I'm continuing to drop some posts evaluating guys on my radar who could potentially be the next guy for VT. This is my eight post. Check out the previous seven:
- WKU coach Tyson Helton
- JMU coach Bob Chesney
- UNLV coach Dan Mullen
- Iowa State coach Matt Campbell
- Southern Miss coach Charles Huff
- Georgia DC Glenn Schumann
- Former PSU Coach James Franklin
This week: Shane Beamer
There's something deeply uncomfortable (to me, at least) about Virginia Tech hiring another coach named Beamer. It feels incestuous, or even greedy; like we're trying to recapture magic that's already gone. But here's the thing: Shane Beamer's career trajectory at South Carolina mirrors his father's at Virginia Tech so perfectly that it demands we ask the question—is that similarity a feature or a bug?
Who is Shane Beamer?
Shane Beamer is the 48-year-old head coach at South Carolina who's posted a 29-22 record through four seasons, making him the winningest coach through their first four years in school history (you read that right - that's not Spurrier or Holtz erasure - no head coach at SCar has had a more successful first 4 years than Shane). He's led the Gamecocks to three bowl appearances, three wins over top-10 opponents, and back-to-back top-25 finishes.
The Frank Beamer Blueprint—Replicated Perfectly
Shane hasn't just learned from his father—he's replicated the blueprint exactly. Strong defense anchored by a loyal coordinator. Special teams as an identity. Offensive coordinators who struggle without elite QB play. Success predicated on developing defensive talent while the offense remains inconsistent.
The data bears this out. Under defensive coordinator Clayton White, South Carolina has ranked #49, #13, #55, and #13 in defensive SP+ over four seasons—not exactly the kind of consistency Bud Foster was known for, but the highs have been similar. White has been nominated for the Broyles Award five times and led the nation's top defense in forced turnovers in 2022.
But the offensive coordinator carousel has been... meh. Marcus Satterfield only succeeded with Spencer Rattler, then left for Nebraska where he was slow demoted from OC/QB coach to OC/TE coach to TE coach (sound familiar LOL?). Dowell Loggains showed the same QB-dependent pattern (but was pushed onto a life boat in App State). Mike Shula (2025) has the offense ranked #68 in SP+ and last in the SEC.
This mirrors Frank's issues with Bryan Stinespring and Scott Loeffler—coordinators who never innovated and struggled to develop quarterbacks.
The South Carolina Success Needs Context
By South Carolina standards, Shane has been excellent—only the third coach to finish ranked in the AP twice in three years, joining Hall of Famers Lou Holtz and Steve Spurrier. But here's the reality: Virginia Tech has won more than six regular season games just three times in the last decade. Shane's 7-9 win floor would actually be an improvement.
The Special Teams Myth
Everyone assumes Shane inherited Frank's special teams genius, but the data is mixed. South Carolina has ranked #49, #49, #12, and #49 in SP+ special teams over four years. One excellent season surrounded by mediocrity isn't exactly Beamerball (or is it...).
The SP+ Rollercoaster
South Carolina's overall SP+ rankings tell the story: #66 (2021), #14 (2022), #51 (2023), #14 (2024), and #40 and falling (2025). This isn't sustainable building—it's QB-dependent volatility. When they have elite quarterbacks (Rattler, Sellers), they compete. Without it, they're mediocre.
The 2025 season confirms this. South Carolina ranks last in the SEC in total offense, and offensive line injuries have exposed the lack of infrastructure when the QB isn't elite.
What Did He Actually Learn From Those Hall of Famers?
Shane has worked for Frank Beamer, Steve Spurrier, Kirby Smart, and Lincoln Riley. That's an incredible pedigree. But can you identify a single Shane Beamer innovation? A specific scheme he brought from those experiences? The answer is no. He's a culture guy, an energy guy, a recruiter. But he's not a schematic innovator. He's replicated Frank's model without evolving it.
The Impossible Question
Here's the scenario nobody wants to discuss: What if Shane comes to Virginia Tech and after 3-4 years, it's clear he's not the answer? Is going to be harder to fire Beamers son? Maybe we already went through this with Pry, but I can see a world where we would we be trapped in a toxic situation where everyone knows a change is needed but nobody can pull the trigger?
This isn't an argument against hiring Shane. But it IS an argument for acknowledging the unique risk: if this doesn't work, Virginia Tech could be stuck (but to fair... we're already stuck).
