Yeah, that one's not really close either. I tend to think more of Mizzou since they joined the SEC after us and were in the East with us. Thankfully, we've made up some ground with Kentucky in the last couple of years at least.
Does Lamont's quick success turn up the heat on Beamer at all?
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
Yeah, that one's not really close either. I tend to think more of Mizzou since they joined the SEC after us and were in the East with us. Thankfully, we've made up some ground with Kentucky in the last couple of years at least.
Based on the title of this thread the success of another coach in a different sport should have no bearing. They each have their own records. Each record should be considered by itself in judging success or failure.
Beamer has been here long enough to start fielding a good team. We can’t have another season like we did in 2023. Lol
One word of caution on this matter would be that Heupel, Kiffen and Drinkwitz all cashed in on opportunities without ever having to sustain anything. There are examples of individuals doing something once without having to sustain something over a period of time. Kiffen is in the process of sustaining and creating a situation at Ole Miss. Heupel and Drinkwitz are still in show me mode in regards to consistency. All three are not there until they consistently challenge to go to the conference championship game.
Mike White was not fired at Florida. He resigned from Florida to take the UGA job.
Ole Miss too has a helluva Head Coach.
Kiffin has either won conference championships or produced nationally-ranked teams at 3 different FBS schools. Drinkwitz has produced one Top 20 and one Top 10 team at 2 different FBS schools, and there's talk that Missouri will be a pre-season Top 10 team this year. Heupel, at 2 different FBS schools produced teams that finished 6th, 11th, 17th and 24th in the nation. I would not sell either 3 short. But that's me. They sure seem to have shown that they know a thing or two about "coaching". There's an old Chinese proverb that says "A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step". Kiffin's, Drinkwitz' and Heupel's first steps have been outstanding.
Kiffin was fired from two different HC jobs. People forget about that. It's not like he just walked into FAU and started winning. The trail of destruction he left in the middle of the night at UT will be talked about forever. He's a helluva coach now, but he had to learn how to be.
Heupel and Drink have been good from the jump. There is SOME concern with JH at UT though. He started white hot at UCF. But his third year there he went 6-4, and had regressed each year before getting hired at UT. This past year caused some of those doubts to creep back in. When Drink beat Chump in 2019, the worst game I've ever seen in my life, I said we should have fired Chump and hired Drink. He gets it. And he's a damn good coach. IMO, the best of the 3.
I guess I'm also thinking of it from Beamer's perspective. He just finished of an extremely disappointing Year 3. Lamont has come in and in Year 2 has us as one of the most exciting teams in the SEC. I would personally be feeling some added pressure to improve. Maybe that's a good thing.
I would not hold being fired against Kiffin. Even Belichick has been fired and/or pushed out at 2 different jobs. Heupel was at UCF only 3 seasons. And in his 3rd season at UT, he finished 17th in the nation. Who here would not trade our 2023 season for UT's? None of the 3 are prefect. Hardly anyone is perfect. BUT, they have each proven they can win at more than one place, And as far as I can tell, NONE are on the "hot seat".
My point is he failed. Twice. So did Belichick. They had to learn and adjust...or in the case of Belly, draft the greatest QB of all time (He's be an abject failure without Brady). Lane Kiffin is not the same HC he was at SoCal, and he's admitted that. That's why he's successful now. That's what the good ones do.
I'm not saying JH isn't a good coach, he is. But I do know this. Big Orange won't be happy with another 8-4 season from him.
Is there a more curious case in the history of coaching than Belichick? No coach wins big without good/great players, but I don't know of a case where a coach's success was more inextricably tied to a single player. His record without Brady vs with Brady is a shocking contrast.
And it doesn't help that Brady went off on his own and won a title immediately.
All 3 are good coaches. That was my point. Our measuring sticks right now are the Missouris. Ole Miss, Arky's, Kentuckys and Tennesses of the world. The Georgias, Texas', Bamas of the world are not, at this time. And certainly our football program's measuring stick is not our basketball program. To equate our football program with our basketball program makes no sense, 2 totally different sports, with one requiring far fewer players.
