History would show it’s the other way around. Adkins has been successful in multiple other stops. Satterfield has never been successful at any stop.
So are we keeping Satterfield ?
- Thread starter Snake006
- Start date
I was typing something similar as you posted this.
There is a history of success (or lack of) for both coaches.
Wrong. There is no guarantee we win those other 3 games with Chump and Bobo. I say they lose one if not two of them. They proved 2 years ago that they could easily lose to smaller teams like Troy or ECU.
And dropping 40 points of Florida means the D won the game? LOL. No.
Or we could have a HOF coach that lost to Vandy like Spurrier did two years in a row.
Everytime I see Florida mentioned now it just rings hollow. Samford...freaking Samford dropped 42 on UF in a half. I was impressed with our offense in that game and then reality hit the following few weeks. Outlier fits.
Well, they did have a DC when they played us and not when they played Samford. Probably had a little to do with that.
.
So, he didn't have any success at UT-Martin or Chattanooga? And he was so unsuccessful that Matt Rhule hired him at Temple and multiple other times? And when Tenn Tech was looking for a head coach, they intentionally hired someone with zero success? And before you start crying about him getting fired at Tenn Tech, that has nothing to do with him as an OC.
So, he has never been successful at ANY stop? Or is it just more lying by omission that seems to be a pattern with you?
So, are the ones that want keep him going to say the same when our D is gassed in the bowl game from 6 consecutive 3 and outs by this completely inept offensive scheme.
Low blow that wasn't even a decent response to the post he was trying to reply to.
No it's not. Quite the opposite.
Spurrier inherited a mess and took some time to get it right. Calling Beamer a below average coach at this point bullshit. He's far exceeded expectations.
It was spot on. Not surprising your tater ass doesn't understand.
Ringing hollow is the right term. It was a win, and a needed one. But to ignore the circumstances of that team is disingenuous at best.
Look at his patterns. Rhule hired him as QB/Coach and OC. He was apparently so successful that Rhule then hired a QB coach and shifted Satterfield to RBs.
Muschamp has now had two failed HC jobs so a guy getting a HC gig is often more about who they BS than their ability to be a HC.
When things went south at Tenn Tech it was back to Rhule as a TE coach and then off to the Panthers as an assistant to the OL.
If he was that great of an offensive mind why would Rhule keep shifting him down the line and before we start with the “other guys doing things at Baylor” it didn’t stop him from hiring a QB coach at Temple when that was Satterfield’s position.
I’m not saying Satterfield doesn’t have a good football mind but you being able to recite someone else’s playbook doesn’t mean you can run the offense. To me he’s just another Roper.
I don't get why this is so hard for some people to understand.
He was but based on reports from local beat writers it was more contract based than anything else and that impacted recruiting in his final year there.
You arguing for Satterfield is weird...given we can all see what he has or HASN'T done in his coaching career. Coaching careers are hard. There is a TON of luck involved. Being in the right place, at the right time, etc.
Satterfield, like Beamer, is just way out of his depth in the SEC at this point in their careers. Doesn't mean they will always be in this lane, but you can't fake it til you make it in the SEC. It doesn't happen in this league.
You are making a lot of assumption with your repetitive diatribe. You don't know any of the circumstance around why things were done the way they were done. Maybe he knew a head coach was around the corner for Satterfield and was doing some succession planning. I don't know and you certainly don't either.
But, you continue to say he failed at every stop. Is that really the truth? What about his days at UT-Martin and Chattanooga?
Scored 33 points on O and only 10 in the second half. Our D sealed the game with the TD they scored which “broke their back”. Again, reading comprehension seems to be an issue for you.
But they didn’t have 15 guys out with the flu like they did vs USC. Plus, not having Grantham may have won them the game vs Sanford
Don’t agree Beamer is out of his league but will on Satt. Beamer has done a hell of a job in one year or rebuilding a program let alone for being a first time HC. His only big mistake is if he doesn’t get a new OC.
The OL failures have more to do with the OC. You keep calling dumb plays and protections and the OL is going to look awful.
I know the career summaries will give you all of this glowing information about his time at the programs but it’s always interesting to see what happens there. I can’t really find a lot about Chattanooga other than it appears he was there at the same time as former UT transfer BJ Coleman. There is lots of talk about the years Coleman was there but not much about the year after he left. At UT Martin his first year was worse than their previous season and then Cade Thompson arrived. That should be a name familiar to Gamecock fans as he was one of Spurrier’s first big gets winning a recruiting battle against NC. Things improved with Thompson there getting back to pre-Satterfield offensive numbers and things continued at the same level they were prior to Satterfield after he left.
So if your point is that he might be okay with a QB playing above the level he’s at that won’t be the case here. Rattler didn’t transfer down a level if anything he moved up. I don’t have any doubt that the team will be better next year simply because Rattler is here but that doesn’t mean that Satterfield has suddenly turned it around.
LOL. Already starting with the "it's Rattler, not Satterfield" narrative.
But you are finally starting to get it. OCs that have great QB general look better. OCs with no QB talent generally look bad. It's almost as if the QB is the most important part of the offense and drives how the entire offense looks.
Profound.
Weird how there are all of these other teams with zero to three star QBs that aren’t ranked 116 in offense…
None were playing with 2 FCS leftovers. In the SEC.
Not knocking those players, but it is what it is.
Good coaches adapt to their teams, they don't keep forcing a square peg in a round hole.
You're not going to win titles with bad talent, but you can certainly adapt to accommodate it.
To not have WRs running into each other, and a run game that wasn’t pathetic. That’s not the QB’s fault.
Last edited:
And not going away from what's working for no reason, i.e. using Jones at fullback.
I was thinking that about personnel. There is a thread right now (wide receivers) with talk of players being under utilized, and I think it's pretty commonly held that the rb rotation had similar issues.