The Realistic Assessment
Shane would bring stability—7-9 wins most years, occasionally 9-10 when everything breaks right. That's better than recent Virginia Tech teams. But his poor OC hiring record and QB-dependent model suggest his ceiling isn't high enough to compete for ACC championships consistently.
The Bottom Line
If Virginia Tech announces Shane Beamer as the next head coach, I'll understand why. The pedigree is real, the South Carolina success is real, and frankly, his track record is better than what we've had. He'd probably win 7-9 games most years, which would feel like a massive improvement.
But let's be honest: if Shane's last name was Smith, would we be having this conversation? His resume is solid, not spectacular. The real question isn't whether Shane can replicate his father's success—the data suggests he already has. The question is whether Virginia Tech wants to repeat the Frank Beamer era, complete with its limitations, in the post-Rev Share, nationalized recruiting era of college sports.
The data shows Shane Beamer is, in almost every way, his father's son. For Virginia Tech fans, that should be both comforting and terrifying. We know exactly what we'd be getting—the good and the bad. The question is whether that's enough, and whether we're willing to accept the consequences if it's not.
Comments
Two follow up comments:
Average SP+ ranking for USC under Beamer puts them 33rd in FBS and 14th in the SEC.
Their average recruiting class under Beamer ranks 23rd — pretty much exactly where USC has ranked historically.
Make of that what you will.
This is all well and good. But where are the airport recommendations??
Totally kidding, thanks again for your work on these bar!!
I think Shane would be the least "exciting" hire of the ones you have gone through so far. But, like you, I could see it happening.
--Douglas Adams, The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul
Meh, ICN in Seuol, Korea is pretty cool IMO. It's like the Amazon Rainforest mixed with the Death Star.
I recommend flying through Doha - that airport is magnificent
Yes, Doha great. Abu Dhabi and Hyderabad are also very nice. And I'll be in Singapore tomorrow, which is supposed to one of the best in the world.
Was supposed to fly through Doha this summer, but Iran decided to lob missiles at Qatar a couple days beforehand, so we changed our flights. Hopefully, we'll get another chance.
Never been to it, but Singapore's airport is one of the best in theworld!
https://www.changiairport.com/
he is considered due to his name. it's time to clean house and move on. next candidate please...
No!
If I was ranking it would be Franklin, Mullen, Huff, then Beamer. I think Franklin is a home run, but I also think he isn't coming here. I think Florida, FSU, Oklahoma State outbids us in the Franklin sweepstakes.
I think I'd put Tyson Helton ahead of Shane, but maybe that's overly optimistic.
If we're ranking wishlists I don't think realism factors in
My list would have Helton, Chesney, Huff at the top spot in no particular order, followed by Mullen and Franklin. Shane doesn't even make the list, tbh
I'm trying to ignore the Beamer of it all, and if he wasn't a Beamer, I think he'd be rounding out my top 5 or just outside. But he is a Beamer.
the more i stew on it, the more i really like huff
I don't think any school that wants a natty hires Franklin. Whether his ceiling is real or not, the perception is there.
I also do not think that there is any coach right now that get us reorganized AND get us to win the CFP final game.
I think he's exactly what we need to get to that level then evaluate if he's learned how to become the coach to get to a natty.
Nothing against Shane and I wish him well. Just not here.
We were fortunate with Frank, but that also (poorly) informed the fan's collective world view: "we hire a coach that loves us and we love them back, they stay for 20+ years and retire."
We tried to replicate that with Pry....
The real world is more like our basketball experience. We got Buzz, then he left. Then Seth, etc. We got Kenny, then he left .... etc.
If we hire Shane (or any coach) we can hope for 4-5 years then on to the next. Either because they lost, or because they won so much we got big dogged. Having to fire another Beamer.... I'd rather have USCe deal with that.
Shane has worked for Frank Beamer, Steve Spurrier, Kirby Smart, and Lincoln Riley. That's an incredible pedigree. But can you identify a single Shane Beamer innovation?
Boxing glove on a stick
- VT oldheads love Beamers, maybe more dollars flow in?
- While record at SCAR isn't impressive, not terrible compared to contemporaries, would probably have easier time winning in ACC
- Sometimes coaches do way better in the 2nd or 3rd stints (see Lane)
- Has experience recruiting the area
- If he fails, would be a way to bury the fixation with trying to revive the "good old days" once and for all and let us finally move on with a clean slate in the subsequent hire
- Would probably be the first proper CFB dynasty in the royal sense of the word, not necessarily the football winning sense. Which at least would be somewhat memeable
Did i miss anything?
…as a new member of Conference USA or similar.
