We DID have a lot of injuries in the ‘99 season, but yeah, the talent had fallen off significantly over Scott’s tenure from even the relatively low standards we’d had in the early to mid ‘90s
Did we jump the gun on Brad Scott?
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
Not really, he was facing the Tommy West era Clemson Tigers, who went 30-28 over those 5 years and were quite mediocre.
To me the fact that he only went 2-3 over that era of Clemson football is a another point for arguing what a lousy coach he was.
Last edited:
If he had gone 5-6 again in year 5, that would be one thing. But going 1-10 in year 5 (after not setting the world on fire in years 1-4) was too much for any fanbase to bear. If you lose 10 of 11 games due to injuries, that is an indictment of your recruiting as well.
To add to this point, the original poster seems to assume our history is even far worse than it in reality actually is. This is one example. He says Scott going 2-3 was “pretty dadgum good” for us, when in reality that is a winning percentage of 60% for Clemson almost exactly matching their historical win percentage against us. This despite, as you say, them being down significantly during some of these years.
Also, he drops out the horrible 1-10 season, and then says if you look at the rest of it Scott went .500 which is “pretty dadgum good for us”. Again, you only even get the 500 record by dropping out a 1 win season, lol. And just for reference, since Scott was fired we’ve had 16 winning seasons and 8 losing seasons amd are well over 500 so you can’t even say looking at the other years in isolation was pretty good for us given what we’ve done since then.
the reality is Scott took a mediocre team and turned it into the worst team in the SEC. His best season was his first. It went steadily downhill. How could he have brought in decent recruits or turned it around after 1-10, 5 seasons in? Of course he couldn’t. Can’t believe I even got sucked into this thread. Good troll OP
2nd in the country in upset wins his first two years. Exceeded expectations 2 of 3 years. Last year what happens when injuries ravage an already thin OL. A lot of us knew we were on thin ice going in. Saban wouldn't have won with that injury situation and OL room lay year. Maybe pump the brakes before bad mouthing your coach over not winning with no OL, because it is the most important group in the field. You think a G5 school wouldn't want him?
The interview with Sheldon Brown today stated half the team had quit on Scott and the locker room was divided
Not sure if someone mentioned it, but there was supposedly a huge fight between two offensive coordinators after an away game I believe in an airport
There was also his inability to recruit OL while he was here
Those don’t add up to a keeper coach
There’s also the numerous L’s that doesn’t help either
Do you mean the 3-3-5 defense we fielded because we didn't have enough DL for a 4-3, or good enough LBs for a 3-4?
No. Personally I don't think a G5 school will hire him. I don't think anyone will hire him as an OC or DC either. I see "consultant" in his future.
I should point out the distinction between what I THINK will happen is different than what I HOPE will happen.
Last edited:
No, we did not jump the gun. He had obvious and untenable deficits on his staff that he refused to address. All credibility had been exhausted. Recruiting was not projecting well. It wasn't going to get any better, or at least not enough better.
Forget hope, if you think he's not good enough for a G5 job, the only thing you're looking at is that he's a first time HC. Recruiting as well as he does, finding greens like he does (a lot of the blue- chips we signed under him were 3*s when we offered with small offer lists), field the STs he does, winning 7 upsets in 2 years while only losing 1 game he was favored in, all shows a good coach. But you're probably one of the guys who thinks being a coordinator matters (it doesn't) and a year when the OL bottomed out means he sucks. No one wins while losing up front, we were one okay away from beating our over/ under for the season, we signed our two best OL classes back to back, and have more 5 *s at one time than we have ever had before.
He may have been good enough for a G5 job had he come up the ladder, imo. He skipped a rung, and jumped straight to HC in the SEC.
If he doesn't succeed here (if), then who will hire a guy whose only experience is that he was thrust into a job he wasn't ready for?
For a regular coach, someone would hire him as a coordinator, like even Muschamp got to do. But which coordinator spot is Beamer known for?
I would still wager he gets a consulting job for at least a year or two. Then? Maybe a small school takes a stab at him. He could always go back to a position coach, that's been done before.
Again, he exceeded expectations 2 of 3 years and the third had few upper classes OL, from the Covid class and missed from the last regime. Why do you think he wasn't ready? He's been an ST coach, he hasn't worked on just one side of the ball. He wouldn't be a Coordinator, other than ST, which has more crossover with HC than OC or DC. And I thought all of that before he was hired, before I get accused of cope.
I am not as enamored with the position of STC than I am with the OC or DC position.
His exceeding of e petitions his first two years can really be summed up in two games at the end if his second year. But let's just say that we all agree, two yearsnof exceeding expectations.
He has the chance this year to show that last year was an anomaly. If he does, great. Bit miss a bowl, and it's two years in a row sitting at home on the holidays. It would even be different if we stayed home his first two years THEN went bowling in year 3 and 4.
This is just a negative trend.
But we have this year upon us. He has the chance to put all doubts to rest. Of he does, great. If he doesn't, then he may not have much longer here.
No, I'm sorry, 7 upset wins in 2 years was second in the country, and he did that while only losing once. We were supposed to be a 2- win team and then a 5- win team by Vegas lines those first two years, he beat that by 8 wins. Last year our o/u was 5.5, and with 6 injuries on an OL that had 1 upperclassmen at OT to only be half a game below the o/u doesn't prove he's bad. Really, in that situation, we did well to win as much as we did. And if DQ makes a single tackle, we go bowling, with 6 OL injuries including the only guy who should've played a single snap at LT before the season even started. We prevented Clemson from scoring a single Offensive TD, after Beamer did what he doesn't like to, step on a coordinators toes and told White to go 3-3-5. Your fixation with OC and DC is just wrong. Meyer is one of the best living coaches and he was an ST guy. And I'll ask you to name a single coach other than Kirby Smart who hasn't lost a regular season game in a few years, who has only been beaten once when favored the last 3 seasons. That's Beamer's record. He stole 7 we weren't supposed to win, lost one we were, and the only time he didn't steal some wins was part year because you can't win when losing on the OL, no matter who the coach or QB is. So how does 7 stolen wins in 2 years mean he isn't good? And perhaps you've forgotten, the two you're focused on is the only time we've ever beaten top-10 teams back to back.
I started to really question your thinking when you said we were supposed to be a 2 win team his first year. I googled it and found it to be 3.5, not 2. And the second year to be 5.5
Both overachieving regardless. Then we crapped the bed and didn't even qualify for a bowl. I have made it clear that it's An assumption on my part that we will fail to reach a bowl this year. It could obviously be proven wrong.
But i firmly stand by the notion that IF that happens, it would have been better to struggle the first years, and do better the following years instead of overachieving and then failing. This way is a distinct downward trend, where the opposite would at least allow one to argue we were improving.
I should also clarify that if we fail to make a bowl, I am saying that the 5th year will be the decider on his career, not that he should be fired at the end of this year.
Edit: Forgot Meyer. According to Wikipedia, he was not a ST guy. And this (from wikipedia) "In 2001, Meyer took his first head coaching job at Bowling Green.[14] In his first season there, he engineered one of the greatest turnarounds in the NCAA football history"
I would not compare Meyer to Beamer. If Beamer had started at a small school, (BG) had a massive turnaround, then wet to a bigger school (utah) and succeeded wildly, he would have earned his shot. That's what Meyer did.
Beamer skipped over those two proving grounds and went right to head coach at an SEC school.
Last edited:
I did the research and the wins over Tennessee and Florida represent 2 of the largest spread covers by an underdog in Power5 football history. Pretty sure they were both top 10 if not higher. At least in the data I could find going back to 1990s. Pretty impressive to have 2 of that magnitude in your first 2 seasons. We were a double digit underdog to UNC and beat them by 17 and that 28+ point cover only clocks in at no.3 on the list
Wholeheartedly agree with the praise for the UT win, but didn't Florida follow that up with getting pushed around by samford, or some small school. In the weeks following that UF game, it seemed to be evident that they had mailed in the season.
Kudos for being there to take advantage of it though.
Yep. But all anyone notices is that he wasn't a coordinator first, and we have been embarrassed in games we were supposed to lose, but not by that much. What I notice is that of the 9 5*s that have come here, 3 came in the last two classes, he finds gems like he's Link, his teams have been at their best at the end of each season, he forced the changes on his OC and DC that led to the late season turn arounds both groups had the last two years respectively, he's coached under what like 7 current or future HoF coaches, he's one of the best ST minds around, he beat half the League to implementing a 4-2-5 base, which I thought we should've been throughout the Muschamp years, he was the recruiting coordinator here under Spurrier for the 3 most impactful classes we've ever signed, he's set records for the upset wins he's had, he's only been upset once, and he's the only coach to ever win back to back top 10 teams at Carolina, and he hasn't even had his "show me" year yet. I followed his career for years because of the insiders that used to go on cockytalk and said he was a future star HC, so I looked into him and found the only thing standing in his way is this sky idea you need to have your own offensive or defensive system.
We were the team that broke their resolve and lost the lockerroom for Mullen. They were obviously phoning it in after we curb stomped them.
My answer to this question would be because the OP who went to Clemson wants to argue this crazy notion that Scott should of gotten more time?
I'm old and remember what was going on then and will argue that notion all day long, it was actually the correct decision, that has only looked better and better in hindsight as time passed, which doesn't always happen historically when you look back at our athletic departments decision making.
LOLAnd I also need to argue this one because honestly when OP brings up the Richard Bell firing as being wrong, that was a little before my time and I wont have much to say.
Last edited:
As the other guy says he has 7 upset wins so if you don’t like that one just pick another one.
two things you want more than anything in a coach- 1) the ability to beat teams with better talent and not lose many to teams with lesser talent; and 2) ability to recruit better players over time so program improves.
IMO Beamer has already demonstrated the ability to do 1. No. 2 remains to be seen and is complicated now by NIL and whether we can give him the resources to really change the overall trajectory. I have no doubt at all he’s working very hard on the recruiting front though.
Just to be clear, that gives him three of the top, what? I have no idea. I do know we have the largest margin of victory an underdog has had against a top ten team since the start of the AP poll.
