Thought on Kendal Briles

[JoeMorrisonLives]

Yes, you ignored it. Ill repeat it for you.


Funny how Chadwell sucks at 4-8. Remind me again what our record was last year? And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years? Somehow I think those numbers would be important to you if you chose to argue the other side.

There are two sentences in there with qurstion marks at the end. That means they are questions. And those are the ones you never answered.

I said Chadwell has back to back years of diminishing returns. I said it's easier to win in C-USA. I said I won't defend Shula. You wanted the Chadwell offense. The same Chadwell offense that was the 83rd most productive, playing a G5 schedule where scheme has an outsized impact compared to P4. We don't have the Shula offense, i never liked the Shula hire but took a wait and see approach. You wanted Chadwell, based on his offense. I wanted Beamer based on what i thought his roster management would be, from his time as RC here, and all the coaches he learned under. We're just shy of 50% blue-chip ratio, and that's never been true in my life. However, you have nothing to point to that the spread- option can sustain success at a power program, other tab Oregon 15 years ago. I've also said multiple times i don't think a CEO coach is a bad thing, because he can how a guy to run a different scheme. Beamer's pro- spread experiments got us a few upsets and 1 truly great year. The rest kind of sucked. Maybe he would've been better off hiring someone running that scheme, but dumbed down for college, but it doesn't matter. With mixed results, and overwhelmingly bad in 2025, he changed direction. Now we get to see how the scheme works out.

Again not find defend Shula. It's the dumbest decision Beamer's made. We were better on offense without a team OC the last 3 games than we were with him. We built a defense and special teams that still kept is competitive with the worst offense in cfb. The reason i supported Beamer is still holding true. And if it doesn't work with Briles, he should be done. 3 losing seasons in 6 would be unacceptable. Having one halfway decent OC in 4 hires would be unacceptable. But i still stand by every criticism of the other schemes i made, so why would i want the coaches who'll only run those schemes?

 

[JoeMorrisonLives]

I don't think you understand the comment I was responding to. Beams is Dabo. Not a great coach and certainly no tactician. Good recruiter. Probably as good as anyone at SC could be, but others have recruited equally well.

Upsets do happen, but Shane is not beating a good coach with similar talent in a meaningful game where the other team takes us seriously.

Well, what makes a great coach? Dabo ran the ship that won the ACC before Scott, Venables, and Elliott got their. He established a culture that got the most out of his players, improved then every year they were there, demanded a high standard, instilled resiliency, and I hated every damn minute of it. In 2021, the drop- off on offense started with Elliott, and everyone blamed him. His defense is now worse than it was with Steele calling it. The game passed Dabo by. He's not the first coach to lose his touch, but he was definitely a factor in their success. I think the best way to put it is Dabo makes a lot more excuses now than when he was building.

 

[Lurker123]

I said Chadwell has back to back years of diminishing returns. I said it's easier to win in C-USA. I said I won't defend Shula. You wanted the Chadwell offense. The same Chadwell offense that was the 83rd most productive, playing a G5 schedule where scheme has an outsized impact compared to P4. We don't have the Shula offense, i never liked the Shula hire but took a wait and see approach. You wanted Chadwell, based on his offense. I wanted Beamer based on what i thought his roster management would be, from his time as RC here, and all the coaches he learned under. We're just shy of 50% blue-chip ratio, and that's never been true in my life. However, you have nothing to point to that the spread- option can sustain success at a power program, other tab Oregon 15 years ago. I've also said multiple times i don't think a CEO coach is a bad thing, because he can how a guy to run a different scheme. Beamer's pro- spread experiments got us a few upsets and 1 truly great year. The rest kind of sucked. Maybe he would've been better off hiring someone running that scheme, but dumbed down for college, but it doesn't matter. With mixed results, and overwhelmingly bad in 2025, he changed direction. Now we get to see how the scheme works out.

Again not find defend Shula. It's the dumbest decision Beamer's made. We were better on offense without a team OC the last 3 games than we were with him. We built a defense and special teams that still kept is competitive with the worst offense in cfb. The reason i supported Beamer is still holding true. And if it doesn't work with Briles, he should be done. 3 losing seasons in 6 would be unacceptable. Having one halfway decent OC in 4 hires would be unacceptable. But i still stand by every criticism of the other schemes i made, so why would i want the coaches who'll only run those schemes?

You write posts like tou get paid by the word. And in all that, you still didn't answer the questions.

I'll repost for you.


Funny how Chadwell sucks at 4-8. Remind me again what our record was last year? And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years? Somehow I think those numbers would be important to you if you chose to argue the other side.

I even bolded the two questions for you this time. They appear to be relatively easy to answer. The fact that you refuse to is making my point for me. (Just in case that subtlety went over your head.)

