- Sep 8, 2014
- 25,430
- 59,358
Mandel’s Mailbag: What is Will Muschamp’s ceiling at South Carolina?
https://theathletic.com/240425/2018...uth-carolina-football-jacob-eason-washington/
I’m impressed with Will Muschamp’s success at South Carolina. What has made this time different from his rocky tenure at Florida, and what’s his ceiling with the Gamecocks?
Matt Giles, Seattle
First of all, we have to acknowledge the lower expectations at South Carolina, which went 3-9 the year before he took over, relative to Florida, which was just a year removed from the Tim Tebow era. Furthermore, Muschamp went 7-6 and 11-2 in his first two seasons in Gainesville, yet Gators fans weren’t nearly as satisfied at the time as Gamecocks fans are today coming off 6-7 and 9-4 marks.
There also was one important difference between the two scenarios: South Carolina is coming off the biggest win of Muschamp’s tenure, its Outback Bowl upset of Michigan, whereas he ended Year 2 at Florida with a dreadful Sugar Bowl defeat to Teddy Bridgewater-led Louisville.
And now comes the part where I rain on South Carolina’s parade a bit by pointing out that Muschamp’s “success” might not be quite as impressive as it appears.
Muschamp’s crucial mistake at Florida was his initial approach to offense. He tried to convert a roster recruited for the spread offense into a pro-style system, and he hired Charlie Weis of all people to do it. By the time he finally relented and hired Kurt Roper from Duke heading into his fourth season, it was too late. The offense was a largely unfixable mess (that Jim McElwain couldn’t fix either).
So, on the surface, Muschamp’s decision to bring Roper with him and run a spread from the start was a key difference. QB Jake Bentley’s emergence as a true freshman in 2016 only made him look smarter. But today, it’s harder to argue either was an overriding factor. After producing offenses that ranked 14th (2016) and 12th (2017), respectively, in the SEC, Roper was fired in December. Losing star receiver Deebo Samuel three games into the season did not help, but the fact is South Carolina finished with the same ranking as Florida in Muschamp’s Year 2.
Furthermore, even as a 9-4 SEC team, South Carolina finished just 60th nationally in Bill Connelly’s S&P+ efficiency rankings, behind the likes of Miami of Ohio, UTSA and Utah State. I asked Bill for an explanation, and he noted that statistically, the Gamecocks had the profile of a 6-6 team in the regular season, getting outgained in three of their victories (including by 258 yards against N.C. State).
For lack of a better word, they got a little lucky.
Ultimately, that 9-4 number is a whole lot more important than any efficiency ranking for the very reason you brought up — nothing seems “rocky” with the program. Everybody’s happy. If the Gamecocks continue to improve, especially on offense under newly elevated coordinator Bryan McClendon (who called plays in the bowl game), no one’s going to care how the wins came about.
But a word of warning: Teams that fare considerably better or worse in the win-loss column than their performance would suggest often boomerang the following season. Much like Florida did in slipping from 11-2 to 4-8 in Year 3 under Muschamp.
https://theathletic.com/240425/2018...uth-carolina-football-jacob-eason-washington/
I’m impressed with Will Muschamp’s success at South Carolina. What has made this time different from his rocky tenure at Florida, and what’s his ceiling with the Gamecocks?
Matt Giles, Seattle
First of all, we have to acknowledge the lower expectations at South Carolina, which went 3-9 the year before he took over, relative to Florida, which was just a year removed from the Tim Tebow era. Furthermore, Muschamp went 7-6 and 11-2 in his first two seasons in Gainesville, yet Gators fans weren’t nearly as satisfied at the time as Gamecocks fans are today coming off 6-7 and 9-4 marks.
There also was one important difference between the two scenarios: South Carolina is coming off the biggest win of Muschamp’s tenure, its Outback Bowl upset of Michigan, whereas he ended Year 2 at Florida with a dreadful Sugar Bowl defeat to Teddy Bridgewater-led Louisville.
And now comes the part where I rain on South Carolina’s parade a bit by pointing out that Muschamp’s “success” might not be quite as impressive as it appears.
Muschamp’s crucial mistake at Florida was his initial approach to offense. He tried to convert a roster recruited for the spread offense into a pro-style system, and he hired Charlie Weis of all people to do it. By the time he finally relented and hired Kurt Roper from Duke heading into his fourth season, it was too late. The offense was a largely unfixable mess (that Jim McElwain couldn’t fix either).
So, on the surface, Muschamp’s decision to bring Roper with him and run a spread from the start was a key difference. QB Jake Bentley’s emergence as a true freshman in 2016 only made him look smarter. But today, it’s harder to argue either was an overriding factor. After producing offenses that ranked 14th (2016) and 12th (2017), respectively, in the SEC, Roper was fired in December. Losing star receiver Deebo Samuel three games into the season did not help, but the fact is South Carolina finished with the same ranking as Florida in Muschamp’s Year 2.
Furthermore, even as a 9-4 SEC team, South Carolina finished just 60th nationally in Bill Connelly’s S&P+ efficiency rankings, behind the likes of Miami of Ohio, UTSA and Utah State. I asked Bill for an explanation, and he noted that statistically, the Gamecocks had the profile of a 6-6 team in the regular season, getting outgained in three of their victories (including by 258 yards against N.C. State).
For lack of a better word, they got a little lucky.
Ultimately, that 9-4 number is a whole lot more important than any efficiency ranking for the very reason you brought up — nothing seems “rocky” with the program. Everybody’s happy. If the Gamecocks continue to improve, especially on offense under newly elevated coordinator Bryan McClendon (who called plays in the bowl game), no one’s going to care how the wins came about.
But a word of warning: Teams that fare considerably better or worse in the win-loss column than their performance would suggest often boomerang the following season. Much like Florida did in slipping from 11-2 to 4-8 in Year 3 under Muschamp.
