I don't think UNC or ND cared much. They would have just beat us worse if he wasn't shown the door.
But his old friend hired him to hold a clipboard, your family income was saved. Congrats.
Last edited:
Beamer, just happy to be here.
- Thread starter Cockytalk84
- Start date
I don't think UNC or ND cared much. They would have just beat us worse if he wasn't shown the door.
But his old friend hired him to hold a clipboard, your family income was saved. Congrats.
No worries at all. Just wanted to point you the crazy, but it looks like it found you.
Lmao
Crazy is continuing to insult someone for sharing the same opinion as you.
Where you been since 2009??? If you dont agree with "the new Fundamentally changed America" sit down and SHUT UP!!!
Last edited:
UNC thought they would beat us last time. Satt beat them with a receiver at QB.
Tennerr'see thought they would beat us. We dropped 63 on them. Knocked them out of the playoffs.
Clemson thought they would beat us. How did that work out? That's the best one.
We beat them AT Clemson. Knocked them out of the playoffs. Broke their 40-game home winning streak. Hadn't lost at home since 2016. Broke our 7 games losing streak to them. Kept Dumbo from getting a record 8 rivalry wins. And sent their seniors, who had never lost at home, off into the world with their final memory of Death Valley being a loss the SC. Probably the biggest win the rivalry.
I have zero doubt we beat ND with Satt, just like we beat UNC the year before. The howling monkeys phantom play caller certainly didn't get it done.
Hopefully Loggains can get us back to where we were with Satt. And then build on that. He's got 3 years to get it done, and he will get all 3 of them. He deserves it, and I hope gets it done and is then willing to ignore the idiots and stay with us if he does.
Tennerr'see thought they would beat us. We dropped 63 on them. Knocked them out of the playoffs.
Clemson thought they would beat us. How did that work out? That's the best one.
We beat them AT Clemson. Knocked them out of the playoffs. Broke their 40-game home winning streak. Hadn't lost at home since 2016. Broke our 7 games losing streak to them. Kept Dumbo from getting a record 8 rivalry wins. And sent their seniors, who had never lost at home, off into the world with their final memory of Death Valley being a loss the SC. Probably the biggest win the rivalry.
I have zero doubt we beat ND with Satt, just like we beat UNC the year before. The howling monkeys phantom play caller certainly didn't get it done.
Hopefully Loggains can get us back to where we were with Satt. And then build on that. He's got 3 years to get it done, and he will get all 3 of them. He deserves it, and I hope gets it done and is then willing to ignore the idiots and stay with us if he does.
Satt watched us beat UT and Clemson. We never beat them if he wasn't sidelined.
Loggains is a substantial step up from Satterfield, but I don't know if he gets 3 years to prove it.
Oh yeah.
Fire Marcus Satterfield!
Rather than a blast from our past, this is Nebraska, two games into the season. I can't believe they picked up that clown after we gave him the boot. https://huskercorner.com/2023/09/10/nebraska-football-marcus-satterfield-era-end/...
southcarolina.forums.rivals.com
It's funny how Nebraska fans sound so similar to our fans from the last two years.
Every team has a few moron fans that think their dumpster fire is going to turn around in two games. LOL
We had more than just the 2 here now.
We had more than just the 2 here now.
Loggains has potential, but not a great start. He will get 3 years unless he does well and bails on us too for more money.
Not fiction, I provided links. It's not my fault you have trouble reading.
Loggains is a substantial step up from Satterfield, but I don't know if he gets 3 years to prove it.
Delusion howling monkey alternative reality that Satt was sidelined or we lose to Clemson. Only a moron would believe that. Quite the opposite. The bowl offensive fail proved that.
And I don't need to read anything about fools thinking their program will turn around in 2 games. I've seen that from plenty of idiots on our own board. No surprise there would a few there too.
And I don't need to read anything about fools thinking their program will turn around in 2 games. I've seen that from plenty of idiots on our own board. No surprise there would a few there too.
Of course you don't want to read corroboration that your crush sucked all along. Denial is one of your virtues.
If you ever actually read posts, instead of being in such a rush to move on and hurl insults, you might see that a lot of those people aren't expecting a turn around in 2 games. Just signs of intelligence.
Debatable at best.
What's true is that Satterfield sucks. Maybe Loggains gets the chance to show him up. But I think he'll be a scapegoat at some point.
Beating Clemson didn't suck. Beating Tennessee didn't suck. 63 points on Tennessee definitely didn't suck. Beating UNC didn't suck. Winning our bowl game didn't suck. Being the talk of college football for 2 weeks didn't suck.
You can live in your howling monkey alternate reality if you want, but that was Satt no matter how you try to rationalize it in that little howling monkey pea brain of yours. Beamer told you it was. Film showed you it was. And the bowl game proved it.
You can live in your howling monkey alternate reality if you want, but that was Satt no matter how you try to rationalize it in that little howling monkey pea brain of yours. Beamer told you it was. Film showed you it was. And the bowl game proved it.
You may be the only person in the fanbase who actually thinks Satterfield was successful 😂🤣
If everyone else thinks Satterfield sucks but you, who is in the alternate reality?
