18, I have said for awhile that those who were pushing for Beamer to be hired based on his supposed recruiting skills, sold us a "bill of goods". Maybe they were sold a "bill of goods". Recruiting under Beamer is no better, maybe worse, than under previous coaches.
I understand the NIL argument. But Clemson surely is no better off NIL-wise than us, maybe worse. Yet their recruiting class is currently ranked 4th. And regarding NIL, the Ray Tanner supporters say he is a better AD than his predecessors because of his fund-raising prowess. None of this adds up.
I don't recall if you were for Beamer to be hired. I was not. I suspect that you and I have more in common than just being long-time New York Yankee baseball fans. I suspect that you, too, was not in favor of hiring Beamer. I was incredulous that he was even in the conversation to be hired.
I agree that we have never been a recruiting powerhouse and probably never will be. We will never win the SEC or a national championship. But we can be nationally relevant. Spurrier proved that, making us that in his time at USC. Our most successful football coaches here never had recruiting as their forte. Our most successful football coaches here were proven tacticians, strategists and with coaching organizational skills (Carlen, Morrison, Holtz and Spurrier). Hopefully, Beamer will prove to have those skills because he clearly does not appear to have the recruiting skills that was advertised 4 years ago.
