Gamecocks last in the country
- Thread starter 1vagamecock
- Start date
Our defense taketh and our offense giveth away. Not a winning formula.
The writing is on the wall for Teasley but when will Beamer take off the blinders.
The writing is on the wall for Teasley but when will Beamer take off the blinders.
I don't know a how a midseason change hasn't been made.
Unless Beamer doesn't think anyone currently on the staff can do better.
It has to be noted, Clemson fans are considering the hiring of Matt Luke to be Dabo's best coaching hire in years. We doubled down on Teasley.
Beamer has clearly not yet developed the HR personality trait needed to be a successful package as a HC.
Hiring Luke was a great move on their part. The whole offense looks different with the (basically) same players. They even fired a former Clemtech player to get Luke.
Clemson has played a laughably easy schedule since the UGA game. Any one of us could have coached their OL and they would have looked good.
I disagree. I watch a lot of football games. I see a huge difference in their OL play this year versus the last few years with basically the same players. There is a difference. They weren't really bad against UGA either.
Can anyone doubt that we have to do something decisive regarding the offensive line?
By "decisive" I assume you mean "raise and extension for Teasley".
Is Beamer even being asked about OL play/coaching in his pressers? I haven't any.
Beamer
Fair enough after the first game - but we're not getting better. Stats don't lie through 7 games - A change is not only needed, but coming. Being last (or first depending on your perspective) in Sacks allowed is not sustainable. Even Beamer can't sugar coat that. There's just no way around it.
After the ODU game Beamer said (paraphrasing I just looked it up) "The narrative will be that the OL struggled. I don't think so. I think they played pretty well. There's always a few plays you want back, sure. Edge blocking was atrocious. We have to get better"
Fair enough after the first game - but we're not getting better. Stats don't lie through 7 games - A change is not only needed, but coming. Being last (or first depending on your perspective) in Sacks allowed is not sustainable. Even Beamer can't sugar coat that. There's just no way around it.
Agreed. And stats don't lie through 19 games. The OL was putrid 12 games last year and has not fared much better through 7 games this year. The jury has reached a unanimous verdict on Teasley. Beamer said the same kind of stuff all season long last year...edge blocking, need to get rid of the ball sooner, WRs gotta get open, etc. He made every excuse in the book he could for the OL. At some point, he's gotta call a spade a spade. Midseason firings are usually more symbolic than productive, so I guess it's fine to retain Teasley through the end of the season, but there simply is not one single excuse that could be offered up to retain him for next season.
You have a 300 lb OL and a 300 lb DL. The OL should be able to block the DL for at least a few seconds. Our OL is getting pushed back into the QB immediately after the snap. This is either weak strength or poor technique. Our DL is playing well and they both have the same SC coach so its got to be poor technique
Muschamp had TROB as DC because of his recruiting ability. But, he couldn't coach worth a lick. The same is true of Teasley. What good does it do to have 4 stars if they can't do the job on Saturdays? Has Beamer learned? Time will tell.
Why not switching Elliott’s and Teasleys coaching responsibility.Make Elliott OL coach and put Teasley with TE’s.OL would improve and TE’s wouldn’t drop too far.
Nobody fired.
Nobody fired.
If Elliott had not previously worked here, would he even be on our radar as an OL coach?
Sure we can shoot higher.
Sure we can shoot higher.
My suggestion exactly, and it could even take place behind the scenes. Worth a try.
I have suggested this as well this season. That being said, I'd make it only temporary. I was not impressed with our OL when Elliott was here before. I agree with 18 that we can do better.
Sadly, I suspect if an offseason change is made, that's exactly what we'll do. The always successful internal promotion.
Elliott probably gets the nod because he loves it here and all that stuff. Do you think Lane Kiffin loving Alabama was a pre-requisite for Saban hiring him?
I’m talking an in season change.If you outright fired Teasley you couldn’t hire from the outside in season so a quiet in season. Move makes sense.
If they want a top notch OL coach they are going to have to get off the money.I think Matt Luke makes 1.1 million.
Gotcha. Yes, that would make sense as an in-season move.
For the offseason part, I don't know if Shane has the desire or ability to hire a top notch assistant. We shall see.
Those three have been MIA. I hate to say it, but any of the three might hit the portal.
I've said before, OL is the most difficult position group to build and sustain. HS OL who are D1/FBS prospects, regardless of star ranking, are generally really good because they are physical giants playing against much smaller DL. Their physical size allows them to dominate in HS without much concern about technique. When they get to college they are suddenly facing DL who are their equal in size and are much, much faster than anyone they have ever played against. Footwork and hand technique become crucial and many highly touted OL recruits never manage to get those parts of the game mastered. This is why the top teams recruit layer after layer of OL and then cull through them to get the best 10 or so and let the rest go in the portal if they want to or "process" them out of the program somehow.
One promising recruiting class of three or four 4 star OL is not going to make much difference since at least a couple of those will not pan out in college on the SEC level.
One promising recruiting class of three or four 4 star OL is not going to make much difference since at least a couple of those will not pan out in college on the SEC level.
Hmmm. D may not be as elite as some would like to believe, opponents may have just been really bad. In the 3 losses the opponents have scored 36, 27 and 27. I think the D is good but not elite and the O keeping the D on the field with being unable to sustain long drives isn't helping.
We were told last year that they would be good this year with all the injured guys back.
Last year we were 126th in QB sacks/game allowed (3.7). This year we are tied for last at #133 (4.6).
Teasley must and has to go.
Teasley must and has to go.
I'm not sure it is all Teasley. I really wonder about the talent on the OL. Also, Sellers holds the ball way too long and contributes to many of the sacks.
I'm sure there are contributing factors but 126th and 133rd in back-to-back years simply screams OL. Last year Beamer blamed everyone on the team except the OL for all the sacks. Besides, we heard many times how good the OL would have been if not for the injured players.
I defer to Occam's razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best one.
If Beamer wants to survive as a head coach, one question he has to successfully answer this off-season is: can we upgrade at OL coach?
Last edited:
They are a lot better. Passing numbers are down because we went from a NFL QB to a freshman that holds the ball too long and is still learning how to avoid pressure. Look at our run game. Rushing yards per game have doubled and per attempt has gone up a full yard. We have also played some good defenses as well.
Probably a perfect storm. We have absolutely the wrong OL for a QB who holds the ball too long. lol
I spit my drink out.......
We've "been young" for 51 years.......and counting. The excuses need to stop.
Get unlimited access today.