Kim is not good at hiding his agenda
Comments
-
cliff notes?
-
What has Kim done other than front dawgman some money? Samek started the site and needed some backing so Kim gave him some dough and now he's the fucking taken the whole thing over and ran it into the ground. What's Samek's deal in the first place? Does he take it in the ass from Kim or did he sell his ownership to Kim? Hopefully the latter because I didnt' think he was that much of a pussy.
-
Don't forget Chip Kelley at Oregon. He was always an asshole to the media and didn't give a fuck.
Kim is enamored with shiny objects. If he knew anything about coaching (which he doesn't) most coaches aren't sucking up to a 5' skinny jeans wearing wannabe photographer. Adults are in charge now. To compare him to willingham is silly. Unless he's not recruiting and golfing instead, which he isn't. It will be nice to have a coach who is working on winning rather than tweeting and trying to hit the god damn cross bar from the 40. -
I was never given a fair shot at doogman. I registered as "richie suxon" or something like that, made two posts and blammo. Fucking nazis
-
It doesn't work that way.Tequilla said:Only bringing out the long poasts when needed to shoot down the idea that the flash isn't what builds programs and wins at a high level.
-
This.MikeDamone said:Don't forget Chip Kelley at Oregon. He was always an asshole to the media and didn't give a fuck.
Kim is enamored with shiny objects. If he knew anything about coaching (which he doesn't) most coaches aren't sucking up to a 5' skinny jeans wearing wannabe photographer. Adults are in charge now. To compare him to willingham is silly. Unless he's not recruiting and golfing instead, which he isn't. It will be nice to have a coach who is working on winning rather than tweeting and trying to hit the god damn cross bar from the 40.
The doogmen are so used to getting dickrides from Sark that they just assume that Petersen, who doesn't give dickrides, is the same as Willingham, who was just a dick. They're too stupid to know the difference. -
Tequila, your thoughts about stars in football are really fucking stupid. Alabama has a team full of stars. USC with Carroll were full of stars. Sure, you will have a few skill guys upset about not getting the ball enough, but who gives a fuck? I have no idea how you came up with that shit, and I am now dumber for having read it.
-
All I'm trying to say is that having a bunch of elite players is only great if the elite players do their job. What makes the USC's and Alabama's successful is that when they are competing for titles, they are getting everybody to buy in to the success of the good of the team.
Has Sark ever done that at Washington?
Do you think he'll do that at SC all of a sudden?
Does Petersen have a track record of this?
Yes, in an ideal world you take the best players you can and have play with the team first concept.
But you don't have to have a ridiculous number of elite talent guys to win at a high level. You need a lot of very good players combined with a handful of elite players. -
So you're saying it's the coaching?Tequilla said:All I'm trying to say is that having a bunch of elite players is only great if the elite players do their job. What makes the USC's and Alabama's successful is that when they are competing for titles, they are getting everybody to buy in to the success of the good of the team.
Has Sark ever done that at Washington?
Do you think he'll do that at SC all of a sudden?
Does Petersen have a track record of this?
Yes, in an ideal world you take the best players you can and have play with the team first concept.
But you don't have to have a ridiculous number of elite talent guys to win at a high level. You need a lot of very good players combined with a handful of elite players.
