T1B

Papa Willie wrote:Fucking RACK SPARTY!

I wore a green god damned shirt today for you Mgo, and I jumped up like a little school girl on acid when Sparty blocked the kick!

Whattafuckinggame!

Well, rack you my friend.

Congrats to Sparty.

Only B1G winner so far today.

props sparty...great comeback...

oh and FUCK YOU OHIO STATE IN THE GOAT ASS...what did you have to lose today you pathetic pussies...let it all HANG OUT you fucking pussies but no they played like they didn't know how to pass more than 10 yards down field and shit...Urban probably pulled all his fucking hair out...fuck you Gene Smith...FUCK YOU...

Wait, what happened to the best team losing because they missed field goals? You mean that doesn't actually make sense?

Are you really going to keep pursuing this?

What happened to you, Python? Seriously. You used to be the King of One Liners. You've turned into this humorless, bitter man. What's the deal? Mid life crisis or some shit?

I'll pursue it until Mace admits it was a dumb statement. I've seen you guys be merciless to people who are idiots, like M2 for instance.

Python wrote:I'll pursue it until Mace admits it was a dumb statement. I've seen you guys be merciless to people who are idiots, like M2 for instance.

No, it wasn't a dumb statement, but I'll admit that you're a dumbshit. IMO, Alabama has the better team and they'll win the title next week.

Python, seriously, you've never watched a game where you ended up coming away from it thinking the losing team was the better team? Hell, half this board and a good chunk of the national media thought Bama outplayed LSU in the first meeting, and will beat them in the rematch. These are hardly a farfetched couple of notions.

Absolutelly not. I've seen games where a team could have easily won had they executed correctly and done some things they normally do well all year long. But that's the whole point. If a team fails to do enough correct things to win, they don't deserve to win. Take Mace's Alabama example. He says all they had to do was make some field goals and they would have won. Well no kidding. They were forced to attempt long field goals because of LSU's defense. They missed key opportunities to put points on the board but didn't. They didn't deserve to win. They played the full 4 quarters just like LSU and they came up short because they didn't put together a complete package for the game. Missed opportunities due to a tough opponent.

Now let's take Mace's example and move it to the Georgia game. Georgia did the exact same thing...missed field goals. But no one is saying they were the better team. Quite the opposite. They were the inferior team because they didn't execute. Like I said earlier, it's really simple. It all goes back to something we've always said on these boards from day one.

Scoreboard.

So, okay, you feel that the Kansas City Chiefs are better than the Green Bay Packers.

Gotcha.

What forum are we in?

The 15-1 Packers are better than the 7-9 Chiefs.

13-0 LSU is better than 11-1 Alabama.

This isn't that hard.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

This isn't that hard.

Sincerely,
Mrs. Mace

Your analogy sucked. The question put to Py was whether a team that lost a given game might still be better than the winner of the game, and he said, no...scoreboard.

Py, you need an example from the college game? I guess Iowa St is better than Okie St.

Your analogy sucked.

The end result is still true. SCOREBOARD.

Why the heck do they even keep score then? Whoever scores more points than their opponent wins and the other team loses.That means the winner is better than the loser. It's really simple guys.

No, it really isn't. You may be, though, at least when it suits you to be so.

Both teams will have the opportunity next Monday to prove who's the better team and I'm not going to argue the point with dumbfucks like Python all week leading up to the game. I don't really give a fuck one way or the other, and wouldn't care if both campuses dropped off the face of the earth, resulting in a significant increase of the average IQ in the country.

That'd represent the loss of an awful lot of gorgeous Southern Coed Tail, though, Mace. That wouldn't be good.

How about we keep a little common sense about us? I don't care who said what. Perhaps a 7-9 team beating a a 15-1 team means they were better that day. But who cares? Said 15-1 team already punched their ticket to the playoffs. There was nothing on the line in that game for GB.

