ADVERTISEMENT

Pumper Logic Explained

Beamer Preseason: Get in the boat, get excited, we're going bowling this year! First year coach with unknown coordinators? Don't ask questions, just blindly follow. Little Shane's energy will push us through and he REALLY wants to be in Columbia!

Ugly win at ECU: A win is a win, the offense will figure it out. Satterfield is a mix of Riley and Joe Brady, what can go wrong?

Barely escape Vandy: Well what did you idiots expect? This team would go 0-12 with Muschamp, 4 wins is better than 2 wins last year. Ignore the all SEC schedule last year, doesn't matter. Little Shane needs 5 years to turn this around.

End of Season 1: 1-7 in the SEC isn't a shock, Little Shane needs 10 years to turn this around. We knew this team was terrible, Satterfield is the only thing holding us back. He deceived little Shane, can't blame him. Shane can't call plays, he was confused on what to look for in an OC
Proverbs 26:4-5 – Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes. The self-confident fool thinks too highly of himself and his opinions, and he shares them freely.
 
Beamer Preseason: Get in the boat, get excited, we're going bowling this year! First year coach with unknown coordinators? Don't ask questions, just blindly follow. Little Shane's energy will push us through and he REALLY wants to be in Columbia!

Ugly win at ECU: A win is a win, the offense will figure it out. Satterfield is a mix of Riley and Joe Brady, what can go wrong?

Barely escape Vandy: Well what did you idiots expect? This team would go 0-12 with Muschamp, 4 wins is better than 2 wins last year. Ignore the all SEC schedule last year, doesn't matter. Little Shane needs 5 years to turn this around.

End of Season 1: 1-7 in the SEC isn't a shock, Little Shane needs 10 years to turn this around. We knew this team was terrible, Satterfield is the only thing holding us back. He deceived little Shane, can't blame him. Shane can't call plays, he was confused on what to look for in an OC.
I think Beamer will be judged by what he does this offseason moreso than what the results have been in the field this season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscwatson21
I think Beamer will be judged by what he does this offseason moreso than what the results have been in the field this season.
I've been saying this for awhile. This offseason is going to be where we really find out a lot.

If he can't find some difference makers it may doom his entire time here by digging a hole he can't get out.
 
Really bad. Strippers and monkeys bad.
Please tell me one man who is responsible for a woman’s actions. Or is guilt by association ok with everyone?
Yes, I know you said that in jest. Just thought it would be an appropriate post to add my comment. Sorry.
 
I think it's usually the most recent thing that people look at. Earlier stuff usually gets discussed later on.
Good point. The contrast between the Florida performance and the Mizzou performance is what everybody is focused on right now. Jason Brown is front and center, while Noland and Doty are in the background. The rushing success against Florida vs the rushing fail against Mizzou is what we care about.

Some will say the pressure is off Beamer because we’re not expected to win the last 2 games. But losing the last 3 games is certainly not going to look good. I think it’s absolutely imperative that we look better, win or lose. That’s what the program, staff, players and fans will sit with for a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: king ward
If we lose out, emphasize more wins than expected, we fire a couple coaches, have a good recruiting year and make a couple good hires.

Some instant relief, but the real test comes next year when people start looking for those changes to work. It's noise now, people doing what people do on message boards. Next year, it's a little more real related to job retention.
 
If we lose out, emphasize more wins than expected, we fire a couple coaches, have a good recruiting year and make a couple good hires.

Some instant relief, but the real test comes next year when people start looking for those changes to work. It's noise now, people doing what people do on message boards. Next year, it's a little more real related to job retention.
What would you call a good recruiting year?
 
Please tell me one man who is responsible for a woman’s actions. Or is guilt by association ok with everyone?
Yes, I know you said that in jest. Just thought it would be an appropriate post to add my comment. Sorry.
Worse than being responsible for a woman's actions, imagine being held responsible for a monkey's actions. The monkey was in a cage and the kid thought it a good idea to go taunt the monkey. Here is a tip, don't taunt monkeys, they have teeth. But it is symbolic of when things go wrong, they seem to all go wrong. The coach did nothing wrong, really, but the headlines just are hard to make it feel that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vacock#
Now you can add one more to make that 9 games of dysfunctional play and coaching. Of course we now know the one "good win" wasn't as good as was many thought since it is obvious UF has mailed it in.
A 3 point loss to Missouri is "dysfunctional"? No coach on earth will be satisfactory by your standards.
 
So are we pretending the game was actually that close?
Y'all are the biggest Debbie Downers I have ever seen. It isn't like this was a 3 TD blowout. It was 19 first downs to 20 first downs. 3 TO for each team. Missouri had quite a bit more total yards, but SC had slightly more passing yards. The first half was a toss up until the last seconds. Missouri controlled the 3rd qtr and the 4th up until 12:31. After that it was all SC and it looks to me, having scored two TDs in the last seven minutes, if SC had another 4:00 minutes or so it would have won the game. SC finished strong. It is ridiculous to call this game dysfunctional. No one likes a loss, but this is far from a dysfunctional game by SC.
 
