we just wore out.
This team, this year, is not nearly as lacking as that '99 team was ... but I do agree, there are some similarities, mainly along the OLine. We've got better QBs now, more depth at certain positions, we're still very young.
There is no doubt that Spurrier left us in the lurch - but there is no excuse for this OLine problem we are having.
What got Brad Scott fired was his shitty OLines. He had fire years and our OLines never improved.
Shawn Elliott has been coaching OLines for six years and our OLine is a mess right now ... with his recruits.
What got Brad Scott fired was his refusal to make needed changes on his staff ... infighting and back biting was the norm on his staff. Eason and Reeves in particular hated each other. Wally Burnham was a LB coach who couldn't recruit and couldn't run a defense.
That's basically where Spurrier's downfall began as well ... he was too loyal to several of his coaches.
Holtz had some issues there as well.
Muschamp cannot afford to make the same mistake.
Here's the problem.
Elliott is entrenched here with the high school coaches and Muschamp is going to be reluctant to screw with that. Elliott has actually recruited fairly well at the position, he's just failed to develop the talent he brings in. So Muschamp has to make a decision. Either get Elliott up to SEC standards coaching that OLine, and he is sure being paid enough to expect that, or take the risk of firing him and pissing off some high school coaches and then have Elliott go somewhere else and come back here sniping players out of SC.
Elliott was the one coach on the last staff that caused some internal back biting issues ... he was resented for some of his sneaky back stabbing moves by the other coaches. If he is allowed to stay-on here, he will do the same thing with this staff and this staff will begin to bail on Muschamp.
So everything has to be weighed and a decision is going to have to be made eventually.
How might Muschamp get Elliott to raise his coaching game? Send him to camps, send him to schools, work with him one on one. Hire an analyst with some serious OLine experience to work with Elliott - a trusted sage out there somewhere.
Somethings got to give.
Posted on 9/25/16 at 4:22 pm to scrooster
One difference between today and 99 is that we weren't breaking in a freshman qb. The Oline was still crap in 99, but Petty had some decent playing time in 98.
Posted on 9/25/16 at 6:26 pm to scrooster
They should've fired Elliot with everyone else.
Posted on 9/26/16 at 12:11 am to scrooster
quote:
Elliott was the one coach on the last staff that caused some internal back biting issues ... he was resented for some of his sneaky back stabbing moves by the other coaches. If he is allowed to stay-on here, he will do the same thing with this staff and this staff will begin to bail on Muschamp.
If that's the case I say good riddance, we can repair the relationships in SC. My only hope is that Tanner isn't blinded by Elliot's love of the Gamecocks, and protect him from the executioner's sword.
Posted on 9/26/16 at 10:33 am to mikeboss550
I don't think it would just be Tanner blinded...y'all remember the basketball game where the new coaching staff was introduced?
The majority of Gamecock fans in attendance that night gave a rowdier and noticeably louder applause for Elliott than any other coach introduced, including Muschamp. I don't think a lot of them even understand the fundamentals of football enough to see that most of the problem is Elliott, or either they just don't want to see it or acknowledge it because of the same reason you mentioned with Tanner. They are blinded by his love for the Gamecocks.
The majority of Gamecock fans in attendance that night gave a rowdier and noticeably louder applause for Elliott than any other coach introduced, including Muschamp. I don't think a lot of them even understand the fundamentals of football enough to see that most of the problem is Elliott, or either they just don't want to see it or acknowledge it because of the same reason you mentioned with Tanner. They are blinded by his love for the Gamecocks.
Posted on 10/10/16 at 3:19 pm to Carolina_Girl
Just cause I have nothing else to do and it may be the booze, but hear me out. Fire Elliot hire Les if he would take it. Great recruiter, arse end of his career and is in no need of money. He played o line in college, and has had solid lines at LSU. He also won't touch the QB or offensive scheme all that much.
I understand it's a pipe dream but it makes me feel better thinking of Elliot's replacement.
I understand it's a pipe dream but it makes me feel better thinking of Elliot's replacement.
Posted on 10/10/16 at 3:32 pm to mikeboss550
quote:
hire Les
I think there are teams that would give Les a head coaching job.
He would take that over being our OL coach.
Posted on 10/10/16 at 3:41 pm to I Bleed Garnet
Like I said I know pipe dream but maybe he wants lower stress
Posted on 10/10/16 at 5:07 pm to mikeboss550
quote:
pipe dream
this
Posted on 10/10/16 at 6:18 pm to atlgamecockman
Man guy can't even dream haha...I just want Elliot gone. OL was a tad better yesterday but was still turrible
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News