South Carolina at Kentucky Post-Game: This Loss Is on Spurrier
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 12:10 PM EDT
in Football
Email
PrintThere's lots of blame to go around right now. You can blame Stephen Garcia for missing open receivers. You can blame Stephon Gilmore and Ace Sanders for their fumbles, which in large part are why the game was still in reach for Kentucky in the second half. You can blame Ellis Johnson's three-man rush and zone coverage schemes. You can blame the DBs for getting waxed in the second half, oftentimes on 3rd- or 4th-and-long situations when you knew a pass was going to either Chris Matthews or Randall Cobb. (I'm absolutely at a loss for how Cobb got so open on his TD.) You can blame Marcus Lattimore's injury. You can blame the bad bounces we got when Kentucky fumbed near their own goalline and on the final interception. You can blame the homecooking officiating. You can just concede that Mike Hartline had the game of his life and give credit where credit is due.
However, where the blame deserves to go in this one is on Steve Spurrier. He deservedly took a lot of the credit for the Alabama win, and now he gets the blame for losing a game that we had no business losing, because he laid a huge egg in this one.
Let's go back, for a moment, to what happened at the beginning of the third quarter. Kentucky gets the ball first, needing a score to get back into the ball game. Our defense, though, stuffs the Wildcats for a three-and-out--a huge stop that could have been a decisive moment in the game in terms of momentum. We get the ball back, and Lattimore gets hurt after a couple of postive gains. The next pass is a long completion for the third down conversion, and then the next three plays are short complete pass, reverse to Sanders, and incomplete pass, followed by a punt.
Spurrier completely abandoned the run once Lattimore went out of the game. Actually, let's be more precise--losing Lattimore certainly had something to do with it, but Spurrier has done this several times now. This time, though, has to be the worst example, because it came in a situation where conventional wisdom says to run the ball. We had an 18-point lead. Our QB obviously wasn't playing his best game. We were playing against one of the worst rushing defenses in the country, a defense that we had carved up like swiss cheese with the running game in the first half. It was time to run the ball up the gut and get out of Lexington with an ugly win.
Spurrier, though, got cute. We ran the ball something like three times in the second half, an absolutely shocking decision considering how weak Kentucky has been against the run. I'd like to say he did it because he wasn't confident that we could run the ball without Lattimore, but that would (1) be the wrong decision and (2) doesn't reflect the fact that this is just what Spurrier seems to do. Firstly, even without Lattimore, we should have been able to run on Kentucky. Much worse backs than Brian Maddox have ran the ball on Kentucky, and when we ran Maddox in this one, he was getting some positive yardage. And where was Kenny Miles? We could have rotated Maddox and Miles and ran the ball up the gut. Again, both Maddox and Miles have had good game against better defenses than Kentucky's.
Spurrier seems to have an innate distrust of this team's offensive identity, and that's hurt us multiple times now. We're never going to consistently be a good passing team with Garcia under center. He had a great game against Alabama, and he had his moments in this one, too. He's turned into a decent QB. However, he's too inconsistent to rely on all the time, and what's worst about Spurrier's choice to put the game in his hands in the second half is that anyone could see that Garcia was off early on.
I don't know if Lattimore is going to be back for Vandy or not. I sure hope so, because he's obviously a huge difference maker for us. Vandy and Tennesee, though, are bad football teams, and we shouldn't need Lattimore to beat them. Maddox and Miles are more than serviceable running backs, as evidenced by their performances last year. Spurrier just needs to trust that they can help us win the games. If he doesn't, I'm very worried that we're about to lose more games to teams that we should be throttling.
Tweet
53 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I agree
yea sure the players didnt play spectacular… and again, just as in the Auburn game, I come to the point that scoring 4 offensive TD’s should be enough for us to win any game with our defense (the coverage was once again stupid, after a good showing against Bama’s pass)… I dont know what Ellis Johnson is thinking with all these ridiculous zone cover schemes hes coming up with, but when you are trying to win a game that is getting dicey, you should be playing press, bump and run coverage… not giving up free 10 yards per pass.
