Dave - You must live under a rock. DEI is totally responsible for hiring those who aren't qualified and promoting the less qualified. Go try to get a job at Disney as a white male.
Dawn being Dawn at ESPYs
- Thread starter hahnenkampf
- Start date
Dave - You must live under a rock. DEI is totally responsible for hiring those who aren't qualified and promoting the less qualified. Go try to get a job at Disney as a white male.
Kickbacks and favoritism is older than America itself. Nothing new about it. Nothing unusual. Routine.
Many industries live off of kickbacks and favoritism. Sports certainly live off favoritism for many jobs, probably a majority just like numerous others.
Of course, where this is seen even more than in Washington DC is at the local level: Town, county, and state.
South Carolina is famous for this- and quite popular. Not a week goes by in the SC general assembly legislative session where elected reps aren't dining on the dime of various industry lobbyists, with executives from whatever involved industry there to shake hands and grease some campaign accounts.
In South Carolina, the "kickbacks" often aren't always cash for the PAC helping out the politician. South Carolina legislators have a long history of padding the accounts of certain agencies that help out their own family business back home- or in the case of a few- building a road to their house- or build an interstate exit to make it easier for them and their family to get home.
Kickbacks is how our political system works- and always has worked. Of course, so does big business, tech, industry, manufacturing, and even family businesses - or especially family businesses.
So you're a fan of the kickbacks to our health officials and media that enabled a dangerous experimental product to be pushed on the masses (and our youth) and labeled "95% safe and effective?"
K Street is at the heart of what is wrong with DC. I can't imagine being a proponent of this.
Also, use AI more responsibly. Not like this and your DEI educational punch list. It's glaringly obvious.
Last edited:
Kickbacks in the US. Nothing like showering us with cancer and autoimmune chemicals for profit. It's no wonder we pay the most for healthcare with the worst outcomes.
My God, how did we get from Dawn Staley to your stupid lies and conspiracy theories...
HFCS isn't banned in Europe. That dumb conspiracy theory again. Do people not do even basic research anymore? It's clearly too much of a leap for a mind as rotten as yours.
Sharing "Cooper Wade's" conspiracy theories (and he spreads some real doozies online) aren't helpful, but they are revealing.
I realize that to a conspiracy nut, it makes perfect sense though.
Did AI tell you that? The box ingredients are correct Dave. Maybe check out the crap they are able to throw in our food here versus that of Europe versus trying to obtain a hollow "W"
"But this one nurse at Prisma sez..."
It doesn't take AI to know HFCS isn't banned in Europe like the fool you posted above said
Your lies are so stupid. But that's a liar for you
Now back to Ignore.
Do we need to walk back all of the topics you've been dead wrong about for the last 4 years?
The list is not short and the topics are not small.
So I took the time to look up a few more classes. Of course, most everyone we are recruiting is ranked in the top 10-20 in the rankings so the list of available players we are targeting with offers is small. We don't target many players outside of the very top players. For the great majority of our fans (outside of USCWatson21), this is not only acceptable but is a no-brainer. In other words, to the great majority, we better be only focusing on the very top players.
These players were targeted by USC with offers or recruited with an offer in mind. Several are listed as "former" targets as they have committed elsewhere.
2025 targets - (White players only just for USCWatson21 who is focused on white players)
Lara Somfai
Sienna Betts
2026
Olivia Vukosa
McKenna Woliczko
Now, just for USCWatwon21 - several players we are targeting could be bi-racial. I didn't include them. I personally don't care but USCWatson21 clearly does so I thought I'd put that qualification here.
Last edited:
Now that's a different argument altogether and one that resonates more with me. But saying people do things for money is like saying the sky is blue. That being said do folks think we should fire Dawn, the only coach who wins jack crap here??? Or do we just wish she would talk less about things we don't want to hear? Just trying to understand the argument here?
Last edited:
The problem would be "things WE don't want to hear?" Who is that? The tiny group that doesn't like anything she does? (Almost always the same folks that attack others as "snowflakes" when they don't like something someone else says and whine that they should get a backbone, etc)
Well Dawn has a backbone- a damn strong one. She doesn't care if people don't like it - or if they don't agree. She's going to stand up for what she believes and thinks. She has a very strong backbone.
In reality, she's pretty darn "keep to herself" most of the time. Remember the late Mike Leach? He had a strong backbone too. There was a man that pontificated on nearly every topic, including politics. He gave his personal views all the time- sometimes most didn't know what he was talking about- and many of the same people that would want Dawn to shut up cheered him on because they agreed with him.
