Read on Twitter
I have had some time away from the Twitter-machine and have thoughts about Will Muschamp and South Carolina and where we go from here. I apologize if the pending thread is rambling and poorly-organized: 1/
First, I do want to thank Will Muschamp for the work he put in at South Carolina. Coaching at an institution like South Carolina is not easy, and I don't think Muschamp's failures can be attributed to a lack of effort 2/
In a way, I think Muschamp had the bad fortune -- somewhat self-inflicted by his career choices -- of being the guy after the guy twice. He followed up Urban Meyer after a wildly successful run at UF, and Steve Spurrier, the most successful coach in S.C. history 3/
I also get the number of media types out there who will bemoan that this decision comes down to wins and losses. Reporters are human, and while we try to show no fear or favor in our coverage, we do like some of our subjects more than others 4/
But sports is a results-oriented business. Yes, Will Muschamp was a good guy and a hard worker. If you asked me what kind of person I want to coach my football team, someone like Muschamp would be my choice 5/
Which brings us back to the record. Ask me what kind of coach I want at South Carolina, and a lot of the characteristics I would look for -- flexibility, creativity -- seem to be somewhat lacking with Muschamp 6/
I do not think coaches like Muschamp work at places like South Carolina for a relatively simple reason: You are not going to consistently be able to out-athlete Florida and Georgia here, let alone Alabama and LSU 7/
That is one of the reasons Spurrier was successful here: Spurrier was an expert play-caller. He knew how to put his players in a position to win. If that meant ball-control, Spurrier would grit his teeth and call running plays. If that meant airing it out, Spurrier had fun 8/
Will Muschamp wanted to do things the way he thought they should be done. That meant a reliance on NFL-style football, often, which doesn't work at a place like South Carolina. Some of Muschamp's OCs would get away from that, and he would go along -- as long as it worked 9/
Once it would stop working, though -- once things got tough or the team lost -- it seemed like the offense got conservative again, like Muschamp was reining things in. It felt like Muschamp was always playing tight, on and off the field 10/
That's where the wins and losses come in. Football coaches are paid to win football games. You shouldn't knowingly hire someone with baggage (cough cough Freeze cough cough), and you hope that the person you hire will have integrity and will mold character 11/
But the way the job is evaluated is based on wins and losses. Period. In some ways, sports coaches have the fairest measuring stick in the world: Win and, barring scandal or conflict with the higher-ups, you remain employed. Lose and you don't 12/
Now, here is the caution for me and my fellow South Carolina fans: No job in college football is as good as the fans of that school think it is. The only possible exception to this is Alabama. Even Texas fans seem to think too highly of their job 13/
That includes the school of whoever reads these tweets, and of course, South Carolina. If Michigan comes open this season, that job will be more attractive than this one. Same thing for Auburn 14/
South Carolina might end up higher than usual in the pecking order; some teams might be cautious because of COVID and the weirdness of the season. But higher in the pecking order does not mean that the job is going to draw interest from most other P5 coaches, for example 15/
That is why I'm so high on Jamey Chadwell. Hugh Freeze is, astonishingly, likely to have other jobs to choose from. Napier is going to be a hot commodity, and might have choices (like Auburn) closer to his current recruiting areas 16/
Chadwell is a South Carolina guy. He has spent most of his career in South Carolina. Chadwell can use the same recruiting connections that were useful at Coastal Carolina, and can build on those. And you don't stay in a state as long as Chadwell has unless you like it 17/
Regardless, there is one thing I think we should all demand: No more retreads. Holtz brought credibility and showed someone could win here. Spurrier brought stability and showed that someone could build a program here 18/
Muschamp showed the limits of that strategy. Freeze is in this category. So is Bob Stoops -- someone I have joked about, but whose name will likely be a hot one on the message boards, because that's what we do 19/
Yes, we all dismiss Dabo, but here's a hard truth: we need our Dabo. We need a guy willing to come and build a program who wakes up every day thrilled that he is the coach at South Carolina, because that's the job he wants to have 20/
We need someone who will make it his mission to take 10 or 15 years to build a machine, and then who wants to ride it for 5 or 10 more. And maybe that coach retires at South Carolina, or maybe he gets one of the Tiffany jobs he can't turn down, but the ride will be worth it 21/
Bob Stoops ain't that. Hugh Freeze ain't that. Chadwell might be. Napier might be. Ray Tanner should make both of them say no at least twice before contacting anyone else 22/
And the standards for the next coach are, to me, pretty clear. Nine- or 10-win seasons should be the norm, but there will be rebuilding years. Compete in the East most of the time. Win it every blue moon. Losing seasons are unacceptable 23/
We know that can be done, because it has been done. If we get lucky with this next hire, maybe we can hope for more. If we get a little less lucky, maybe we can hope for slightly less 24/
And there's the word that we haven't heard much lately: hope. Soon, it will come into contact with reality, which might be better or worse. But we have the hope again, and that is exciting, even if it comes under sad circumstances 25/25
