Analysis: On coaching changes, Will Muschamp’s future and what a reset usually means
We’re in the aftermath of a bad South Carolina loss in an underwhelming season, and thus the calls for Will Muschamp’s job from a portion of the fan base are loud and clear.
Such pleas from an angry fanbase are a given for many teams across college football this time of year. Some fans simply believe that a coaching change can cure all ills.
To be clear, there’s no indication any such movement for a change at the top is happening, or will, at South Carolina. But imagine for a moment what might follow if such a move were to happen.
First, what would be a good short-term outcome if a new guy come in?
The 2020 schedule is again brutal, with a road game at LSU replacing Alabama on this year’s slate. There are three easier non-conference games, but expecting a bounce-back to much better than six or seven wins would be a bit much.
In 2021, USC gets Auburn, along with the usual top-end cast of four teams: Clemson, Georgia, Florida and Texas A&M. Even if USC takes that big step forward in a coach’s second year — and assuming Tennessee is still struggling — it’ll be a fight to get to eight or nine wins.
So if everything breaks right, a new coach at South Carolina might be able to replicate the win totals of Muschamp’s first two seasons.
At times, it seems the assumption is that a new coach comes in, the existing talent takes a step forward and suddenly things are rolling. But in truth, most of the time hiring a new coach means hitting the reset button.
That means Year 2 usually isn’t winning nine games with a young QB like USC did with Jake Bentley. It’s modest success, maybe a bowl, the coach talking about establishing a culture and fans warning, “Just wait until he gets his recruits in.”
Take programs like Michigan and Nebraska. Each school moves through coaches (three in 12 years for Michigan, four in 16 for the Huskers) with the early promise of what’s to come giving way to the call for change because not enough is being done (or the sense of having a ceiling in Bo Pelini’s case). Each has more historical cache than South Carolina, one has more resources and both reside in easier neighborhoods when it comes to year-in, year-out competition.
This process happens over and over across the sport. A coach comes in with a wave of hope, it sustains the fans for a few years, then things either turn in terms of perception of the coach or fortunes for the program. (And at many programs, that last part means success and a restart because someone moves on.)
Chances are, that’s the more likely path than a coach coming in, taking what’s there and crafting something better quickly.
Bud Elliott of The Banner Society pointed out that the early recruiting signing period will only intensify the challenges of a new staff. Most coaches aren’t hired until early December at best, and that’s often with a coach being relieved before the end of the season.
That means three weeks before the first signing day for a new coach to try to evaluate a recruiting class and hold onto still-wanted players, all without a full staff in place and before the majority of prospects sign. In this era, the class that gave South Carolina Bryan Edwards, Rico Dowdle, Kobe Smith, D.J. Wonnum and Sadarius Hutcherson might well have been a full bust.
This is not to say the probable outcome of this particular season should sit well with Gamecocks fans.
Without an upset of Texas A&M on the road or Clemson at home, South Carolina will not go to a bowl game. USC projects to be favored against Appalachian State, but that won’t be easy, and a 4-8 season could be in the cards. South Carolina got a burst of goodwill by upsetting Georgia, but most of that is gone after the Tennessee loss.
Take the emotion out of coach firings, and such moves should likely come down to results and behind-the-scenes factors. Results are king, but some kind of rot in the organizational structure can expedite that.
Will Muschamp appears to be headed toward a season with the kind of results that don’t keep a coach employed only if they become a pattern (and he’ll need a goodwill-building win to help things). One question becomes, is South Carolina in position to drop a coach after one bad season and only four years into a tenure?
That’s a big-picture one, and it leads to other big-picture, spiraling questions after that. The same voices that doubt Muschamp often doubt USC Athletics Director Ray Tanner. Were a change to happen, it’s Tanner’s job to find the coach who gets another four-year tryout (and Tanner has a new boss in Bob Caslen, one relatively new to the institution).
That’s to say nothing of the $19 million buyout price tag that would come with letting Muschamp go after this season.
Here’s the thing of it: In many cases, a coach hanging on at the end means a decay of sorts. Lack of long-term faith erodes recruiting. Theoretical momentum stalls. But with a Muschamp staff, that hasn’t proven to be the case.
He’s got the South Carolina roster in better shape. Things seem to be going well on the classroom and character side of things. He left a talented base at Florida, one that won a pair of SEC East titles in a weak division.
USC’s roster is different from what he inherited, one with almost nothing proven at the skill positions, a mess on the offensive line and a defense in bad need of development.
And one more year probably won’t change that. He’d bring in running back Marshawn Lloyd and quarterback Luke Doty in the next recruiting class, and he’d create a more solid base for whatever the future brings.
Plus, it doesn’t hurt that his players strongly went to bat for him and families of players and recruits are behind him as well.
Year 4 historically hasn’t been kind to South Carolina coaches:
▪ Steve Spurrier had one of the best, a 7-6 campaign with a Week 2 loss to Vanderbilt and a three-game losing streak to close the season.
▪ Lou Holtz went 5-7.
▪ Joe Morrison went 3-6-2 before rebounding for two 8-4 years.
▪ Jim Carlen went 5-5-1, making bowls the next two years.
▪ Paul Dietzel did win the ACC his Year 4, but he turned around for a losing season the next year.
Maybe things turn south in a big way, and the need for a change becomes obvious. Maybe the Gamecocks get one more upset and salvage a very strange but acceptable season.
But any change likely wouldn’t be one that produces a start at USC like the Muschamp era has had.
Chances are, even with whatever is inherited, it would be a reset of the hope clock, granting a few years of leeway as someone new tries to build their program.
This story was originally published October 30, 2019 at 5:00 AM.
