I feel bad about the Jason White joke.
Dude has a statue. I have a varsity jacket and my old helmet.
Shouldn’t be talking shit.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I’m watching ESPN’s FirstTake right now (how the fuck did Skip Bayless not make the Most Punchable Face list) and Kordell Stewart is making a fool of himself right now. He’s saying that RG3 is clearly a better QB and a better pro prospect than Luck. The guy’s a fucking racist who’s only on RG3’s bandwagon because he’s black.
I remember when Tebow became the starter and he kept saying that it wasn’t fair and that he resented that Tebow was getting the chance to play that he didn’t get, that Vince Young didn’t get, that McNair didn’t get and a couple others didn’t get and stopped JUST short of saying that Tebow was getting a shot because he’s white and those players didn’t get a shot right away because they’re black.
Tebow IS a fucking joke, but he’s also 6’3" 250 playing in a totally different situation than Stewart played in, and Stewart wasn’t nearly the same size as Tebow. Besides, I could have sworn McNair and Young DID get a shot pretty early in their rookie season.[/quote]
Lol
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
I feel bad about the Jason White joke.
Dude has a statue. I have a varsity jacket and my old helmet.
Shouldn’t be talking shit.[/quote]
Why there are 20,000 student athletes that are going pro in things other than sports. 
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I’m watching ESPN’s FirstTake right now (how the fuck did Skip Bayless not make the Most Punchable Face list) and Kordell Stewart is making a fool of himself right now. He’s saying that RG3 is clearly a better QB and a better pro prospect than Luck. The guy’s a fucking racist who’s only on RG3’s bandwagon because he’s black.
I remember when Tebow became the starter and he kept saying that it wasn’t fair and that he resented that Tebow was getting the chance to play that he didn’t get, that Vince Young didn’t get, that McNair didn’t get and a couple others didn’t get and stopped JUST short of saying that Tebow was getting a shot because he’s white and those players didn’t get a shot right away because they’re black.
Tebow IS a fucking joke, but he’s also 6’3" 250 playing in a totally different situation than Stewart played in, and Stewart wasn’t nearly the same size as Tebow. Besides, I could have sworn McNair and Young DID get a shot pretty early in their rookie season.[/quote]
Anytime I’m talking to someone and they say “well, Skip Bayless said…”
My brain goes “whhuuuzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…” until it’s my turn to speak.
Bayless is playing a character, loud mouth New Yorker all fancied up just to get under people’s skin.
I hate him.
As for RG3, I like him as a man. I like him as a player. I hope he gets drafted to a system that knows what its’ doing. He’ll probably end up a Dolphin though. I don’t think he wants to be a card carrying black quarterback, it seems the man just wants to play ball.
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I’m watching ESPN’s FirstTake right now (how the fuck did Skip Bayless not make the Most Punchable Face list) and Kordell Stewart is making a fool of himself right now. He’s saying that RG3 is clearly a better QB and a better pro prospect than Luck. The guy’s a fucking racist who’s only on RG3’s bandwagon because he’s black.
I remember when Tebow became the starter and he kept saying that it wasn’t fair and that he resented that Tebow was getting the chance to play that he didn’t get, that Vince Young didn’t get, that McNair didn’t get and a couple others didn’t get and stopped JUST short of saying that Tebow was getting a shot because he’s white and those players didn’t get a shot right away because they’re black.
Tebow IS a fucking joke, but he’s also 6’3" 250 playing in a totally different situation than Stewart played in, and Stewart wasn’t nearly the same size as Tebow. Besides, I could have sworn McNair and Young DID get a shot pretty early in their rookie season.[/quote]
Anytime I’m talking to someone and they say “well, Skip Bayless said…”
My brain goes “whhuuuzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…” until it’s my turn to speak.
Bayless is playing a character, loud mouth New Yorker all fancied up just to get under people’s skin.
I hate him.
As for RG3, I like him as a man. I like him as a player. I hope he gets drafted to a system that knows what its’ doing. He’ll probably end up a Dolphin though. I don’t think he wants to be a card carrying black quarterback, it seems the man just wants to play ball.
[/quote]
Or the Broncos draft him to back up Tebow or take over for Tebow…
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I’m watching ESPN’s FirstTake right now (how the fuck did Skip Bayless not make the Most Punchable Face list) and Kordell Stewart is making a fool of himself right now. He’s saying that RG3 is clearly a better QB and a better pro prospect than Luck. The guy’s a fucking racist who’s only on RG3’s bandwagon because he’s black.
I remember when Tebow became the starter and he kept saying that it wasn’t fair and that he resented that Tebow was getting the chance to play that he didn’t get, that Vince Young didn’t get, that McNair didn’t get and a couple others didn’t get and stopped JUST short of saying that Tebow was getting a shot because he’s white and those players didn’t get a shot right away because they’re black.
Tebow IS a fucking joke, but he’s also 6’3" 250 playing in a totally different situation than Stewart played in, and Stewart wasn’t nearly the same size as Tebow. Besides, I could have sworn McNair and Young DID get a shot pretty early in their rookie season.[/quote]
Anytime I’m talking to someone and they say “well, Skip Bayless said…”
My brain goes “whhuuuzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…” until it’s my turn to speak.
Bayless is playing a character, loud mouth New Yorker all fancied up just to get under people’s skin.
I hate him.
As for RG3, I like him as a man. I like him as a player. I hope he gets drafted to a system that knows what its’ doing. He’ll probably end up a Dolphin though. I don’t think he wants to be a card carrying black quarterback, it seems the man just wants to play ball.
[/quote]
Or the Broncos draft him to back up Tebow or take over for Tebow…[/quote]
You’re just trying to get pat involved in this scrum Deej!
thinly veiled shot across his bow! hahaha
I missed you assholes, had a helluva handful of weeks over the Holidays, nice to be back.
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I’m watching ESPN’s FirstTake right now (how the fuck did Skip Bayless not make the Most Punchable Face list) and Kordell Stewart is making a fool of himself right now. He’s saying that RG3 is clearly a better QB and a better pro prospect than Luck. The guy’s a fucking racist who’s only on RG3’s bandwagon because he’s black.
I remember when Tebow became the starter and he kept saying that it wasn’t fair and that he resented that Tebow was getting the chance to play that he didn’t get, that Vince Young didn’t get, that McNair didn’t get and a couple others didn’t get and stopped JUST short of saying that Tebow was getting a shot because he’s white and those players didn’t get a shot right away because they’re black.
Tebow IS a fucking joke, but he’s also 6’3" 250 playing in a totally different situation than Stewart played in, and Stewart wasn’t nearly the same size as Tebow. Besides, I could have sworn McNair and Young DID get a shot pretty early in their rookie season.[/quote]
Anytime I’m talking to someone and they say “well, Skip Bayless said…”
My brain goes “whhuuuzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…” until it’s my turn to speak.
Bayless is playing a character, loud mouth New Yorker all fancied up just to get under people’s skin.
I hate him.
As for RG3, I like him as a man. I like him as a player. I hope he gets drafted to a system that knows what its’ doing. He’ll probably end up a Dolphin though. I don’t think he wants to be a card carrying black quarterback, it seems the man just wants to play ball.
[/quote]
Or the Broncos draft him to back up Tebow or take over for Tebow…[/quote]
You’re just trying to get pat involved in this scrum Deej!
thinly veiled shot across his bow! hahaha
I missed you assholes, had a helluva handful of weeks over the Holidays, nice to be back.
[/quote]
Me no way.
Yea I was gone from here for about 11 days, went on a cruise, drank like a Frat boy, ate a shit ton of food. Now back on the wagon and back fucking around on here.
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?[/quote]
I think if, for any reason, Ok St. didn’t deserve the title game shot because of the loss to a massively inferior Iowa State team.
That being said, the computers don’t have an algorithm for a teams performance based on their school grieving from losing staff after a plane crash.
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?[/quote]
I think if, for any reason, Ok St. didn’t deserve the title game shot because of the loss to a massively inferior Iowa State team.
That being said, the computers don’t have an algorithm for a teams performance based on their school grieving from losing staff after a plane crash.[/quote]
Okie State was ranked 2nd by the computers, the humans put Alabama second. Okie State had more victories over highly ranked teams than Alabama. No need to rehash all that here. However…
I wonder how many of those putting Alabama second was motivated by how they could/should have beaten LSU. Could there be in the back of many minds the idea they want to see Alabama beat LSU as they could have earlier? And what if they do, what if Alabama wins? Or if LSU wins again on Alabama mistakes?
As Yoda might say, “This one…strong the butthurt will be”
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?[/quote]
I think if, for any reason, Ok St. didn’t deserve the title game shot because of the loss to a massively inferior Iowa State team.
That being said, the computers don’t have an algorithm for a teams performance based on their school grieving from losing staff after a plane crash.[/quote]
Okie State was ranked 2nd by the computers, the humans put Alabama second. Okie State had more victories over highly ranked teams than Alabama. No need to rehash all that here. However…
I wonder how many of those putting Alabama second was motivated by how they could/should have beaten LSU. Could there be in the back of many minds the idea they want to see Alabama beat LSU as they could have earlier? And what if they do, what if Alabama wins? Or if LSU wins again on Alabama mistakes?
As Yoda might say, “This one…strong the butthurt will be”[/quote]
I didn’t realize that. My bad.
Alabama-LSU is a national championship victory either way for the SEC, and it seems that’s what matters most.
I’m more of a Big 10 homer, so it’s been shitty to see that MSU squeaked one against UGA, Nebraska lose to the Gamecocks, and OSU lost to Florida. Wisconsin losing to Oregon doesn’t do the Big 10 any favors either, seeing how Oregon lost to LSU this year.
Of those three I wanted Wisconsin to whip the Ducks the most, didn’t happen.
Michigan absolutely has to win tonight agains Va Tech or else all the Big 10 schools will be downgraded in rankings next season, and, apparently deservedly so.
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?[/quote]
I think if, for any reason, Ok St. didn’t deserve the title game shot because of the loss to a massively inferior Iowa State team.
That being said, the computers don’t have an algorithm for a teams performance based on their school grieving from losing staff after a plane crash.[/quote]
Okie State was ranked 2nd by the computers, the humans put Alabama second. Okie State had more victories over highly ranked teams than Alabama. No need to rehash all that here. However…
I wonder how many of those putting Alabama second was motivated by how they could/should have beaten LSU. Could there be in the back of many minds the idea they want to see Alabama beat LSU as they could have earlier? And what if they do, what if Alabama wins? Or if LSU wins again on Alabama mistakes?
As Yoda might say, “This one…strong the butthurt will be”[/quote]
I didn’t realize that. My bad.
Alabama-LSU is a national championship victory either way for the SEC, and it seems that’s what matters most.
I’m more of a Big 10 homer, so it’s been shitty to see that MSU squeaked one against UGA, Nebraska lose to the Gamecocks, and OSU lost to Florida. Wisconsin losing to Oregon doesn’t do the Big 10 any favors either, seeing how Oregon lost to LSU this year.
Of those three I wanted Wisconsin to whip the Ducks the most, didn’t happen.
Michigan absolutely has to win tonight agains Va Tech or else all the Big 10 schools will be downgraded in rankings next season, and, apparently deservedly so.
[/quote]
I do not officially join the SEC bandwagon until mid-summer.
Agree about Big 10. Definitely rooting for UM tonight. Saw a prediction for a LSU-UM NC game next year with Denard taking the Hiesman. If he can figure out when and when not to run he just might. Plus, he could use about 25 more pounds of mass.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?[/quote]
I think if, for any reason, Ok St. didn’t deserve the title game shot because of the loss to a massively inferior Iowa State team.
That being said, the computers don’t have an algorithm for a teams performance based on their school grieving from losing staff after a plane crash.[/quote]
Okie State was ranked 2nd by the computers, the humans put Alabama second. Okie State had more victories over highly ranked teams than Alabama. No need to rehash all that here. However…
I wonder how many of those putting Alabama second was motivated by how they could/should have beaten LSU. Could there be in the back of many minds the idea they want to see Alabama beat LSU as they could have earlier? And what if they do, what if Alabama wins? Or if LSU wins again on Alabama mistakes?
As Yoda might say, “This one…strong the butthurt will be”[/quote]
I didn’t realize that. My bad.
Alabama-LSU is a national championship victory either way for the SEC, and it seems that’s what matters most.
I’m more of a Big 10 homer, so it’s been shitty to see that MSU squeaked one against UGA, Nebraska lose to the Gamecocks, and OSU lost to Florida. Wisconsin losing to Oregon doesn’t do the Big 10 any favors either, seeing how Oregon lost to LSU this year.
Of those three I wanted Wisconsin to whip the Ducks the most, didn’t happen.
Michigan absolutely has to win tonight agains Va Tech or else all the Big 10 schools will be downgraded in rankings next season, and, apparently deservedly so.
[/quote]
I do not officially join the SEC bandwagon until mid-summer.
Agree about Big 10. Definitely rooting for UM tonight. Saw a prediction for a LSU-UM NC game next year with Denard taking the Hiesman. If he can figure out when and when not to run he just might. Plus, he could use about 25 more pounds of mass.[/quote]
Ugh, yeah. I’ve got my misgivings regarding Denard. I didn’t like how he got moved around so much during critical games like MSU and Iowa, and how they utilized Gardiner in his stead.
Denard throws high and wide for the whole first half until he settles down, I’m hoping they make him run a 5k tonight before the game to wear him out a little, otherwise he’s going to tuck it too much and try to make things happen.
If he comes back next year with some meat on his bones I’m sure it’ll work fine, but UM’s going to need a strong ass running game once he leaves and the development of those backs needs to happen sooner rather than later.
He seemed to progress from run too often, to nor running enough, to running at the right times (mostly). I have hope, he is just a Sophmore. I think if he is going to run he needs to be big enough to both dish out, but more importantly, take some punishment. He is not a good enough passer to QB with that alone.
Hey Nebraska,
Way to shoot yourself in the foot once again this season.
Just like quicksand, once you guys were in it, you didn’t fight to get out. You kept on sinking.
I am hoping next year is a better one.
I really do believe we were the better team but once that fumble happen near the end zone it went down hill from there.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?[/quote]
I think if, for any reason, Ok St. didn’t deserve the title game shot because of the loss to a massively inferior Iowa State team.
That being said, the computers don’t have an algorithm for a teams performance based on their school grieving from losing staff after a plane crash.[/quote]
Okie State was ranked 2nd by the computers, the humans put Alabama second. Okie State had more victories over highly ranked teams than Alabama. No need to rehash all that here. However…
I wonder how many of those putting Alabama second was motivated by how they could/should have beaten LSU. Could there be in the back of many minds the idea they want to see Alabama beat LSU as they could have earlier? And what if they do, what if Alabama wins? Or if LSU wins again on Alabama mistakes?
As Yoda might say, “This one…strong the butthurt will be”[/quote]
I didn’t realize that. My bad.
Alabama-LSU is a national championship victory either way for the SEC, and it seems that’s what matters most.
I’m more of a Big 10 homer, so it’s been shitty to see that MSU squeaked one against UGA, Nebraska lose to the Gamecocks, and OSU lost to Florida. Wisconsin losing to Oregon doesn’t do the Big 10 any favors either, seeing how Oregon lost to LSU this year.
Of those three I wanted Wisconsin to whip the Ducks the most, didn’t happen.
Michigan absolutely has to win tonight agains Va Tech or else all the Big 10 schools will be downgraded in rankings next season, and, apparently deservedly so.
[/quote]
I do not officially join the SEC bandwagon until mid-summer.
Agree about Big 10. Definitely rooting for UM tonight. Saw a prediction for a LSU-UM NC game next year with Denard taking the Hiesman. If he can figure out when and when not to run he just might. Plus, he could use about 25 more pounds of mass.[/quote]
As asinine as it is to try and predict next years championship game what brain donor has seen enough from Michigan to think they’ll be in it?
Not directed at you AG, just wondering who could think that?
[quote]JoeGood wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have been reading on some of the sports page how Okie State did not deserve a title game shot because they barely beat Stanford in large part to the three missed field goals by Stanford. So, using that logic, LSU should not be in the title game either, right since that is exactly why they beat Alabama the first go around?[/quote]
I think if, for any reason, Ok St. didn’t deserve the title game shot because of the loss to a massively inferior Iowa State team.
That being said, the computers don’t have an algorithm for a teams performance based on their school grieving from losing staff after a plane crash.[/quote]
Okie State was ranked 2nd by the computers, the humans put Alabama second. Okie State had more victories over highly ranked teams than Alabama. No need to rehash all that here. However…
I wonder how many of those putting Alabama second was motivated by how they could/should have beaten LSU. Could there be in the back of many minds the idea they want to see Alabama beat LSU as they could have earlier? And what if they do, what if Alabama wins? Or if LSU wins again on Alabama mistakes?
As Yoda might say, “This one…strong the butthurt will be”[/quote]
I didn’t realize that. My bad.
Alabama-LSU is a national championship victory either way for the SEC, and it seems that’s what matters most.
I’m more of a Big 10 homer, so it’s been shitty to see that MSU squeaked one against UGA, Nebraska lose to the Gamecocks, and OSU lost to Florida. Wisconsin losing to Oregon doesn’t do the Big 10 any favors either, seeing how Oregon lost to LSU this year.
Of those three I wanted Wisconsin to whip the Ducks the most, didn’t happen.
Michigan absolutely has to win tonight agains Va Tech or else all the Big 10 schools will be downgraded in rankings next season, and, apparently deservedly so.
[/quote]
I do not officially join the SEC bandwagon until mid-summer.
Agree about Big 10. Definitely rooting for UM tonight. Saw a prediction for a LSU-UM NC game next year with Denard taking the Hiesman. If he can figure out when and when not to run he just might. Plus, he could use about 25 more pounds of mass.[/quote]
As asinine as it is to try and predict next years championship game what brain donor has seen enough from Michigan to think they’ll be in it?
Not directed at you AG, just wondering who could think that?[/quote]
I think it is based on Hokes previous success and good recruiting class, nothing specific said. I could see them contending in a couple of years.
Same could be said for Notre Dame.
We’ll see. They need to whooop ass tonight though.
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
Same could be said for Notre Dame.
We’ll see. They need to whooop ass tonight though.[/quote]
have you seen ND’s schedule for next year? They’re going to have a horrible record next year.
[quote]BradyZ wrote:
I really do believe we were the better team quote]
What makes you say this? I could understand if they had a million turnovers or something, but nebraska didn’t score the entire second half. It was a fight the whole first half, but the second was a beat down.