Right. The next 3-4 years are CRITICAL, and we need to be positioned well when the endtimes come for the ACC.
He was a grad assistant umder Phil fulmer too
That's a wild pedigree. Fulmer, Spurrier, Stoops, Riley, Beamer, Kirby
I have worked with great people with impressive resumes/pedigrees of companies they spent time at and terrible people with the same resumes. At a certain point the resume becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
Yes and no, he is Franks kid and Frank is well liked in and respected the coaching world. That opened doors that lots of people might not get opened as easily. Shane still had to walk through and do the work, but if Shane Beamer and Glenn Schumann resumes are o your desk when they are looking for GA positions, Beamer stands out as some one to atleast talk to.
Don't forget George O'Leary and Sylvester Croom
I think Shane would not be the worst hire, but also not the best hire we could make. Hes been around and worked with a lot of good coaching regimes. I would be hopeful he could bring some good coordinators in.
Id rank him above a SEC/BIG10 coordinator without prior head coaching experience. But below Franklin, Mullen and Chesney.
Do you mean "above" a coordinator? I mean, he does have head coaching experience.
Thats absolutely what I meant. Corrected!
"But let's be honest: if Shane's last name was Smith"
I've said this for probably over 10 years. If his name was not Beamer, there would be no infatuation with him. Would he be a possible candidate? Sure. But no one would be really pushing for him. I would not be angry if he came here as HC. But would not be all psyched either. Never felt like he was a great recruiter. Sure, got good people to Oklahoma. Lots of people could do that. Was he bad? No, was okay. Didn't seem great as a coach here. Not bad, but not great. Has done a solid job at SC. Could be okay-to-solid. Nothing more.
Franklin would raise the floor but he has a pretty solid glass ceiling - he's not going to win the big games.
Shane, to me, is Franklin lite. He'd raise the floor, but probably not quite as much as Franklin would. Its also harder to tell where his ceiling is but he's been coaching in the SEC for a few years and, though he hasn't been bad, hasn't really impressed me.
Its genuinely cute that our fans are worried about the 'ceiling' of coaches like Beamer or Franklin.
Fact of the matter is, where we are right now is far below the floor that either coach would have here. Both of them would have our standards raised far above what we have grown accustomed to the last decade. And in all likelihood, neither of them would be here long enough for us to even have to worry about bumping up against their ceiling.
Like cmon, Shane Beamer has been a thorn in Dabo's side since he took over, going 2-2 against Clemson, who might not be what they used to be, but is still a school we haven't beat since 2007. That's a level we can't even approach right now and we want to sit here and complain that he's just not overall successful enough to be our head coach? GTFOH
pretty strong language here
Franklin and Shane are not at the top of my list. If you disagree with that, fine but you don't have to be so condescending about it.
I've said before and I'll say again - if we hire Franklin I'll be okay with it. Wouldn't love it, wouldn't hate it. I think he's a "safe" hire. I don't have as much confidence in Shane. I think it's unlikely either of those coaches end up in Blacksburg, though. I think Franklin will get better offers and I don't think Shane wants to work in his dad's shadow. I'd be surprised if he came to Blacksburg without a huge pay raise and he's already making more money than I think we want to pay our next HC.
A lot of good points tho.
Agree on Shane = Franklin lite
This is exactly where I'm at. Take the name off. We could do better (I think?) but we definitely could do worse.
we definitely have done worse.
I live in Columbia, SC, and while I'd prefer that we don't hire Shane back to VT, it's hard to say he isn't a great recruiter. Before he was the head coach at SC, he brought in Alshon Jeffery, Stephon Gilmore, Marcus Lattimore, and Connor Shaw. He was a big reason that "The Old Ball Coach" did as well as he did while at SC.
That...that hits HARD...
I am a hard no on Shane.
Too many connections to the status quo in Merryman.
This year was supposed to be Shane's coming out party and it's been a disaster. Have they played some of the best SEC teams? Yes but have they really been competitive in those games? No. They got steamrolled by Vanderbilt and Oklahoma. They fell on their face in the 4th Qtr against Missouri. LSU, they got a FG in first drive of the second half and failed to score again the rest of the game.
Is he better than Pry? Absolutely 💯
Is he better than a number of candidates proposed? Yes again.
Is he ready to rebuild this program from ground up? That I am not sure of.
Is he ready to really tear down Merryman to compete in today's football? I am torn on this as well. I think he wants to be successful so will make decisions on that path but not sure he will truly clean house.
I want a clean house.