But the bottom line here, is that when you expect a Heisman winning, Legendary SEC, future Hall of Fame coach to tie a game up in the closing seconds… you expect them not to throw the game away due to their pride. Spurrier lost us this game because he didnt wanna chance an OT loss to UK for his first ever to the wildcats; rather he just handed them the game in regulation.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 17, 2025 12:25 PM EDT reply actions
I really don't want to defend Spurrier, but 75% of the blame on that last play goes to Garcia.
The throw was supposed to be outside, towards the sideline, and Spurrier said as much today. That would’ve given the defensive back almost no chance to catch it. However, Spurrier gets 25% of the blame ‘cause it was obvious to everyone watching the game, except him, that Garcia was struggling with his accuracy for most of the day. However, someone said that play went to Scruggs. I can never tell if it’s Scruggs or Moore, ‘cause they both have dreads that block the names on their jerseys. If it was Scruggs, Spurrier deserves about 10% more of the blame, ’cause that would’ve been insane.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 17, 2025 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
It was Scruggs, and I'll admit that I don't understand that. At that point in that game...
you don’t try to psyche out the opposing team by not going to one of your two star receivers. The play was there, though, and I guess we’d all be calling Spurrier a genius if Garcia had made a good throw.
As far as going for the win there, I think that was the right call. The play was a fairly safe call; if Garcia had made at least a decent throw that was outside and close to the sideline, we either win or get a chance to kick a FG. When you have the time to make the winning play, you take a shot. Garcia just flaked yet again in a key situation.
Burning the timeout, though, was dumb. As was, in retrospect, burning the timeout earlier in the half when we decided not to kick the long FG.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
doesnt matter if Garcia made a bad throw or not
Spurrier was the one that decided to take the risk, and it didnt pay off.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 17, 2025 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you have to go for it there. Not letting your QB try for the endzone in that situation is a clear vote of no confidence in your QB..
and a wasted opportunity to win the game. The throw wasn’t supposed to be anywhere near as risky as it ended up being. Like I said, a good throw to the outside shoulder and closer to the sideline would have been impossible to intercept, and it’s not a difficult throw to make. I’m sure that during that timeout Spurrier told Garcia over and over again to throw it so that no one but the receiver could make a play on it. It’s a common throw that teams use in that situation that’s used precisely because it’s difficult to intercept.
To me, Spurrier deserves massive amounts of blame for this loss, but this isn’t one of the reasons.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Amen.
I am a 1000 times more upset if he goes for the tying FG and foregoes a shot at the endzone.
True, SG had a pretty poor second half. But he was hot enough on the last drive to be trusted to throw a ball only Scruggs could catch. He didn’t.
I think it was inspired not to go to Alshon. I dont blame Scruggs for not catching the ball. Plus, UK made a great play. And that’s all she wrote.
It’s time to concentrate on Vandy. We have our own streak to snap … a two year SEC road drought. Plus we still owe the ’Dores for ’07 and ’08.
They wore garnet helmets.
by tryptic67 on Oct 17, 2025 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I keep going back and forth on not going to Alshon.
You know, it seems like a crazy choice, but the play was actually there if Garcia had made the throw, so I guess you could call it a well-designed play.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions
And just imagine how you would have felt if we don't take a shot at the endzone, go to overtime, and lose.
We’d all be really, really steamed.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Or miss the field goal.
Dum spiro spero - "While I breathe, I hope"
State motto of South Carolina
by The Feathered Warrior on Oct 17, 2025 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Not necessarily.
Most teams keep some extra seconds on the clock when kicking game winning field goals in case there is a bad snap or hold, and they have to try again. I don’t think anyone would’ve faulted Spurrier for keeping that extra time in case something like that happened. It’s standard clock management procedure. Usually, it isn’t as much as 11 seconds, but they had no timeouts. If there was a bad snap, they would’ve had to get back to the line of scrimmage and re-kick, or spike the ball, while time was still running.
