South Carolina Football: Gamecocks hope reward outweighs risk with Beamer

Did South Carolina football make the right head coaching call?

When the South Carolina football coaching search first began following the firing of Will Muschamp, there were a number of the names thrown around as possible replacements. Candidates for the opening included Urban Meyer, Hugh Freeze, Billy Napier, and Scott Satterfield, among others. The job ultimately went to Shane Beamer, who comes back to South Carolina after making several stops as an assistant at some of college football’s most notable programs.

Many in the Gamecock fanbase, however, seemed to be in favor of either Meyer or Freeze getting the head coaching job due to their experience within the Southeastern Conference. Meyer led Florida to back-to-back national titles in Gainesville, while Freeze put together one of Ole Miss’s more successful stints during his five years in Oxford. Would they have been better off going with experience, or did they make the right call hiring a coach with youth, ambition, and a loyalty to the program?

Personally, I am not a big fan of the so-called “retread.”

For those of you that do not what I mean, a retread is a coach that’s bounced around the college football landscape. Some, like Meyer, have been successful, having led Utah, Florida, and Ohio State to the pinnacle of the sport, despite, in some cases leaving a mess upon his exit. Others, like Muschamp, failed, and seemed to be with a new program every other season. In Muschamp’s case, he’s been employed with South Carolina, Florida, LSU, Auburn (twice), and now Georgia since the turn of the 21st century.

Honestly, I am against the retread motion because if a coach was super successful at a previous stop (Meyer), then expectations immediately go through the roof. Fans can become frustrated quickly, expecting an instant turnaround. We even saw this in beginning of the Steve Spurrier era following a string of six, seven, and eight-win seasons during his first five years in Columbia.

There could also be the notion that retread coaches would use a job like South Carolina as a stepping stone to more prominent programs. Take Hugh Freeze, for example. Would he have stayed in Columbia for the long haul or jumped ship after the first signs of success? Had he led the Gamecocks to a 10-win season, then taken a job with, say, LSU, the athletic administration would have to start up another coaching search after it’s first taste of victory.

The Gamecocks have been on both ends of the “retread” spectrum. Lou Holtz and Steve Spurrier helped turn struggling programs around. Will Muschamp, on the other hand, went just 28-30 in five seasons in Columbia.

Sometimes going with the guy with less experience as a head coach can be the better solution than going with the big-name guy. I say that because going with the big-name coach, as I stated before, instantly presents higher expectations, most of which can be unrealistic. But a coach with less experience as a head coach should get a longer leash with the fans, which should be the case with coach Beamer.

And we’ve seen this work in the past. Look no further than archrival Clemson for that proof. Obviously, taking a coach with no previous head coaching experience is a risk, but sometimes, that risk is worth the ultimate reward.