I think the last name has a lot to do with the appeal of Shane. For me, its got more to do with him being a former player, being here his entire playing career, AND having some success in the SEC. Take out the "Beamer" and change it with something like "Randall", or "Suggs", or "Adibi"... hell, we'd flip out if Dave Meyer was having this success elsewhere and my expectation is that we would all say its time to bring him home. My only hesitancy is that past success is no guarantee for future success. Look at Scott Frost.
What excites me about Shane is he was there when the culture was at its peak. What concerns me is that he was also there went it all started to go to hell. And even with the other team's playbook he couldn't find a way to get the team in the endzone.
tldr we are not a serious program if we hire shane. I told joe: we are on this trajectory unless frank steps in and stops it.
on the other hand, if shane comes here and lives up to frank's legacy or (Allah permit) surpasses it... it will basically be the greatest story in the history of cfb. I'd be a bitch and wipe a tear at his first presser
at least we aren't all clamoring for mv7
Shane isn't a splash hire right now, given his record at South Carolina, but he does everything we'd need a coach to do, and he's got more experience and is a better all around coach than our last two coaches. He can put the program on the right path.
Though Shane isn't obvious top pick, he should absolutely be on our list of possibilities. He would absolutely be as fired up as a person can be to get our program back on track. It wouldn't be just another job for him. he'd be ready to light the place on fire.
If he returned to VT, there can be no doubt that he'd give it his very best. For that reason, I'd be OK with it.
While I agree with the general context of your post, the same could be said about Pry coming here.
Just a small difference of a guy who has never been a head coach at any level before being fired up and a guy who is currently a head coach at a SEC school who has legitimately risen their profile since he's been there being fired up.
Pry should never have even been an option.
Shane has actual experience as a P2 program head coach, in addition to his bloodlines and VT experience.
Those aren't comparable coaching resumes.
My opinion is if Shane is hired as the HC then VT as an organization is cooked. They have no new ideas and can't let go of the past. They clamor for the old days and they have no idea how to replicate that without a Beamer being the HC. CFB in '25 has passed by the decision makers and they have no idea what to do or how to catch up. Maybe this is why they got rid of the 'Invent the future' motto.
I have already lost a lot of interest in the program this year and this coaching search isn't pulling me back in. If Shane is hired I might just not care anymore and just look for the game results when I find time. It would be nothing against Shane but that is just not the direction the program should go.
While I share your other concerns, I wouldn't put too much stock in what we are hearing in the coaching search. It is all just rampant speculation at this point. Lots of rumors and rumors of rumors. Even the breakdowns here, while useful and interesting, don't actually tell us anything about what is being discussed in the committee.
One of the problems of moving on from Pry when we did is that we have weeks and weeks of time worry and over analyze this situation when it is very unlikely we are going have any real information before the end of November or the beginning of December.
edit: though I'd love to be done sooner if that is possible. I just don't think its likely.
the only way we're done sooner than Nov/Dec is if we hire Franklin - which is a move I wouldn't love but we could do worse and with the shear number of openings I'm expecting there to be this winter I do worry that we're going to have a lot of competition which could result in us settling on a coach that wasn't a top pick for anyone (sorta like Pry)
I think it's more that it seems like there are too many cooks in the kitchen and many of those people are not on a single page of what we need. It seems to me like we had stated a plan for this next hire(s) and then decided to just half ass it as we go along and hope that we fall into a good hire.
Sands fires Pry, they hire a committee to filter resumes, Whit makes the hire. Seems to me like nobody wanted to Fire pry that could and nobody wants to be the person to hire the next coach to me. All the while we stated we are hiring a GM but nobody knows what the position will be for and who it will report to. Just seems like we are winging it as we go along because there was no plan for after we fired the football HC. From my perspective it's just all complacency and going through the motions to fill a position.
Hiring Shane seems like a 'We tried nothing and we are all out of ideas" position to me. Don't get me wrong, I like Shane and think he is a good coach but I just don't see it being the best hire for the long term future of VT football.
Shane Smith anagrams to "Math Shines". Which it does, because math is awesome, but Shane's math, as seen by the statistics in the article, is not that great.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Smash Thine", which tells me that if he comes to Tech, he is going to woo all our wimmens. Don't want that either.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Sheath in Ms", which means see above.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Meats In Shh", which means see above again, but with some darker overtones.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Mash the Sin", which means see above again, but also could be a catchy catchphrase.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Mean Sshhit", which is true, he does have a bit of a temper.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Mensa Sithh", which tells me that he is secretly an evil genius Sith Lord.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Ha Mess Hint", which hints at the fact that it will be a mess if he comes here, and other programs see that and are laughing at it.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Ha Sent Hims", which means that other coaches are pranking him by sending him ED medicine.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Hash Stem In", which means that he doesn't take the stems out of his weed before packing the bowl, which is bad karma. (Or is it not? I don't know.)