Y'all are the biggest Debbie Downers I have ever seen. It isn't like this was a 3 TD blowout. It was 19 first downs to 20 first downs. 3 TO for each team. Missouri had quite a bit more total yards, but SC had slightly more passing yards. The first half was a toss up until the last seconds. Missouri controlled the 3rd qtr and the 4th up until 12:31. After that it was all SC and it looks to me, having scored two TDs in the last seven minutes, if SC had another 4:00 minutes or so it would have won the game. SC finished strong. It is ridiculous to call this game dysfunctional. No one likes a loss, but this is far from a dysfunctional game by SC.
After that fumble in the first where we would've gone up 14-0, Mizzou pretty much controlled that game. Partly because our idiot OC quit going with what had been working. Again.

To me, it looked Mizzou took their foot off the gas when we scored the late TDs to make the score appear respectable. But after that, they ran it down out throats with relative ease to ice the game.
 
Y'all are the biggest Debbie Downers I have ever seen. It isn't like this was a 3 TD blowout. It was 19 first downs to 20 first downs. 3 TO for each team. Missouri had quite a bit more total yards, but SC had slightly more passing yards. The first half was a toss up until the last seconds. Missouri controlled the 3rd qtr and the 4th up until 12:31. After that it was all SC and it looks to me, having scored two TDs in the last seven minutes, if SC had another 4:00 minutes or so it would have won the game. SC finished strong. It is ridiculous to call this game dysfunctional. No one likes a loss, but this is far from a dysfunctional game by SC.
You're leaving out the fact that Missouri is terrible at football.
 
Proverbs 26:4-5 – Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes. The self-confident fool thinks too highly of himself and his opinions, and he shares them freely.
Does this not also apply to the overzealous Shane Beamer supporters?
 
Y'all are the biggest Debbie Downers I have ever seen. It isn't like this was a 3 TD blowout. It was 19 first downs to 20 first downs. 3 TO for each team. Missouri had quite a bit more total yards, but SC had slightly more passing yards. The first half was a toss up until the last seconds. Missouri controlled the 3rd qtr and the 4th up until 12:31. After that it was all SC and it looks to me, having scored two TDs in the last seven minutes, if SC had another 4:00 minutes or so it would have won the game. SC finished strong. It is ridiculous to call this game dysfunctional. No one likes a loss, but this is far from a dysfunctional game by SC.
Missouri is a very poor team. Those of us that watched....we saw two bad football teams duking it out. It wasn't fun or loaded with excitement about the future. It was like watching an "near drowning"...and that goes for both teams.
 
Missouri is a very poor team. Those of us that watched....we saw two bad football teams duking it out. It wasn't fun or loaded with excitement about the future. It was like watching an "near drowning"...and that goes for both teams.
Nah; I watched. Watched my replay as well. I stated on here the week before the game that Missouri looked better than I expected against Georgia; certainly better than the “garbage” description being thrown out by the local talking heads.
 
Nah; I watched. Watched my replay as well. I stated on here the week before the game that Missouri looked better than I expected against Georgia; certainly better than the “garbage” description being thrown out by the local talking heads.

Well, so far their only other wins are south east Missouri state, north Texas, Central Michigan and vandy.

One could see the complaints that they haven't beaten a decent team yet.
 
The game was Kentucky revisited. Mizzou looked like the better team all night, but somehow we were in the game at the end. Not to say that Mizzou is a good team. They’re not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: king ward
Well, so far their only other wins are south east Missouri state, north Texas, Central Michigan and vandy.

One could see the complaints that they haven't beaten a decent team yet.
Yeah, I'm aware of their record. All I have to go by is what I saw against Georgia and us. "Very poor" they ain't.
 
What would you call a good recruiting year?
Well, we currently sit at 19 in the rankings with 4 four stars. That's the area we have inherited since Spurrier's recruiting got going. Of course, he had some spectacular years.

You and I know it requires a decent ranking, outstanding evaluation and sometimes a little luck. We will find out about evaluation as we move forward, but we need to maintain at least the 20 level or just below to improve at any pace.

Combined good evaluation, a top 20 ranking and the portal could make us more competitive.
 
Well, we currently sit at 19 in the rankings with 4 four stars. That's the area we have inherited since Spurrier's recruiting got going. Of course, he had some spectacular years.

You and I know it requires a decent ranking, outstanding evaluation and sometimes a little luck. We will find out about evaluation as we move forward, but we need to maintain at least the 20 level or just below to improve at any pace.

Combined good evaluation, a top 20 ranking and the portal could make us more competitive.
I appreciate your honest answer. Top-20 recruiting classes might get us as high as third in the division. We're going to have to mine gold in that transfer portal - I mean GOLD!
 
  • Like
Reactions: fowl_mood
You're leaving out the fact that Missouri is terrible at football.
They are 5-5 with one of the losses in overtime. That isn't Georgia, but it isn't Vanderbilt, Duke or Bowling Green either. 5-5 SEC teams are mediocre. Not terrible. Not good.
 
After that fumble in the first where we would've gone up 14-0, Mizzou pretty much controlled that game. Partly because our idiot OC quit going with what had been working. Again.

To me, it looked Mizzou took their foot off the gas when we scored the late TDs to make the score appear respectable. But after that, they ran it down out throats with relative ease to ice the game.
No one let's a team get within 3 points to appear respectable. Especially not a team good enough to go up 14-0 on them if not a fumble. I get y'all are disappointed in the loss, but keep some perspective.
 
Missouri is a very poor team. Those of us that watched....we saw two bad football teams duking it out. It wasn't fun or loaded with excitement about the future. It was like watching an "near drowning"...and that goes for both teams.
Your expectations may not be realistic.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT