Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

Southern Miss WAREAGLE Forum

1356

Comments

  • Options
    wobidbuswobidbus Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 308
    Name Dropper First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    They're giving UW more respect than it deserves. Just goes to show how far the SEC has fallen.
  • Options
    ApostleofGriefApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Anniversary First Comment

    I know I quit posting here, but I have to say I took a look at that thread and it deteriorated rapidly. It starts off fine, and then some huskyfan gets told to fuck his sister or such.

    Well, I don't see the point of these SEC is not as good as PAC arguments. If they won't let the two play in playoffs, how can we know?

    The south is biased in the polls as we can all see. For one thing there are 3 southern teams and MSU in the "playoffs." Condoleeza rice and Coach Willingham are black and they put this together. Sorry for the racist crap, but I don't think they think those stanford white guys can beat all our southern black guys.

    Serious question: WTH are you talking about? I was nice and didn't flag it since it wasn't about PLU playing Reed College in transvestite flag football this time.
    oklahoma, clemson, alabama, all southern teams... oklahoma not the deep south but still ~southern? the committee is not biased towards the south? Stanford plays a lot of white guys, the southern teams have almost all black guys? Stanford not seen as competitive against these teams?
    Where did my reasoning go wrong?
  • Options
    ApostleofGriefApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Anniversary First Comment
    my post is partly bullshit, admittedly, but there is a grain of truth to it.
  • Options
    WilburHooksHandsWilburHooksHands Member Posts: 6,742
    5 Up Votes First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes

    Here's another thread:

    http://eaglepost.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=363

    WE?

    "USM will actually beat them by 20+. We will have over 200 on the ground and 350 in the passing game. Defensive will get us points and one special team play for a turnover.
    Peterson will be on the hot seat after this game going into his 3rd season.

    USM 51
    Washington 27"

    The way we came out for the last bowl game he's probably not wrong.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    Here's another thread:

    http://eaglepost.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=363

    WE?

    "USM will actually beat them by 20+. We will have over 200 on the ground and 350 in the passing game. Defensive will get us points and one special team play for a turnover.
    Peterson will be on the hot seat after this game going into his 3rd season.

    USM 51
    Washington 27"

    The way we came out for the last bowl game he's probably not wrong.
    Had the exact same reaction
  • Options
    Fire_Marshall_BillFire_Marshall_Bill Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,970
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Founders Club
    edited December 2015

    I know I quit posting here, but I have to say I took a look at that thread and it deteriorated rapidly. It starts off fine, and then some huskyfan gets told to fuck his sister or such.

    Well, I don't see the point of these SEC is not as good as PAC arguments. If they won't let the two play in playoffs, how can we know?

    The south is biased in the polls as we can all see. For one thing there are 3 southern teams and MSU in the "playoffs." Condoleeza rice and Coach Willingham are black and they put this together. Sorry for the racist crap, but I don't think they think those stanford white guys can beat all our southern black guys.

    Serious question: WTH are you talking about? I was nice and didn't flag it since it wasn't about PLU playing Reed College in transvestite flag football this time.
    oklahoma, clemson, alabama, all southern teams... oklahoma not the deep south but still ~southern? the committee is not biased towards the south? Stanford plays a lot of white guys, the southern teams have almost all black guys? Stanford not seen as competitive against these teams?
    Where did my reasoning go wrong?
    Stanfraud lost too many times.

    But the SEC bias has been alive and well for many years, you're correct in that respect.

    I think there's a subconscious bias against McCaffery because he's white.
  • Options
    ApostleofGriefApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Anniversary First Comment

    I know I quit posting here, but I have to say I took a look at that thread and it deteriorated rapidly. It starts off fine, and then some huskyfan gets told to fuck his sister or such.

    Well, I don't see the point of these SEC is not as good as PAC arguments. If they won't let the two play in playoffs, how can we know?

    The south is biased in the polls as we can all see. For one thing there are 3 southern teams and MSU in the "playoffs." Condoleeza rice and Coach Willingham are black and they put this together. Sorry for the racist crap, but I don't think they think those stanford white guys can beat all our southern black guys.

    Serious question: WTH are you talking about? I was nice and didn't flag it since it wasn't about PLU playing Reed College in transvestite flag football this time.
    oklahoma, clemson, alabama, all southern teams... oklahoma not the deep south but still ~southern? the committee is not biased towards the south? Stanford plays a lot of white guys, the southern teams have almost all black guys? Stanford not seen as competitive against these teams?
    Where did my reasoning go wrong?
    Stanfraud lost too many times.

