S'all good, Sam. We've grown accustomed to the arrogance and condescension you people have for schools that threaten to expose your in-bred, over-rated, circle-jerk of a fraud conference for really being no better than anybody else.Sudden Sam wrote:I know I'll alienate (further) all the Mizzou fans in here...and you all seem like good guys, so I'll apologize up front.
Really?Sudden Sam wrote:But I think you'll all admit to the truth of what I post.
Mizzou was, at best, the 7th best team in the SEC.
Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Georgia, and Alabama were all better teams.
Your "better" is wide open for argument.
Mizzou didn't play Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State. How the fuck do you know all four of those schools are any better? LSU can't score, and who the fuck is Mississippi, for cat's sake? Play those games, and you may see your take validated. Or you may not.
I know how much you people cling to opinion polls cast by hack writers and mouth-breathing talk show hosts to validate your "greatness", but last I checked, al.com power rankings or sbnation recruitment sites have yet to crown a champion. In the XII, we played the games to determine such outcomes.
Sudden Sam wrote:Georgia would have been a far better team to have represented the East. But, yes, they blew it.
There you go again with "better". I'm guessing M2 was right about Southern math. Yes, I understand 34-0 at home... I also understand that a one loss Conference record is better than a two-loss Conference record. Hell, the damn 'Dogs lost two in the friggin' Division. So fuck you AND Georgia.
Oh, so it would've been better had Mizzou lost those games. At least, to prop up your patronizing take. Gotcha.Sudden Sam wrote:South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M, and Arkansas almost beat Missouri.
Sudden Sam wrote:The Tigers beat Vandy and Kentucky by 10. They lost to the worst team in the B1G.
So those wins would've counted for EVEN MORE in the standings had the winning spread been 20 or 30? Does Pinkel know about this?!
You wanna hang Indy on us, so be it. We own it. The Hoosiers drug around THE Ohio State for three quarters too, as I recall. Mizzou was in control of the game despite a flat performance before a questionable PI on a 4th and 6 extended Indy’s game winning drive in the closing seconds. Any given Saturday…
Or maybe the kid just made a couple of plays. Or maybe Mizzou isn’t quite the rummy you apparently need them to be. Regardless, Bitterman, much?Sudden Sam wrote:Alabama should have put them away much earlier than they did. Pitiful CB play gave up 150 yards on 3 plays to a scrambling for his life Maty Mauck, Embarrassing, but the Tide has been really good at doing that all year. You're welcome.
The kid regressed this season; I stated this in another thread. Amazing what happens when your team graduates/releases 1,500 yards of receiving offense and the young kids take time to develop. Mizzou had the SEC’s defensive player of the year for the second straight year too, Sammie. What’s your point?Sudden Sam wrote:Mauck 's QB rating was better than only Jeff Driskel and Anthony Jennings.
Mizzou over-achieved in a year where they were supposed to be rebuilding, and managed to win most of the games on their schedule. Yet your precious blueblood Bulldogs still finished second. God really DOES hate the SEC, doesn’t He?Sudden Sam wrote:Missouri is a decent team that got the benefit of a disastrous year in the East. A division populated by shitty teams, other than Georgia.
Hell, I’d rather JOIN Minnesota and the rest of the B1G. But if Mizzou does win, it sure-as-hell won’t be for your benefit. Now go roll a lawn mower.Sudden Sam wrote:Now please go out and beat Minnesota.