I think kicking the field goal was the right call with 11 seconds left, hit or miss.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 18, 2025 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions
You don't think people would blame Spurrier
if we went for the field goal with 11 seconds on the clock and we missed? That’s absurd. Plus, as Gamecock Man has mentioned, Kentucky has the momentum. This wasn’t a game-winning field goal, it was a game-tieing field goal. I do not feel confident at all about our prospects of beating the ‘Cats in over time. Running one more play there was the right call. Calling the timeout when he did wasn’t.
Dum spiro spero - "While I breathe, I hope"
State motto of South Carolina
by The Feathered Warrior on Oct 18, 2025 9:36 AM EDT up reply actions
We could debate it all day really.
I think the only thing most people can agree on is calling the timeout was a mistake.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 18, 2025 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
I wouldn't have been upset that we didn't go for it.
If you recall, in the game day thread, I think it was you who said they should toss one up in the end zone, and I pointed out that it would probably be picked. Garcia was way off that night. I can understand the argument for both sides, but it really all comes down to how the quarterback was playing, and that was inconsistent. Yeah, he hit some guys on that last drive, but it was a bad decision to just ignore all the poor throws he had made that night.
It was a very tough call. The defense was playing pretty bad. Kentucky probably would’ve scored in overtime. If Spurrier had run the ball more, I think he would’ve had more faith in our offense to score as well though. If it were my call, I would’ve kicked the field goal.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 18, 2025 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions
Garcia throwing a pick on that play was not foregone conclusion.
The way he was playing on that last drive Spurrier had every right to believe we could take one last shot at the end zone and then kick the field goal. That’s pretty standard football strategy. It looks dumb now because we all know what happened. But, other than when he called the timeout, I think Spurrier made the right call and I would expect him to make that call 10 out of 10 times. I would be willing to bet that most other coaches would do the same.
Dum spiro spero - "While I breathe, I hope"
State motto of South Carolina
by The Feathered Warrior on Oct 18, 2025 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions
And if anyone
happend to watch the Steve Spurrier Show, could you recap me on it??? I chose to forego it, as I know it would have only deepened my anger towards Spurrier.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 17, 2025 12:27 PM EDT reply actions
You don't want to know.
It was infuriating. I have no faith in Spurrier going forward now. He doesn’t even know what he did wrong.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 17, 2025 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
No, he just said that he thought we should have thrown more in the second half.
He did more or less accept blame for the loss and ceded that he and his staff did a poor job, but his explanations for what went wrong were a little perplexing.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Naw, like the dude said, Spurrier actually said the players came to play hard.
He said the staff just didn’t put them in a position to do well. I think that’s only half right, but at least he’s accepting a lot of the blame. He did critique the players on individual plays as they replayed the highlights, like always. One thing that I didn’t agree with was he said Sanders wasn’t running through his routes fast enough, and that was why the passes to him were incomplete, as opposed to Garcia over throwing him.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 17, 2025 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it was a little bit of both with Sanders. That first long pass (post route?) over the middle...
was clearly overthrown by Garcia. I don’t think Sanders had a shot at that one. However, the later pass was only slightly overthrown, and I think Sanders could have gotten it if he had run through his route.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
By the later one do you mean the one going out of bounds on the right side?
From what I saw I have to disagree with you. I don’t think he had a shot at either. I was really baffled that Spurrier would even blame Sanders on those. Maybe I’m wrong though, I don’t know.
I think they should completely abandon throwing down field to anyone under 6’3" or 6’4". Just tell Garcia to under throw it, and let the receiver make a play on it in the air. Let Sanders run some short routes and make plays after the catch. Garcia just can’t hit guys deep consistently. Pretending he can is a waste of a down. I’m not completely blaming him. I realize it’s not easy to throw a ball on a dime like that, but still Spurrier needs to adjust his game plans for the reality of the situation.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 17, 2025 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I remember thinking he could have gotten it, and the announcers thought so, too, although I'll grant that they were both idiots.
I’d have to watch it again, though, to be sure. I think you’re right about Garcia’s downfield passing. He’s never been consistent on difficult deep throws, and I doubt that’s ever going to change. I don’t think we can scrap that part of the offense, as the threat of the deep ball opens up other elements of our approach, but I would agree that throwing deep to a diminutive speedster isn’t best for Garcia. It’s like asking him to be even more accurate when he can’t even be relatively accurate in the first place.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Truly.
