It's not true for all. It's just the fact that for the most part, we're losing guys who didn't produce at a high enough level, Pup included. He's like Bell to me, just not a knucklehead. Freak athlete, but can he be a football player? He didn't give any indication he would this year. In this landscape, it's increasingly difficult to develop raw players.
21 transfers out
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
UGA has over 20 so what the hell does that prove?? I guess they have a problem in their organization following your logic.
Well, it is a ver positive spin on things. One class, ranked 24th, had transfers and no legit SEC starters. But the class ranked 20th will be completely different, because.
I do applaud your ability to remain so positive.
They are overloaded with talent, and have starter quality guys sitting on the bench.
That is not our situation.
OK, we can use the overall rankings to compare on 247. The 22 class was #24 (31 commits). The current class is #17 (24 commits), with spots left to fill. We're going to end up around 10 spots higher than that class. If you don't call that better, I can't help you.
You're making 2 separate arguments in this thread, one of which undoes the other.
On the one hand, you're arguing that we were 5-7 and we should not be worried about losing players from a 5-7 team.
On the other hand, you're arguing that we're losing depth players who, for the most part, were not contributors.
But the second argument undoes the first. If we should be ok with losing players from a 5-7 team, then we're talking about the starters, who were primarily responsible for that record. But, as you noted, we're mostly losing non-contributing depth players who, then, as non-contributors, were not really responsible for that 5-7 record.
For your first argument to hold up, we should be replacing starters via the portal, not depth players.
Never said it wasn't better. I disagreed with the notion that the #20 class in the nation was a "dud", that obviously needed to be flushed for the program.
No one will remember, but in a year or two, when some of this class is transferring, I'm sure we'll demean them as duds as well.
Fans when a player signs: Big time get!
Fans when that player transfers 2 years later: Not a loss.
Both can be true. We haven't lost any DL to the portal, but we've added two 4* players there. A big issue we have is lack of depth at key positions, like DL. Same was true of RB. Not true anymore. On D, we've lost a starting LB and a LB that played a considerable amount of snaps. Both of those guys contributed to a lackluster defense. Both will be replaced, hopefully by better players. We have little WR production returning. So we have WRs that just aren't good enough leaving, and hopefully better guys coming in. When I talk about losing players from a 5-7 team, it's guys like Omega Blake. He played a lot, but he didn't really contribute. We don't have room for that.
When I say dud, it's in comparison to the level of players we're bringing in. If you're recruiting over the current roster, they have to go somewhere.
Never say never. I don't care anymore about CFB, and I would have never dreamed of saying that.
Either at the front end of their engagement with the program or the back end - maybe both.
Folks can admit it or not, but the truth is that the charm of college football was largely found in the bond fans developed with the players. Yes, some came and went, but for the most part, the players you recruited were around for 4 years in most cases, except for the few who could go pro early. The opposite is true of players from other teams. Fans developed a strong dislike for the players from other teams and you looked forward to shutting that player down. It was OUR players vs YOUR players and you had 3-4 cracks at beating that player...Tim Tebow or Peyton Manning or Deshaun Watson or _____________________.
Now, you may cheer your heart out for a player one year and be forced to cheer equally strongly against him the following year. Or the other way around. Two years ago Raheim Sanders was tearing us a new one, delivering a key loss for us early in the season. This year he'll be one of the most beloved players on the team, no doubt. Two years ago, Antwane Wells was Gamecock royalty. Now we're rooting against him.
Some may say they like it and it's good for the game and whatnot, but it undoes THE defining attribute of college football. Particularly as a great many of your college teams are in areas where there isn't pro football, college fans identify MUCH more strongly with their team than pro sports fans do. Some will say it's silly and it's just entertainment (the latter of which is true) but it's just the sheer reality that fans identified with the team and by extension with the players. For many, it will be hard to be invested when you know the player you're cheering for today could very well be an opponent next year.
I would really like to think this is true. But for it to be, a majority of this true freshman class would have to end up starting this year. Otherwise, we're losing the players that would be stepping into those starting roles.
The issue is those so called non-contributors are the developmental type players and future depth.
We currently have 8 experienced transfers, most of which will play immediately. And we'll add more. I can see a handful of freshmen playing.
"Future depth" is dying. I'm not going to wait around 3 years for the light to turn on when I can go add a player that's already productive at the college level.
Understood. Every transfer out was a dud, every transfer in will be a large contributor. (Nevermind that they are also transferring out of somewhere and being called a dud by that team)
A lot are. I thought I read something like 40% were left without a landing spot last year.
Lol ... already productive total BS .. Coach Prime says hello
With the possible exception of those who are fans/alums of schools that are perpetually playing catch up and are getting slaughtered by the current state of college football.
Say what you want, but he tripled their win total from previous year. He's not a magician. That roster had nothing on it. Still going to take a few years to do anything noteworthy.
So your happy with 4-6 wins per season . You do realize in some situations the light has not come on for some 5* playears until year 3 ?