Honestly, not sure why anybody is talking about winning out, we are completely one-dimensional right now and not sure it can be fixed this year. There is zero chance we win out, let be realists here. The problem with "don't see any that are definite losses" is that it means that none of them are definite wins either. We should beat Jax St and Vandy unless one of those is our "fall flat" game, so there are 7 other games that we "could" lose. I think we will be the underdog in at least 4 of those, who knows by then, so let's be rational and say we win half of the 7 (+/-). If we win over half of them (4 games) and win the two we should win, that makes us 7-5 for the regular season. Is that ok? If we win less than half of them (3 games) we would be 6-6, is that ok? Unless we get a running game I would lean right now to more than likely losing 4 of the 7, and finishing 6-6. Call it what you like, that is mediocre, but is it ok? Time will tell if we play better as the year progresses, like last year, and even so, will that result in W's?
When everyone else was talking about Garrett Riley and Kendall Briles and Dan Mullen (lol) for the next OC here at SC, ONE person said there was no chance we land any of those and we would end up with a project.
Who was right?
Well, I recall saying that Beamer would never hire a bigger name then him. And I remember saying that no coordinator would work for him when they were more qualified to be head coach. So I guess it was me. My problem is remembering which site I posted it on. 🙂
Beating Tennessee and Clemson was done with Satterdield holding a clipboard.
And as the other poster said, when you're the ONLY one singing the praises of Satterfield, the problem just might not be everyone else.
And you were wrong. It wasn't that he wouldn't, it's because he couldn't. Bigger names have better options. More NIL money. Better players. More pay.
Why do you think it took so long to get an OC? We could have had Loggains the day after Satt left?
Plenty of people had doubts about the hire.
She is intentionally confusing people's posts about what they WANTED to happen vs what they thought would actually happen.
Soon, she'll have repeated it enough that it will become reality in her mind.
I gurss you're calling coach Beamer a liar then.
“I could easily go out and hire the hot names, the guys when you read the ‘hot boards’ on some of y’all’s websites, that the general public thinks that’s the guru and that’s the guy we need to bring into the program. I’m not interested in winning the press conference. I’m interested in hiring the best coach available for what we need as a program.
Coach speak. Or maybe he believes that. But we've never had a big name OC. And Spurrier played calls, and struggled worse that Satt at times.
If Beamer knew he was going to let Satt go and Loggains was the #1 target, Loggains would have been here the Tuesday after the Clemson game. Especially with the portal opening Dec 5th. If he was our guy from the start, NO WAY we wait a week and half after the portal opens to hire him when we could have had him well before the portal opened. ZERO advantage to be without an OC for 10 days while people are moving in and out of the portal.
I've never heard ANY coach come out and say that the guy that they hired wasn't the guy they were after. Just coach speak.
If Beamer knew he was going to let Satt go and Loggains was the #1 target, Loggains would have been here the Tuesday after the Clemson game. Especially with the portal opening Dec 5th. If he was our guy from the start, NO WAY we wait a week and half after the portal opens to hire him when we could have had him well before the portal opened. ZERO advantage to be without an OC for 10 days while people are moving in and out of the portal.
I've never heard ANY coach come out and say that the guy that they hired wasn't the guy they were after. Just coach speak.
So you're calling Beamer a liar.
He directly contradicted you, and you're calling him a liar.
I wonder how fast you'd change your mind on "coachspeak" if someone suggested that Beamer saying Satterfield calling plays against UT and Clemson was him being polite in public, and just coachspeak?
Last edited:
He knows the limits you have at SC, and what we "need" is very subjective and gives him a lot of wiggle room to justify a hire that isn't what people expected. Technically, not a lie, but clearly coach speak.
HE DID directly contradicted you when he said it was absurd to suggest that someone other than Satterfield was calling the plays. And you still stick by that absurdly stupid lie.
HE DID directly contradicted you when he said it was absurd to suggest that someone other than Satterfield was calling the plays. And you still stick by that absurdly stupid lie.
Why does anyone think any better coaches would want to come here?? Seriously, not trying to flame. There is very little history of winning. I'm not sure all the money in the world solves that problem. Our best hope now is an up and comer. The established coaches a'int lining up to come here, not now, not ever. Holtz and Spurrier were a brief aberration. Changing out head coaches every couple of years isn't going to fix anything. The rich just keep getting richer and we don't have two pennies to rub together.
I mean you can't say no one is willing to come here then immediately point out that Holtz and Spurrier both came here.
You're proving yourself wrong.
It isn't that SC can't hire a big name OC, it's that big name OC's don't want to work for Beamer.
Then why couldn't we hiring a bigger name than Muschamp or Beamer?
He is absolutely correct. The fact that Holtz and Spurrier couldn't get it done here hurts us now. It doesn't help us.
Yep.
The fact that Tom Herman chose to stay at Houston and wait instead of coming to South Carolina and Billy Napier choose to stay at Louisiana and wait instead of coming here proves it has nothing to do with Beamer.
Different football world with coaches that think differently than old school coaches.
It isn't that SC can't hire a big name OC, it's that big name OC's don't want to work for Beamer.
How in the world do you know that? You friends with the world's best OC's. Sell crazy somewhere else. We're full up here.
We could have hired better coaches than Muschamp and Beamer. That's the problem here.
But you know that, that's why you're making such a nonsensical argument.
Pass me whatever you are smoking and quickly. Name one that is realistic and explain why they would want to come here.
It's probably more that Beamer is intimidated by coaches who are more qualified than him.