Last edited:
You sure? I though that happened the week before when they were crushed by UGA.
I suppose we'll see. He'll need a few more upsets to ha e a good season this year. And IF he doesn't, he'll be entering year 5 trying to avoid 3 years of no bowl.
Also, there are recruiting rankings that give a hint to your #2. As some have said, we need a few upsets this year to reverse that trend.
Our most successful recruiting class in history was 2010, and according to 247, that was the 32nd class in the country. In recruiting, we're losing ground off of not having the big bucks, and we are losing in negative recruiting. I guarantee we are losing players because people are saying Beamer can't win here and his job is on the line. You know what coaches point to for the mood of a fanbase? The fanbase. The definition of being on the hot seat is when the fans talk about how a coach can't win and we'll have to move on. Beamer hasn't justified that talk, it helps no one to perpetuate it. We don't have the big money donors to back a robust NIL, that just is what it is. Have to hope the NCAA pulls off the regs they're trying now that they're finally giving ground on revenue sharing.
Here's a video about our positive momentum recruiting 4 months ago. The changes since then are negative recruiting and NIL. Sanders speed taking about us shortly after saying what kind of NIL he expected.
The fanbase was pretty excited after his 2nd season. It wasn't the fanbase that caused us to lose that momentum. It's not the fans fault if we suck again this year. It's not the fan's fault we don't have a better staff than the one we have. The fans are certainly doing their part. Is the University doing their part?
I don't think this is true. In 2007 we had the 6th ranked class. In 2009 we had the 12th class. In 2002 we had the 11th ranked class and in 2003 we had the 8th ranked class.
So we've had better than 32 by a long shot. In recent years we've gone over this a lot. We usually fall from high teens to mid 20's (ish). Some years better, some worse as spikes.
Last year according to 247 we were 23rd. And this year's class is currently 30th. That is lower than our usual, and probably due in part to how we looked last year. I don't think we can afford that again.
First off, we won't such this year. We really weren't bad last year. I mean, the OL was terrible, but overall we were 2 points away from bowl eligibility playing a top 10 SoS, with a terrible and injury riddled OL. We all knew we were screwed when Nichols got hurt, because we all knew the only guy in roster who should play LT was a true freshman who wasn't even on campus at that point. It got worse from there. I said all over the insiders forum going into spring '23, we were at a low point at OL and DE, and we needed to stay healthy before the depth and talent improved. We didn't stay healthy. If it was obvious to me, you have no excuse for being blindsided, but I admit, I didn't foresee Henry going down the first drive, and all those injuries. And I knew we would be weak on the OL, but I didn't expect historically bad performance against UNC. That being said, Lee and actually those middle three players were good game one, you can ratchet if you doubt me, that whole game the middle held and the edges folded right off of the snap. Baugh didn't give up a sack the whole time he was playing and he got beat out, getting the sound of it. That's huge having two OGs better than the fit who didn't give up a sack. Tree flashed, scoring a 90 in pass protection against Georgia, got exposed as weak against speed at Tennessee and then improving throughout the year, sounds like Thompson beat him out and Henry is holding onto RT. Our second string OL is officially better than our OL for any game last year. Similarly, at EDGE or 2nd string should be better than our starters last year, and that is very much being conservative. At DT, we had 2 who were considered Draft prospects before we took any transfers, and I think Boogie got snubbed on those lists. We have 1 LB who was All-SEC last year and another transferred in that is on the Butkus watch list. We have 4 solid spots at DB with good back- ups at Nickel and safety. We have 3 former blue- chips and a big contributor from last year vying for the open CB spot, opposite a lockdown corner. We have a better RB room than we've had since Dowdle was here. We have a proven contributor at TE in Simon, a quality transfer from Ball State, and a blue- chip freshman, who i know some analysts thought was the top TE prospect, who has been making noise in camp. At QB, it's Sellers or bust, hopefully he's the guy we think he is. We do have questions at WR, but we brought in well thought of transfers, so hopefully they can get it done.
Which of those teams you mentioned had three 11- win seasons? I didn't say highest rated, I said best. That class had 3 different 2* players who had NFL careers. 2*s. 247 had an article after 2014 looking back in that 2010 class, and said it actually ended up being the best class in the country that year from what they actually contributed.
I said it won't be the fan's fault IF we suck this year. I'm predicting 5 wins. If we win 6 and go to a bowl I would see that as definite progress. I would much rather you be right than me. And we better not lose to one of the "cupcakes".
Those three seasons had more contributors than just that class. The next two classes were ranked 15th and 17th.
But if I understand your point, and please correct me if I'm wrong, then the rankings don't matter because our best class was ranked 34th? Then you're saying the dip in rankings don't matter because the class could still be very good, even if ranked low?
I could see that reasoning, but I'd counter with the fact that those kids were coached by a living legend. And that might have had a sizeable impact on their performance too.
That is certainly a LOT of positives that we have going for us. Does this give you confidence that we will win more than 5 or 6 games? And if so, how many are you thinking?
Get unlimited access today.