Nope. But if you can't see improvement in the CO program, you have another agenda.
And yes, I understand that. Shane Beamer is at a point where he doesn't have that luxury anymore. He has to win now. If he doesn't, perhaps the next guy will have 3 year guys to hope the light turns on for.
If they were that good do you really think 41 players would have hit the portal after 1 season ? Name 1 good team they beat this year . With the backing of the media it's all about Primetime. When you only win 1 game a year there's only one way to go .
Who did I say was that good?
They won one game and got blown out in every loss in 22. They won 4 games and lost 6 games by one score. I never said they were good. I said they were improved. Again, if you can't bring yourself to admit that you have a different agenda than just talking ball.
That's not a bad point. I suppose the difference is that they have a winning culture and that it will be difficult for backups to beat out 4 and 5 star talent. At South Carolina though, that should not be the case. When you think about a player leaving a situation where he can easily start, does that logic now finally make sense to you? There's a difference that I believe points to a problem within the South Carolina football organization.
Last edited:
My point you can live by the portal and die by the portal. Have no clue about your last sentence
The portal should make turnarounds faster for a losing program. Not sure why we are mired in mediocrity.
I understand your point. And you're making the assertion that CO is dying by the portal, when in fact, they're improving.
We won 6 games the previous 2 years combined. The portal helped us to win 15 games the next two years. This year wasn't what we all wanted, but I believe it will help us get back on track.
Just adding that one of those years was the covid year without ooc patsies.
Or 3 more, depending on the patsies.
Still an improvement of 9 games to 15 over two years. Before this year dropped us back to that level.
I'm hopeful, DSPP. I know lots of people here are down on Clayton White. I am not because he has produced good defenses before. I'm down more so on the offense side of the ball. Unlike White, neither OL coach Teasley nor OC Loggains have a history of producing in the course of a whole season. Time will tell. If we have a season like 2023, I may stay away from this board.
Will not know for sure about Co. until next season is over but I am sure 41 players leaving will be hard to replace out of the portal. Yes if a team only needs a couple of key players that team may do OK in the portal but replacing half of a team not so much. Can not build locker room chemistry with a big turn over . There's a reason one of the best in the business (Saban ) does not care for NIL / portal . Most portal players iare chasing the NIL money and could care less about team chemistry
Ole Miss in 2024 will be the final arbiter of whether or not a team can be effectively built with portal players. Kiffen has done the best job of any coach in bringing in portal talent. If Ole Miss can win big that will show that a championship caliber team can be built with portal players. I have my doubts.
Meion at CO is going to continue to be a 4 or so win program. His sycophants will continue to point to the 1 win season in 2022 as proof that he is a great coach and his method works. I think the CO fans will tire quickly of his revolving door roster management and losing records. I will be surprised if he is still at CO in 2025.
Saban and Kirby are using the portal to process players who are not living up to expectations out of their programs to make room for players they think are more talented. I read that UGA is now at 85 players on scholarship after all of their portal, graduation, early departure losses so they aren't worried about finding more players. Apparently, Kirby has his sights on a couple other players in case he has any players leave after Spring practice. I think this is the major difference in how the top programs deal with the portal compared to the lower tier teams. The top teams "encourage" certain players to leave to make room for better HS recruits and a handful of top portal players. The lower tier teams lose talented players and future talent and are having to replace them with portal players they hope are as good as what they lost.
From what I have seen, I don't think building a team with portal players is a way to win a championship. Portal players may help in bringing about a few wins but I don't think the portal is the answer to roster issues.
Meion at CO is going to continue to be a 4 or so win program. His sycophants will continue to point to the 1 win season in 2022 as proof that he is a great coach and his method works. I think the CO fans will tire quickly of his revolving door roster management and losing records. I will be surprised if he is still at CO in 2025.
Saban and Kirby are using the portal to process players who are not living up to expectations out of their programs to make room for players they think are more talented. I read that UGA is now at 85 players on scholarship after all of their portal, graduation, early departure losses so they aren't worried about finding more players. Apparently, Kirby has his sights on a couple other players in case he has any players leave after Spring practice. I think this is the major difference in how the top programs deal with the portal compared to the lower tier teams. The top teams "encourage" certain players to leave to make room for better HS recruits and a handful of top portal players. The lower tier teams lose talented players and future talent and are having to replace them with portal players they hope are as good as what they lost.
From what I have seen, I don't think building a team with portal players is a way to win a championship. Portal players may help in bringing about a few wins but I don't think the portal is the answer to roster issues.
All eyes will be on Ole Miss next year, for sure. Many are already penciling them as title contenders. They are bolstered by a favorable schedule, almost guaranteed of starting 4-0 (Furman, MTSU, Wake, Ga Southern). Their fate will likely boil down to LSU, UGA, OU, the latter two of which are in Oxford.
For us, they are the game circled on my schedule next year. If I had to pick between going 6-6 with a loss to Ole Miss or 1-11 with our only win coming over Ole Miss, it would honestly be a tough choice.