Shades of Arkansas 2009.
Dum spiro spero - "While I breathe, I hope"
State motto of South Carolina
by The Feathered Warrior on Oct 17, 2025 12:33 PM EDT reply actions
That was definitely one of the games I had in mind while writing this.
But this time was even worse, IMO, because all we had to do was bleed clock to win the game. Against one of the worst rushing defenses in the country!
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
BTW...
Did it seem to anyone else like Spurrier was letting Jr. call some plays in the second half?
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I have no idea.
I was way too inebriated by that time to speculate on that sort of thing. Why do you say that? Because of the plays that were called or did you see Jr. in Spurrier’s ear?
Dum spiro spero - "While I breathe, I hope"
State motto of South Carolina
by The Feathered Warrior on Oct 17, 2025 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I just think that Spurrier is typically much better at reading defenses than what we saw last night...
Kentucky was basically just pinning its ears back to pressure Garcia, which means we probably should have tried something other than the midfield throws and HB screens that we were using. We could have used draw plays in the running game and more vertical types of throws to take advantage of Kentucky’s secondary being in isolation against our receivers. It was really just a perplexing half of football from the coaches.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I like your style FW
hope you killed a bottle of Kentucky’s finest bourbon! That’ll teach ’em.
They wore garnet helmets.
by tryptic67 on Oct 17, 2025 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions
In Spurrier's defense...
It sounds like he acknowledged the defensive gameplan’s shortcomings on his show. Hopefully we’ll be seeing a little more aggression from here on out. This soft Cover 2 / 3 thing isn’t working for us.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 1:21 PM EDT reply actions
only way Spurrier gains my forgiveness
is if he accepts blame for the loss. Like I said, when it comes down to it, you expect your Hall of Fame coach to not lose the game, and thats what he did going for the TD.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 17, 2025 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Still disagree about the last play...
But I agree that he should accept blame for the loss, which he sort of did on his show. Said that his offensive gameplan in the second half didn’t work and that he would have to exercise more control of the defense from now on.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Im all for trying to win a game
but the play he dialed up was STUPID… throw it up to Jeffery or Gurley, or even Moore… one of the guys who know to at least play defense if its a bad throw, dont throw it up to a guy who has 2 catches in his career (one of those coming earlier that game). I have more confidence in Jeffery/Gurley/Moore making a catch double covered than I do Scruggs making a catch with one guy on him… and Scruggs was even doubled up.
What I really would have liked to seen for the attempt at the TD, was a fake field goal… you have a decent QB as ur holder, let him rollout and try to find a receiver open in the endzone… and if nothing is there, throw it away and go to OT. After all, Spurrier has beaten UK at Carolina twice on trick plays.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 18, 2025 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
You know...
I thought of the fake FG option. That would have been an excellent opportunity for it.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 18, 2025 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice idea, but too risky.
The defenders off the edge come free like 50% of the time on field goal attempts, which would be amplified by one of the blockers breaking away to run a route. The holder may not have even had time to get out of the pocket to throw it away. Then, the game is over without a timeout.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 18, 2025 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, you're probably right.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 18, 2025 9:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I don't know though.
They may have been able to get back to the line and spike it. I can’t say they should’ve kicked the field goal with 11 seconds left in case there was a bad snap/hold, and then say it would be too risky to run a fake field goal just ‘cause the holder might be sacked. That’s hypocritical.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 18, 2025 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions
It's fun to play hypotheticals...
And maybe the play would work. But you’re probably right that it would be really risky and that few coaches would try it instead of doing something more conventional.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 18, 2025 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem with conventional and Spurrier down there near the end zone
is that whenever he goes to the air… hes a one trick pony
All a defense has to do is protect the corners of the end zone, as we all know hes going to run the fade route.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 19, 2025 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions
thats why you do a rollout right off the snap
In a situation like that, those defenders are thinking of one thing, and one thing alone… and thats blocking the kick, they would be comin too hard toward the spot of the kick to hit a QB before he had the opportunity to escape the pocket on a rollout and at the least throw it away.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 18, 2025 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm.