    But the SEC bias has been alive and well for many years, you're correct in that respect.

    I think there's a subconscious bias against McCaffery because he's white.
    Well, it's insane to say the winner of the pac-12 is not good enough to play for the "national championship." I think there is a bias too against McCaffery, seriously.
  • Options
    DerekJohnsonDerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 60,595
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Founders Club
    Washington wins this game.
  • Options
    doogvilledoogville Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 1,184
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam

    Washington wins this game.

    Rather easily?
  • Options
    PurpleReignPurpleReign Member Posts: 5,457
    First Comment First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    doogville said:

    Washington wins this game.

    Rather easily?
    Say... 34-17?
  • Options
    doogsinparadisedoogsinparadise Member Posts: 9,320
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary Name Dropper

    I know I quit posting here, but I have to say I took a look at that thread and it deteriorated rapidly. It starts off fine, and then some huskyfan gets told to fuck his sister or such.

    Well, I don't see the point of these SEC is not as good as PAC arguments. If they won't let the two play in playoffs, how can we know?

    The south is biased in the polls as we can all see. For one thing there are 3 southern teams and MSU in the "playoffs." Condoleeza rice and Coach Willingham are black and they put this together. Sorry for the racist crap, but I don't think they think those stanford white guys can beat all our southern black guys.

    Serious question: WTH are you talking about? I was nice and didn't flag it since it wasn't about PLU playing Reed College in transvestite flag football this time.
    oklahoma, clemson, alabama, all southern teams... oklahoma not the deep south but still ~southern? the committee is not biased towards the south? Stanford plays a lot of white guys, the southern teams have almost all black guys? Stanford not seen as competitive against these teams?
    Where did my reasoning go wrong?
    Stanfraud lost too many times.

    But the SEC bias has been alive and well for many years, you're correct in that respect.

    I think there's a subconscious bias against McCaffery because he's white.
    Well, it's insane to say the winner of the pac-12 is not good enough to play for the "national championship." I think there is a bias too against McCaffery, seriously.
    Fucking Christ. He's gonna be in New York, what more do you want? They could've picked Buckner or Mayfield, or a couple of other guys.

    As for Stanford, they were toast once they lost to Northwestern, and then doubly so losing at home to what everyone can see was a subpar Oregon team.

    Quite honestly, considering that the Dawgs were 6-6, who gives a fuck as long as the games are good and the champ is legit.
  • Options
    ApostleofGriefApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Anniversary First Comment
    Northwestern was damn good this year, also was the first game of the year where you can expect some adjustments.... Oregon, I hate to say it but when you say "subpar" that puts them roughly at the level of the rest of the pac, which compared to the rest of D1 is pretty good. Those southern teams should try beating usc twice in one season.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Only a major fucking doog would simultaneously claim bias towards the south and against whites in the same poast. Pick one, you can't have both.
  • Options
    MisterEmMisterEm Member Posts: 6,685
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment

    Northwestern was damn good this year, also was the first game of the year where you can expect some adjustments.... Oregon, I hate to say it but when you say "subpar" that puts them roughly at the level of the rest of the pac, which compared to the rest of D1 is pretty good. Those southern teams should try beating usc twice in one season.

    That was a GOOD Northwestern team, guys.
  • Options
    brett_favrebrett_favre Member Posts: 9
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes Photogenic First Comment
  • Options
    brett_favrebrett_favre Member Posts: 9
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes Photogenic First Comment

    waiting for approval there....annoying

    http://eaglepost.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84

    apparently you have to jump through their convoluted hoops in order to post:
    How Do I Join Eaglepost
    Postby Management » Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:29 am
    1) Register with the site.
    2) Email the administrator at baldeagle90@gmail.com. Indicate the username and why you want to join eaglepost.
    3) If you receive an email from the administrator, respond.
    4) We will activate you as soon as possible.
    5) Enjoy reading eaglepost in the meantime.

    Note: If you were registered on the old board, you will have to re-register. Sorry for the inconvenience.
    I don't think you have to do all that shit, when I first signed up I just registered through the register link.
  • Options
    DooglesDoogles Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 12,480
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    It took me a few days to get approved and I had to send a PM to make it happen.
  • Options
    MisterEmMisterEm Member Posts: 6,685
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    Doogles said:

    It took me a few days to get approved and I had to send a PM to make it happen.

    Sounds like you're a closer.
Sign In or Register to comment.