 

[JoeMorrisonLives]

You write posts like tou get paid by the word. And in all that, you still didn't answer the questions.

I'll repost for you.


Funny how Chadwell sucks at 4-8. Remind me again what our record was last year? And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years? Somehow I think those numbers would be important to you if you chose to argue the other side.

I even bolded the two questions for you this time. They appear to be relatively easy to answer. The fact that you refuse to is making my point for me. (Just in case that subtlety went over your head.)

It was 4-8. I'm concerned with why. We git rid of the coach that hand cuffed or offense last year. Who runs Liberty's offense? And that's a stupid thing to do putting a hypothetical in my mouth in not gonna agree to. Teasley failed his show me year and got fired. RB coach that made no impact got fired, worst OC in the country got fired. If Beamer didn't make those changes, i wouldn't defend it at all. Defend the results of the Chadwell offense, since it's what you wanted.

 

[Lurker123]

It was 4-8. I'm concerned with why.

You actually answered a question. This is a step up for you. Good job.

4-8 and concerned with the why. But not concerned with the why for the other guy. Just that he was 4-8 was enough.

And I didn't put a hypothetical in your mouth, I made a comment pointing out how your desire to explain away 4-8 only goes one way.

But, there were TWO questions, and since you're on a roll. And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years?

 

[JoeMorrisonLives]

You actually answered a question. This is a step up for you. Good job.

4-8 and concerned with the why. But not concerned with the why for the other guy. Just that he was 4-8 was enough.

And I didn't put a hypothetical in your mouth, I made a comment pointing out how your desire to explain away 4-8 only goes one way.

But, there were TWO questions, and since you're on a roll. And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years?

Okay, when predicting did the future the question is why something happened and what changed. I'll say this, after 2023, i defended Beamer, Loggains and White. I said OL depth torpedoed the offense, Edge depth hurt the defense, and recruiting made the future look bright for both. The next year was 2024. We had a top defense, the number 48 offense, 9 wins and were one bad call away from going to the CFP. Since then Tennessee reached out to White, but we locked him down with an extension, and Loggains got a head coaching job. Chadwell's offense was 60th in 2024, when you would've rather had him coaching and running things. If we're talking futures, my question is what changed. We replaced the guy that destroyed the offense, fired the OL that failed his show me year, and retained the coach that showed he can put together NFL talent and winning seasons. If this hire falls through, he's shown he can't get hire OC's with Loggains being the only one that did the job. If last year was all we can expect from Beamer, I'd say send him packing, but i think I know what went wrong, and i like how it was addressed.

You wanted Chadwell. In '23 his offense was 9th, in '24 it was 60th, last year it was 83rd. Do you want to defend an offense that's failing in C-USA? Do you want to explain why we should've fired Beamer prior to '24, when you wanted him gone then? How do you account for the drop- off last season when we returned so much? Or do you only care that you never liked him, never wanted him to get a shot, and don't care the what our why if what's going on?

You always try to dictate the framing. I don't agree to your framing.

 

[Lurker123]

Okay, when predicting did the future the question is why something happened and what changed. I'll say this, after 2023, i defended Beamer, Loggains and White. I said OL depth torpedoed the offense, Edge depth hurt the defense, and recruiting made the future look bright for both. The next year was 2024. We had a top defense, the number 48 offense, 9 wins and were one bad call away from going to the CFP. Since then Tennessee reached out to White, but we locked him down with an extension, and Loggains got a head coaching job. Chadwell's offense was 60th in 2024, when you would've rather had him coaching and running things. If we're talking futures, my question is what changed. We replaced the guy that destroyed the offense, fired the OL that failed his show me year, and retained the coach that showed he can put together NFL talent and winning seasons. If this hire falls through, he's shown he can't get hire OC's with Loggains being the only one that did the job. If last year was all we can expect from Beamer, I'd say send him packing, but i think I know what went wrong, and i like how it was addressed.

You wanted Chadwell. In '23 his offense was 9th, in '24 it was 60th, last year it was 83rd. Do you want to defend an offense that's failing in C-USA? Do you want to explain why we should've fired Beamer prior to '24, when you wanted him gone then? How do you account for the drop- off last season when we returned so much? Or do you only care that you never liked him, never wanted him to get a shot, and don't care the what our why if what's going on?

You always try to dictate the framing. I don't agree to your framing.

Interesting, in that entire LONG post of verbal diarrhea, you still didn't bring yourself to answer the question.

And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years?

Again, your non answer is really the answer.

 

[JoeMorrisonLives]

Interesting, in that entire LONG post of verbal diarrhea, you still didn't bring yourself to answer the question.

And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years?

Again, your non answer is really the answer.