No, we're talking about an undefeated team vs a one-loss team...with said loss coming to said undefeated team, at home. LSU is better. By some wide margin? No, but better. They proved it on the field in Alabama's house. If we don't go by actual, on-field results, what the fuck else should we go by?

Van wrote:That'd represent the loss of an awful lot of gorgeous Southern Coed Tail, though, Mace. That wouldn't be good.

Ha! Like that would be of any significance to an old fart like me.

So let me get this straight. LSU beat Alabama but they're not the better team. And if Alabama beats LSU, then they're definitely the better team. Sounds to me like there's nothing LSU could have done to convice you. Win or lose, they inferior to Bama.

They played them straight up and won. Scoreboard.

Mgo, quit trying to be PC. You know as well as I do that all that game showed us is those two teams are dead even. Even Py says they'd go 5-5 if they played ten times.

I watched the game, same as you did. No way I came out of that one thinking to myself, "Yep, LSU won 9-6 in OT, so they're better." Instead, I came out of it thinking, "Bama should've won it. They looked to be the slightly stronger team, but they blew it."

Whatever. One way or the other, I doubt the rematch will be quite so hairsplitting close.

I'm not being PC. LSU went into possibly the most hostile environment in all of cfb this year and won, and they're undefeated. I'll defer to what I already said:

LSU is better. By some wide margin? No, but better.

Python wrote:So let me get this straight. LSU beat Alabama but they're not the better team. And if Alabama beats LSU, then they're definitely the better team. Sounds to me like there's nothing LSU could have done to convice you. Win or lose, they inferior to Bama.

They played them straight up and won. Scoreboard.

Yes, dumbfuck, LSU won the first game and has scoreboard but, in my opinion, Alabama has the better team and will have a chance to prove it on Monday night. I could be wrong and, if I am, I won't give a shit. Should that happen, I'll be happy to post in here that LSU has the better team.

Python wrote:So let me get this straight. LSU beat Alabama but they're not the better team.

Correct. Well, possibly, anyway. The way that game played out, it provided inconclusive evidence as to which team is really better.

And if Alabama beats LSU, then they're definitely the better team.

Not if they win in the same fashion that LSU won the first one, nope. All we'd have then is a split of two inconclusive games. Bama would have the trophy, is all.

Sounds to me like there's nothing LSU could have done to convice you. Win or lose, they inferior to Bama.

Not at all. Clearly, you're not paying attention to what anyone is saying. Had LSU won convincingly, that would've been different. They didn't. If they win the rematch in convincing fashion, that'll put paid to the discussion.

Van wrote: Had LSU won convincingly, that would've been different.

Wisconsin didn't win convincingly. Georgia missed some field goals. Georgia must be the better team.

Huh? Neither Georgia nor Wisconsin won at all, much less convincingly.

Did someone spike your gumbo?

Python wrote:

Van wrote: Had LSU won convincingly, that would've been different.

Wisconsin didn't win convincingly. Georgia missed some field goals. Georgia must be the better team.

Georgia didn't play Wisconsin, dumbass, and, besides, neither of them are playing for the national title, so no one really gives a shit.

I meant Michigan State and you knew that. So answer the question.

You made a statement. You didn't pose it as a question.

Really, Van? Really? Good Lord.

Nevermind.

Papa Willie wrote: One statement I saw that I think was 100% correct - if they played 10 times, they'd go 5-5.

That's genius right there.

Yep.

I said it, Blimpy.

Bwhahahahahaha


Porky's not too bright.


If you really want to confuse him and send his head into a 10th bucket of KFC... just mention 3 words.































"Grand Jury Report".


He'll think it's a newspaper article from the liberal media.

There's a thread on this board where multiply posters tried to explain to him that a "Grand Jury Report" had nothing to due with it being a newspaper article... and he still couldn't figure it out.


When it comes to intelligence... "Porky" isn't hanging out at the top of the "Totem pole".

M2, why do you insist on placing quotation marks around random words that flat-out should not be in quotes? Of all your bizarre quirks, swear to god, that's the one that consistently paints you as a total moron.