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Ham Then Sis", which......nope, I'm not going there.
Shane Smith also anagrams to "Math He Sins", which makes me think that he thinks it's okay to divide by zero, which it isn't, not ever.
And finally, Shane Smith anagrams to "Has Men Shit", and for that reason, he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Virginia Tech program, ever.
YES AND... Shane's actual name (Shane Beamer) anagrams to:
Man Hears Bee works better.
I'm not ruling out Shane coaching here ever.
But honestly, right now I think he'd be about my 4th or 5th choice.
He could be right in the future. But now is the wrong time.
I know lots of people keep suggesting we wouldn't consider Shane if he wasn't a Beamer, but honestly I don't think he would consider VT either if he wasn't a Beamer.
Its a good point.
I don't think that Shane's resume necessarily makes him a bad candidate (though I'd argue he isn't a great one), and I also think his history with the program and connections within the Athletic Department would ultimately be a net negative for an organization that needs a complete overhaul.
The old guard at VT needs to go, and we need to stop operating like its 1999. That requires someone who would be willing to clean house, and I doubt Shane would do so.
I agree. I don't really have strong feelings either way on Shane, but I do think it's funny how many of us think VT is too good to even consider a sitting SEC head coach.
Here's my issue with Shane. Could he be good? Potentially, I think he would certainly do things differently than the old guard mentality.
But could VT do better? I think so. Realistically, we are only seriously considering Beamer because of his last name. I get he had a couple good years at South Carolina. But that program is screwed in the new non-divisional SEC (look at this years schedule). I really think the big rub with Shane is he comes off as arrogant and entitled, and let's face it - I think he largely got the jobs he did in his career because of his dad. The silver spoon mentality if you will.
Is he really any good? He's struggled hiring good OCs there (does that remind you of anyone?) It shouldn't be too terribly hard to recruit the mid Atlantic as an SEC program when NC and VA are not (yet) in the SEC footprint.
I just feel like we are getting excited about Beamer nostalgia and an SEC HC that had a ton of help and media/industry hype to help get him where he is thanks to his last name. Could he do ok at VT? Again he could. But should we cast a wider net and work in VT's best interest first? Absolutely.
Personally, I want this program to land a big hire and prove that VT can live without the Beamers.
How many P4 teans hire away a P4 coach with a winning record?
I agree hiring him means a lot of issues at VT that aren't issues with Shane. But the implicatiosn of where are AD is are big.
We can do a lot worse than an SEC coach with a winning record.
Barring an upset of a top 10 team, Shane is staring down the barrel of a 5-7 season and that assumes wins over Coastal Carolina and Klempson. Klempson is a home game for SCar. Their remaining SEC schedule is #4 Bama, #8 Ole Miss and #3 Texas A&M. If they lose those games they will finish 1-7 in SEC play.
But how many coaches could do better than Shane at SCar?
He has had four Top 25 recruiting classes (18, 22, 22, 24) and his transfer classes even better (9, 11, 27, 16, 15) and yet so far he has lost all four SEC games by 9, 10, 19 and 24. Their wins are over us, SC St, and Kentucky, the only winless SEC team.
Second halves they have failed to make adjustments or been able to counter adjustments. They are double digit underdogs to Bama this weekend.
Its not just that they are losing, it's how they are losing. This was supposed to be his loaded superstar team and yet they are getting dogwalked week in and week out. I get that he is facing some of the best in College Football but they aren't even competitive. Loss by 9 they didnt score in 4th Quarter, loss by 10 they didnt score in last 23 minutes. Against Oklahoma they did not score in the 2nd half. Against Vanderbilt, they scored on their first drive and didnt score again. They have scored 79 points in their five SEC games. 35 against Kentucky, 20 against Missouri and then 10, 7 and 7 in their other three.
Sorry even against good teams that's red flags everywhere.
His offense isn't where it should be.
But this is the reason he might be available. If he had South Carolina at the top of the SEC, then VT wouldn't be able to afford him, even if both he and VT wanted to come to an arrangement.
A 5-7 season with 5 losses to top 10 team, and all teams might still be ranked at the end of the season.
But can we still party like it's 1999?