You almost have me believing it might work. I guess I just worry that the QB might run right into a defender on the rollout.
Has anyone ever tried this? I was asking somebody about it the other night. What I mean is a fake FG on a play where you had another down if you didn’t get it.
You know, it would be almost fool proof if we had had the timeout. Sigh.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 18, 2025 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Michigan State ran a roll out Fake FG and won their game against ND
and since it was 11 seconds left, and no timeouts, I doubt a defense would be weary of a Fake.
by Gamecockrock on Oct 19, 2025 8:05 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn't like the throw to the end zone
We can all say that it would have been fine if Garcia had made the right throw — but, really, how many times have all of us seen a quarterback mess up that throw? And not just college quarterbacks but pro quarterbacks as well. But part of the problem was having already burned the timeouts; that prevented us from trying to run a draw or throwing a safer pass that might have been stopped short of the endzone, then calling timeout and kicking the ball. I don’t think it’s a vote of no-confidence in your quarterback; I think it’s an acknowledgement that the other team has the momentum, your season is on the line, and it’s better to try to make Kentucky make a mistake than taking a chance that you’ll make the mistake.
As for the play that they actually ran — I agree with those who say you don’t go all the way down to Scruggs for that play. If there was ever a time in the history of South Carolina football to throw the fade to Alshon, this was it. But let’s all remember that Florida lost as well and all the goals are, amazingly, still in place.
Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.
by cocknfire on Oct 17, 2025 6:33 PM EDT reply actions
The other team having all the momentum, though...
could be construed as a reason not to go to overtime. Does anyone here believe we would have won in overtime? Sure, Kentucky may have made a mistake somewhere and given us the game, but from where I was sitting, we were the team that looked most likely to do that.
I agree, though, that going to Scruggs was the wrong move. When you’ve got possibly the best receiver in the country, a guy who is known for making great adjustments and coming down with anything in his vicinity, that’s the guy you go to on that play. Like everything Spurrier did in the second half, he got just a bit too cute by designing a play to Scruggs.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes.
Why go to overtime if the other team has the momentum? And throwing a fade to Alshon is surely not the answer in that situation. The Scruggs interception was a mirror image of what happened to Alshon against Aurburn. The ideal solution would have been a wheel route to Brian Maddox. That’s how we got most of our yards in the first half anyway. Most of Lattimore’s yards came on receptions, not rushing. But would couldn’t so that because Spurrier blew the time out.
Dum spiro spero - "While I breathe, I hope"
State motto of South Carolina
by The Feathered Warrior on Oct 17, 2025 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Let's face facts
Spurrier is the finest coach to come to the University of South Carolina.
Spurrier has raised the depth and quality of talent at the University of South Carolina to heights we’ve never seen before.
Spurrier’s six seasons are the most successful in the history of the University of South Carolina, coming while playing in the most demanding, intimidating and stressful conference in the nation.
Spurrier will leave on his own terms.
I’m getting dismayed by some of the negativity against a man who is second in all team SEC wins only to Bear Bryant. He didn’t coach the UK game as well as I’d like, but he’s going to bring us where no one else has come close … real contention.
If we let an away-game conference loss derail us, then shame on us. Its’ time for us to start thinking about the Commodores.
They wore garnet helmets.
by tryptic67 on Oct 17, 2025 8:22 PM EDT reply actions
Well, you're partially right.
I believe Spurrier is tied for first in winning percentage over six seasons with Joe Morrison, who coached from ‘83-’88. They both have won 56.52% of their games with Carolina, so it really depends on how Spurrier does the rest of the season as to whether your statement is accurate or not. However, I counted Morrison’s two ties as losses, which really isn’t accurate, so his is actually slightly higher if you want to factor those in as maybe half wins.
And, really, of the coaches who did stay at Carolina for six or more seasons, Jim Carlen (‘75-’81), and Billy Laval (‘28-’34) both come close to that winning percentage. In fact, if you count half wins for Laval’s 6 ties, he probably beats out all of them.
