I think moderate upsets is an understatement with those teams, especially Clemson on the road.
It's a brutal schedule because we lack brutality. I'd say to anyone, take 7-5 any way you can get it and go quietly. Don't look it in the mouth.I think context is important here on what those meaningful games actually are...
I assume you're saying meaningful games are Kentucky, LSU, Ole Miss, Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri, and Clemson.
3 of 8 are in ESPN's way-too-early Top 25's top ten.
6 of 8 are in ESPN's way-too-early Top 25's top twenty.
8 of 8 are ranked in ESPN's way-too-early Top 25.
Updated Way-Too-Early Top 25 after wild times in transfer portal, coaching carousel
Nick Saban retired? Ohio State reloaded? The past month has turned our Top 25 upside down. Here's where things stand now.www.espn.com
Obviously 2-6 or 3-5 in meaningful games isn't ideal, but if we can beat 3 ranked teams that's got to be seen as growth in the program. It's just a brutal schedule, especially if these teams live up to expectations.
Brilliant descriptor.
Missouri might not be as good at running back, but that coach up there has it together. All we'll see is their tail ends.
Beamer is a cheerleader, appears to be a nice guy, talks a good game and, most importantly, "he wants to be here". Those seem to be the most important qualifications for a gamecock football coach for quite a share of the fan base. Actually winning football games comes in a distant fifth on the list of job requirements.
If he doesn't make it, he will be the nicest coach we've fired.
Yeah, I've made the point several times we should simply accept that we are a barely over .500 program and focus on enjoying the tailgating and social aspect of the game day and stop worrying about winning. Lose the game but win the party.
RT has patience and is not one to make quick, decisive moves based on how he is allowing his once proud baseball program to flounder - Kingston is in his 7th year and we are happy with ''playing in a regional'', Omaha be damned. If Tanner is looking to put a magnifying glass on coaching, this is a good place to start.
Well, my take...and I know it's a stretch...is: what do we have to lose by giving him 10 full seasons? We've been playing football for like 130 years. Our fortunes have never really changed that from one coach to the next. Spurrier was an outlier in terms of length of coaching tenure here. We otherwise have pretty much had a 4-6 year rotating door.
I don't think Beamer gets 3 more years unless things turn around. There's got to be significant progress made this year from a competitive standpoint to give reason for optimism in 2025. Win 6 games in 2024 while being competitive in the losses seems like a reasonable building season while breaking in a new starting quarterback. If this year is a disaster from a record standpoint, it's going to be hard to justify giving him 2025.
That's because, from top to bottom, USC's administration is not serious about winning football games.
will110 we were typing at the same time. You read my mind a little! Compete is the operative word.
I see this sentiment often. What should USC's administration do to be serious about winning games?
I would start with the AD position but they won't because they're not serious about winning. The irony is that they're serious about money and football is the money king.
I think 6 should be the minimum expectation. We have 4 gimmes, surely (I know, don't call me surely) we can pick up at least 2 out of the remaining 8, right?
Be more specific. Make a list of things you think need to be done to make the university serious about winning. Just changing the AD doesn't indicate USC is serious about winning.
What is wrong with you?
Well, Richard Bell and Sparky were both nice guys. We have history in firing all types.
My point being, like @Big JC mentioned, Carolina football has never been good. We've got a 120 year history of mediocrity. It didn't start with Ray Tanner or Shane Beamer, so the problem has to be bigger than them.What is wrong with you?
That would be the first sign that they're serious about winning. No serious admin would have hired this AD or this coach.
And this is the comfort zone for the majority of our oldest fans. I think during Spurrier's best 4 years many fans were both excited and afraid of a future where we expected to be in the running for the SEC championship game every season. The historical status quo is a warm security blanket -- low expectations is also a lot easier on the blood pressure until you have to deal with Clemson and Georgia fans after a loss.
To be fair, we bring a lot of the vitriol and mockery from Clemson and UGA fans on ourselves. Every single year we tell their fans and anyone who will listen that "this year is going to be special" and "Clemson/UGA lost __________ and ___________ from last year's team so a win over them is a lock this year", "this year we make a run", etc., etc.. Then, we go 6-6, go to a crap bowl game, lose and act like things are looking up for next season.
I think they THINK they have been serious. I also think they haven't known what that means.
If Carolina football had never been good I doubt that I would have become a fan. I got here just when Morrison was hired and gradually became a fan during his tenure. I was not a fan when I got here. I grew up in Texas and Alabama and was a Bama fan for 14 years. I was 24 when I moved here. Dad is the Carolina grad and his season tickets sucked me in. That and Morrison.
I always laughed when Beamer supporters said we should hire Beamer because "he wants to be here". Did they not realize that any person would crawl naked from Norman, Oklahoma to Columbia, South Carolina for a job with a starting salary @$2.5 million annually? What a joke of a reason to hire someone.