I heard him say a few things over the years straight out political, that I didn't see the same way, but in no way wanted him to keep quiet about it. If he had said the same things from a different political standpoint, many cheering him on would have blasted the heck out of him. Hypocrites for sure.
It's interesting the ones that whine the most about Dawn's opinions are, in reality, the ones that are the most sensitive snowflakes around.
I think the overwhelming majority would be and have proven they are perfectly ok with whatever Dawn wants to talk about.
She will never please those that don't agree with her viewpoints - or those that don't see that she has a right to voice them. That's been proven with her winning 3 national titles. If a right wing talking coach was here and had won anywhere close to that, the very same folk would be calling for streets all around the stadium to be renamed in honor of the coach, and they'd likely bow down 2x a day to pray to them.
Last edited:
All the offers are for full scholarships. We don't hand out partial scholarships in basketball.
Anyone can look up our roster and see who signed and assume if someone isn't there, they didn't sign and enroll. No names of white players I listed above signed with South Carolina. I listed the white players (just for you) that we targeted and recruited with scholarship offers since you are focused on white players.
We can't force players to sign with us. Most people understand that. All we can do, and all that reasonable people expect is for us to target the best players available, offer them a scholarship, and recruit them. Reasonable people also understand that, often, the majority of the best players in the top 20-25 are black players.
What a player being recruited by all the top schools decides to do with what is typically 2-4 available slots on a top 3 basketball team is up to them.
You aren't a reasonable person though.
Let's be clear. Are you saying we should fire Dawn with cause?? The cause being she doesn't have enough white chicks on the team?? Not trying to flame at all, I am really trying to understand in plain English what the beef here exactly is?? Or are you just saying you don't like her or you just don't give a shit about womens basketball, except that you post on threads about it anyway?? I am so lost as to what the point is.
The overall vibe I get is you dislike Beamer because he doesn't win and you dislike Dawn because she does.
Last edited:
Where have I said I don’t like Dawn Staley? I was a student when she was hired and knew she would turn us into a winner.
But just because we are winning we can’t pretend she doesn’t have a bias against recruiting white players. A quarter of the WNBA is white and I can really only recall one white player she’s recruited in the last decade. If we have another coach with similar disparities of any race we should have concerns about those practices.
You’re projecting again.
Keep posting strawman arguments to avoid admitting the percentage of white players Staley had signed.
This seems odd when paired with the DEI discussion earlier in the thread (not by you). Dawn clearly is "hiring" (recruiting) the most qualified players because we are absoultely dominating the womens game at a time when there are more good teams and players than ever in history. So why the problem when it goes this way? Again, this is not directed at you Watson, moreso the earlier DEI posters. Struggling to understand the difference?? On the surface it seems contradictory. Help me understand.
It's easy. If Dawn wasn't winning, she would definitely be getting attention because of her biased recruiting along with some ridiculous, Lebron-like comments and stances on certain social issues.
However, she is winning and so she's perceived in a non-racist light as a whole. With that said, I do think she's learned from some of her previous faux pas and lightened up a bit. Credit to her for self-awareness as she matured.
Just because we are the current best team doesn’t mean we recruited all the best players.
The whole point of DEI is that adding diversity can make a great team even better by diversifying.
Imagine how good our team would have been with a Caitlin Clark or Cameron Brink. In reality, we’ve probably missed out on a couple titles because of her recruiting.
It's not banned by the EU but try buying a Coca-Cola in Europe that has HFCS. They have no reason to not use sugar. In the US corn is heavily subsidized making HFCS less expensive than real sugar. Not the case in Europe though I do believe Sweden has banned it from all food products.
Edit: I remember when coke switched to corn syrup. It coincides with our diabetes epidemic.
Your asking a guy - USCWatson - who is mad because we don't focus on white players because he wants Dawn to focus on the skin color of women's basketball players.
1) It's impossible to recruit all the best players- there are a few dozen that are the best- and any coach has to match needs with available players without overrecruiting a particular position on the team. If one class has 6 top forwards, and we only need two, and the highest two indicate they might come here, it would be foolish to focus on lower rated forwards before the higher rated ones choose.
2) DEI is not a thing with players on an athletic team. Never has been. It makes much more sense and would apply to efforts to hiring a diverse coaching staff. A team recruits the best players they have a chance to land.
3) Cameron Brink committed to her "dream" school Stanford before her Junior year of high school. We tried to recruit her before that but she wasn't interested. Same thing for Clark who was focused on Notre Dame and Iowa early on (UCONN also didn't recruit Clark even though she said it was one of her dream schools).
Plenty of white and black players choose not to play at South Carolina, UCONN, Stanford, Texas, etc.