Look at Belichick's record without Brady and get back to me on how good you think Belichick really is.
Sorry, thought I was responding to Dabosits post. I agree with your point.
I’ve got one more thought to add to the BB vs FB turnaround. We all obviously know turning around the football program is harder. You can get a few really good players (kudos to Beamer for bringing in Rattler). But it’s the trenches that make the difference. It takes a long time to build talent and depth on the O-line. And without that, it’s a 5-7 season.
But even so, Lamont is the man. Smart as heck, and a great tactical coach. Keep building the program his way and I think we are going to stick around.
But even so, Lamont is the man. Smart as heck, and a great tactical coach. Keep building the program his way and I think we are going to stick around.
Back to b’ball, both bigs are seniors and I assume they are done but not sure about it. LP will have to get portal bigs because I don’t think we signed anyone over 6’8 in the upcoming class. I have confidence though that he will poach a few
Apples and oranges. Turning a program around in a sport with only five players is more achievable than turning a program around in a sport with 22 players. 4 times as many variables with personnel.
This will no doubt rile some but IMO our football ceiling is realistically 8 wins. It took a HOF coach to break that ceiling. I like Shane but frankly, he will be fortunate to be around that 8 win ceiling during his time here. Hope I'm wrong on that.
MBB, on the other hand has always had a much higher ceiling as demonstrated by McGuire, Fogler and Martin at various times. Get the right coach and we can roll which is exactly what we are seeing. It's just easier.
I'm not going to hold UT against Kiffin. He came in, made them better, then left for his "dream job " after a year. Scummy a little, but I don't think it reflects a poor coaching job.
At Southern Cal, he was the coach that had to play with all those cut scholarships too.
Basically, I agree with your notion though that he had to learn to be the coach he is now. And most of that learning was off the field.
The Heupel thing at UCF is an interesting story. He took a zero loss team, then lost one or two for two years. His third year was the covid year, with a lot of craziness going on.
8 might be Beamer's ceiling. I don't buy that's South Carolina's ceiling. Drinkwitz at Missouri won 11 games last season, finishing number 8 in the nation. Kiffin, who I have in the past called a younger version of Steve Spurrier, has won 10 games and 11 games at Ole Miss, finishing 11th and 9th in the nation. The right coach can produce at South Carolina like Drinkwitz and Kiffin have produced at Missouri and Ole Miss respectively. We all hope that Beamer can produce like them. We all are pulling for him.
Drinkwitz and Kiffin have not won because they have overwhelming talented players. They do a solid job of recruiting and combine that with very good coaching. We will never be able to match up with the Georgias, Floridas, Bamas and Texas of the SEC regarding player talent. We will need superior coaching to go with solid recruiting to beat those guys.
Last edited:
No. The only thing Paris and Beamer have in common is that they are the head coaches of programs that have sucked for most of their history. What Paris has done is amazing, but it is more difficult to turn around a football program because you need more key players to achieve success. In basketball, one or two guys can make a huge difference. Football at SC will always struggle because SC cannot compete with the resources etc of all the bigger schools in our league. Beamer is a good coach and next year's team could be very competitive but still only win 5 games.
Joe Morrison was the first to win 10 games in a season. Not HOF that I'm aware of.
Yeah, but SOS did it three straight seasons. Great Black Magic Season, though.
I don't know that Beamer can. This is his first Head Coaching job. He has yet to demonstrate that he has the coaching chops to win 10 or 11 games. His recruiting has been OK. But he will never out recruit the Georgias. People who think he will bring in great recruiting classes year in and year out need to get that dream out of their heads. He is going to have to outcoach the Kirby Smarts of the SEC. Will he? We don't know that because he had no history as a Head Coach prior to coming to Carolina. All we can do is pull for him and hope he can.
Remember this: Missouri and Ole Miss have nothing more potential-wise, in order to succeed, than we do. Spurrier and Morrison proved that we have the potential. What Missouri and Ole Miss do have for sure are Head Coaches who have proven they can deliver "big winning seasons". Beamer is still a "question mark".
Last edited: