Had to post this, not this is not me, I would be pulling her hair…
Also for your consideration…
2
3
This reminds of that joke…
“What do women and hurricanes have in common” ?
“When they come they are hot and wet, but when they leave they take your house and your car.”
[quote]Aggv wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Aggv wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Aggv wrote:
As an OSU fan, that sounds highly accurate for most of the women in the state. Although having been to the OSU campus many times (OU grad) there are some exceptionally fine women there, they just either become an “aqua net skank” during that time; or move out of ohio after graduation. [/quote]
Hey man, I grew up in rural Michigan, up above Detoit in the thumb. They’re all over the place up there too. Only reason you don’t see them at Michigan games is because they all go to CMU or MSU!
Or, and probably a better answer, it’s deer season so they’re stuck at home watching the kids.[/quote]
usually those “types” dont qualify for acceptance into UM. [/quote]
You can say “tax bracket” we’re all friends here.[/quote]
I honestly dint mean it in financial terms lol, it was a not smart enough comment.
[/quote]
I think you mean too pretty. UofM is not known for it’s hotties.
Besides I have worked with plenty of UofM Engineers that couldn’t reason their way out of a paper bag.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
4[/quote]
Love the Cross tat so close to the promised land.
Well, Stanford looked like absolute shit tonight against Washington. I was pretty skeptical about the worthiness of their #9 ranking after beating USC. They barely beat San Jose State. Let that sink in…Yes, they barely beat San Jose State. Then they demolished Duke, but Duke fucking sucks. For whatever reason, they’ve just had USC’s number lately and I think it might have more to do with the matchup of styles than the actual physical talent. Their offense struggles to make big plays down the field and even when they had Luck they didn’t take a whole lot of shots downfield. Shit, even with Luck at the helm they still ran the ball almost 60% of the time, if I recall correctly.
Anyways, it seems to put them behind the 8-ball when they get behind or need a quick score, since their QB isn’t Luck this year and the guy simply can’t get into that kind of rhythm when they’ve been pounding the ball between the tackles all night. To tell you the truth, I see some of the same deficiencies with Stanford that I do with the 49ers, which isn’t surprising since they essentially use the same playbook. I like the idea of running early and often in order to soften things up and all that, but it looks like both Shaw and Harbaugh have an inclination to stick with it to a fault at times.
Obviously, they both have to resort to this approach in part because neither of their QBs throw the ball deep very well, and in Stanford’s case they don’t have a legitimate WR with true game-breaking speed outside to compensate. In SF’s case, I don’t understand why they haven’t taken at least a few more shots down the field to both Moss and Manningham. Crabtree is strictly a possession guy, but he’s turning into a very good one. With him and Vernon Davis, there really isn’t any reason why the Niners can’t exploit the defense with some deep balls to fast guys like Moss and Manningham, or even Kyle Williams, who’s probably faster than both of them now.
Yeah man the Pac-12 is wide fucking open.
USC loses to Stanford
Stanford loses to Washington
UCLA loses to Oregon State
Washington loses to Colorado.
Oregon is going to have a loss at some point too. They have to play Washington (at home), USC (in LA), and Oregon State (in Corvallis). Oregon State’s has two huge wins over ranked teams, it’s crazy-time.
I don’t like the the additions of Utah and Colorado, I am not impressed thus far.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I don’t like the the additions of Utah and Colorado, I am not impressed thus far.
[/quote]
Dude I have to say, going to a USC game does wonders for the male ego.