So, actually, it’s questionable how much Spurrier is actually needed. The argument about Carolina playing against tougher competition now is speculative. I wasn’t alive in the ‘70s or ’30s, so I can’t say if the competition they played against was the best colleges had to offer back then or not. I didn’t watch football in the ’80s either. Someone else would have to answer that.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 17, 2025 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions
The argument about Carolina playing tougher competition now isn't really all that speculative.
When we were independents, we basically continued playing an ACC schedule. We also played UGA. So, replace Florida, Tennessee, and the other non-UGA SEC teams with teams like Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, and NC State, and that’s who we were playing. We also played some other random teams, as well; I think we played series against teams like Notre Dame (while they were struggling before Holtz took over), Michigan, and Southern Cal (also not a powerhouse in the 80s like usual). Our schedules now are obviously tougher. I guess Clemson was much better in the 80s, so that’s one respect in which it used to be tougher.
As far as evaluating Spurrier goes, I don’t really want to talk about it until season’s end. Obviously, there’s a lot of football to be played. That said, I’m not opposed to holding him to a high standard. This team is very talented, and there’s really no excuse for winning less than eight games considering how bad the East is this year; we should really be able to win nine or ten all things considered, but ten is going to be really hard now after we dropped one we shouldn’t have. I guess you have to give Spurrier a lot of the credit for bringing in the talent, but you also have to expect him to develop it and put us in positions to win, the latter of which he failed miserably at last night. At any rate, unless there are legit mitigating circumstances, I’ll be torn about his status if we fall to another 7-5 season. There’s really no excuse this year. Let’s hope we never get to that point.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions
All that said...
All of our goals are still intact. And honestly, if before the season you had told me we’d be 4-2 and first in the East at this point, I’d have been happy with it. It’s the way it’s happened that’s been so maddening. We look like a top-five team half the time and a 3-9 team the other half.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog by and for Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Oct 17, 2025 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I was hoping for an 11-1 season
but expecting a 10-2 season, which is still in reach (and very possible).
If we can make it through Arkansas (what I believe to be our last real tough opponent) we SHOULD be 10-2 on the season, and then people can completely forget about this game.
HOWEVER… history of this team, says we will look back on this game and say WHAT IF
by Gamecockrock on Oct 18, 2025 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Or, they could just as easily lose to Arkansas, Florida, and Clemson, and be 7-5 again.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Oct 18, 2025 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions
yes I know
thats where the….
“HOWEVER… history of this team, says we will look back on this game and say WHAT IF”…..
comes in
by Gamecockrock on Oct 18, 2025 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions
In the 80s we played some tough teams
Florida State (independent), Miami FL (independent) and Clemson (ACC) were all tough hombres. But, its still not the same.
RE Joe Morrison, you are forgetting (or maybe are in blissful ignorance) of the whole Tommy Chaikin scandal which lies at the feet of the Man in Black, and which tainted the program for years. So I’m not willing to equate Spurrier … whose biggest NCAA problems have been players not paying their hotel bills … with JoMo, who might have been indicted himself had he not died of heart failure in February,1989..
RE Jim Carlen … he had some good clubs and coached a Heisman Trophy winner. But he never broke through the 8 game barrier.
They wore garnet helmets.
by tryptic67 on Oct 18, 2025 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Bad link .. still practicing that skill!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Chaikin
They wore garnet helmets.
by tryptic67 on Oct 18, 2025 2:52 PM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
- Start posting about the Gamecocks
- Follow @GABAttack
- Subscribe to Garnet And Black Attack Stories
The Absolut Bloody Hour Countdown
::
Enjoy with ABSOLUT Responsibility®
Related FanPosts on Garnet And Black Attack
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NCAA Football -- FanHouse
- Tulsa Lives Up to Hurricane Nickname, Blows Out Hawaii 62-35 in Hawaii Bowl
- Hawaii vs Tulsa: Sheraton Hawaii Bowl
- Five-Step Drop: So Long, JoePa?
- Brady Hoke's Coaching Profile on Rise as San Diego State Thumps Navy
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