I've heard of nearly everything from fans or disgruntled fans. That doesn't make it an accurate description.
Players labeled "token" are also typically players who the coaching staff feels is a good teammate and can play their lesser role perfectly without causing any issues with the other members of the team. That description applies to no one skin color.
You still continue to rely on this fallacy that white players just aren’t good enough for South Carolina.
Your posting just shows how easy it is for someone to deny their discriminatory views.
I think they have all fallen off over the past year and a half - yes or no? People are alienated and beaten down - tired of being inculcated with competing agenda-driven commentary from what are supposed to be "news" outlets. I stay pretty well informed by not watching any of them.
I really do not watch much news anymore. I tend to now watch more of the business channels to help me with investments. I have heard that NewsNation tries to go down the middle and employs people from both sides. Out of curiosity I watched a little of that channel. But I get bored so easily with hearing repetitive news. So I don't know if they really are neutral. Fox, back in the day, claimed they were "fair and balanced". But that was a joke. CNN after Discovery, and through them, John Malone took over CNN, claimed to shift away from left-leaning analysis to be basically a news provider. But I'm not sure that is the case there either, from the little I watched there. I read there have been layoffs there, as there were last year. I believe since cable came on the scene in the 1990s it has been propaganda on both sides. I miss the days when Uncle Walter Cronkite delivered the news and ending with "That's the way it is......"
When Elon Musk took over Twitter, one of the most vocal critics on the platform at that time was Dan Rather. This was at a point in time when Musk was still revered by the left for his contributions to "climate change" and such, so it struck many as very puzzling.
Since then it has become painfully obvious that Dan's concern was that mainstream news would be exposed for their fairy tales without platform censorship and that's exactly what has occurred. Most of mainstream news has served an arm for DC, Intel Agencies and mostly the Democratic Party (not FOX obviously) for decades. It's just gotten far worse of late because people like Trump have called them all out on their actions and now they are panicking.
Since then it has become painfully obvious that Dan's concern was that mainstream news would be exposed for their fairy tales without platform censorship and that's exactly what has occurred. Most of mainstream news has served an arm for DC, Intel Agencies and mostly the Democratic Party (not FOX obviously) for decades. It's just gotten far worse of late because people like Trump have called them all out on their actions and now they are panicking.
Last edited:
It was fascinating to see these same outlets try to paint Musk as a villain directly after the acquisition. The "arbiters of truth" knew they were about to be exposed and they couldn't contain themselves. Same with some in congress who were overseeing the censorship operation like Schiff.
I posted a number of white players South Carolina has recruited that you either were ignorant of or ignored because it doesn't fit your nonsensical opinion that we don't recruit white players.
We are all sorry we don't have enough white players for you to feel more comfortable.
It always pains me when I see someone on my side arguing like a neo-conservative. Congratulations on making us look bad.
I'm not on your side. We recruit white players. We recruit black players, and I'm sorry that bugs you.
Thank you for the compliment, but...
Thinking that our coach doesn't recruit white players when she- clearly does is not wrong.
It's accurate and fact based. I'm sorry that upsets you.
Last edited:
Another view
What did we learn?
As of right now, this study says Reese is clearly the top rookie this season. She was also the only first-year WNBA player who performed better than average across every advanced metric.In fact, her overall score would currently make her one of the top-25 most positively impactful players in the WNBA so far season. While our methods were very different than what was recently used by Neil Paine for ESPN, the results were fairly similar.
This likely suggests that if you look solely at trusted advanced analytics for this decision, Reese is the pick. But as we know, for many, the decision will include more factors than that.
There is still plenty of time left in the season for players to make their case.
So you are essentially saying we should have white player quotas for womens basketball?? Mens too? How in the halls of Hades is that any different than what I will say is reverse DEI?? Look I am as conservative as they come but I don't blindly follow shit unless it makes sense and this just plain and simple doesn't. Sorry. How much more do you think they would have won if Caitlin Clark, Paige Bueckers and Cameron Brink all came here too?? They have lost 3 games total in the last 3 years by a total of like 7 points. Your argument is crap. If Beamer's team was 100% black and won a national title would you be arguing the same point? I sincerely doubt it.
So, what is the optimal number of white players in each sport since that is where this seems to be going? 50%, 30%, 75%? If you know that one (Chloe Kitts) isn't enough, then how many is?? Chloe started most games. Dawn's coaching staff is pretty diverse, so no evidence of any foul play there. Ask the Bowling Green coach what he thinks? Dawn went to bat for him.
I don't care if they're green and purple. If they're wearing a Gamecock uniform just win baby.