No, i reject your framing. It's who would be better here. You liked Chadwell because of his offense, which hasn't drive crap in two years. I said all over reddit that if Beamer doesn't get rid of Shula, he should be fired. I'm consistent, i just don't think last year's results are the end all be all of what's best for next year. I want to know why it happened and what changed. Last year is on Beamer for how he managed the staff. '23 had ridiculous roster issues, but the youth looked promising. '24 vindicates my take on '23. I never trusted the Shula hire, but i didn't think it would get that bad, where the only offensive player that didn't regress was Harbor. And that's squarely at Beamer's feet. Every year, Vegas looks at our roster and sets the over- under. Every year we beat it except falling half a game short in '23 with a paper machet OL, and last year. Everyone knew we were thin in '23, and no coach could change that. So i don't believe we should've died the guy that got us the turn around the next season.

He screwed up monumentally hiring Shula. I would've rathered Satterfield, even though Satterfield still doesn't realize he needs to simplify for college kids. At least his over complex offense had more creativity than Shula. Absolutely Beamer should be on this ice for that absolute blunder. And if the roster was falling apart, and we weren't competitive in our losses, it would've justified firing him. We were competitive and the roster didn't fall apart. We lost a lot of blue-chip OL, but they never really accomplished much here, and I'd trade them for the coach we have now.

I'll say i was late to the party on Teasley. I said last year was his show me year, and we would've been better off dumping him sooner. That OL was miserable, and the regression probably is attributable to scheme, but he showed nothing to justify being here, and definitely had his chances.

 

[Lurker123]

No, i reject your framing. It's who would be better here. You liked Chadwell because of his offense, which hasn't drive crap in two years. I said all over reddit that if Beamer doesn't get rid of Shula, he should be fired. I'm consistent, i just don't think last year's results are the end all be all of what's best for next year. I want to know why it happened and what changed. Last year is on Beamer for how he managed the staff. '23 had ridiculous roster issues, but the youth looked promising. '24 vindicates my take on '23. I never trusted the Shula hire, but i didn't think it would get that bad, where the only offensive player that didn't regress was Harbor. And that's squarely at Beamer's feet. Every year, Vegas looks at our roster and sets the over- under. Every year we beat it except falling half a game short in '23 with a paper machet OL, and last year. Everyone knew we were thin in '23, and no coach could change that. So i don't believe we should've died the guy that got us the turn around the next season.

He screwed up monumentally hiring Shula. I would've rathered Satterfield, even though Satterfield still doesn't realize he needs to simplify for college kids. At least his over complex offense had more creativity than Shula. Absolutely Beamer should be on this ice for that absolute blunder. And if the roster was falling apart, and we weren't competitive in our losses, it would've justified firing him. We were competitive and the roster didn't fall apart. We lost a lot of blue-chip OL, but they never really accomplished much here, and I'd trade them for the coach we have now.

I'll say i was late to the party on Teasley. I said last year was his show me year, and we would've been better off dumping him sooner. That OL was miserable, and the regression probably is attributable to scheme, but he showed nothing to justify being here, and definitely had his chances.

Interesting, in that entire LONG post of verbal diarrhea, you still didn't bring yourself to answer the question. Its a pretty simple one too.

And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years?

Again, your non answer is really the answer.

 

[JoeMorrisonLives]

Interesting, in that entire LONG post of verbal diarrhea, you still didn't bring yourself to answer the question. Its a pretty simple one too.

And has Chadwell had 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years?

Again, your non answer is really the answer.

No, he hasn't. And that has no impact on whether or not he'd be a better option here, or what level of success he'd, or visa offense would have here. Now, why would he field better than the 82nd mouse productive offense here?

 

[Lurker123]

No, he hasn't.

Amazing! You've answered two questions in one thread.

Was it really that hard? I mean, did it really have to take a dozen posts back and forth for a simple yes or no?

 

[JoeMorrisonLives]

Amazing! You've answered two questions in one thread.

Was it really that hard? I mean, did it really have to take a dozen posts back and forth for a simple yes or no?

Is every AD in the country just stupid for not giving Chadwell a job?

Edit: And i keep saying you argue like a boomer for insisting on controllijg the framing, and you're cutting down on my quoted text. It's ridiculous.

 

[Lurker123]

Edit: And i keep saying you argue like a boomer for insisting on controllijg the framing, and you're cutting down on my quoted text. It's ridiculous.

Look at the size of your posts. I HAVE to cut down on the quotes so you dont get confused what part of the diatribe i'm responding to.

In the other thread going on right now, you're having a conniption because you cant understand what im referring to, even though i removed all other text just to reply to one very particular, very specific sentence. Just imagine If there were multiple other paragraphs in there to confuse you.