5 Reasons *Our* Spartans beat Alabama
Comments
-
"I can't see!"ThomasFremont said:
Sweet dreamsPostGameOrangeSlices said:
thisThomasFremont said:
Maybe he's getting sick of all the notifications.PurpleJ said:
Agreed. Deleting threads is Kim territory, but considering that PGOS posted that I am not surprised. At all.ThomasFremont said:
Disagree. Another classic for the vault.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Derek please delete this thread now.
CHRIST
and the Bama avatars make my eyes bleed.
along with PLSS' poasts
and The Fire Marshall's
-
Bama is going to plunger USC. They have five star talent that are young back ups. They will be coached up. Alabama reloads. USC is way too soft.
-
Is this still on?
-
PostGameOrangeSlices said:
A lot of the bowls were against shitty teams.no_uh said:Late double down by puppy as the SEC continues to own the bowls... Can't say it wasn't expected.
Still impressive though. I'm looking at you UCLA.
Well thanks for adding a few truths billy, even though I just said the same thing, andd have been for many years, but at least 1 othe r person sees what ive been pounding into the sheep herd here, and the sewing circle at dawgman for 20 years.. HangFire Bill gets it. Thats 2 of us here at HH. I expect that number to increase exponentially as people start to see the light.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Pretty easy to win a NC when you two teams in your conference play each othertheciscoshow said:
Yeah those 7 straight NT's were all hype! lolFire_Marshall_Bill said:
Yeah, but the avatar...Dardanus said:
I'm not always right and have never claimed to be. I thought Oklahoma would beat Clemson rather easily.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:You too Dardanus? wow...
But to discredit a good team because they are in the SEC and therefore get more credit and recognition by national media (which is partly earned and partly because it drives ratings) is as dumb as blindly supporting any team or conference while ignoring facts to the contrary.
I picked Bammer because they're a good team with a good coach. That doesn't mean the SEC hasn't been overrated, overhyped, and has received some bogus credit over the last 10 years...
Go look up SEC Heismans and NCs vs. other conferences from 2006-2015 vs. 1970-2005 newb. Then look up SEC TV contracts. Then see if you can piece it together. -
8 out of 10
-
Nice retortPurpleJ said:
You wrote a lot. Fag.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Listen cisco you spawned out new fish. The SEC was auto-placed in those 7 bcs bowls. Odds were pretty good theyd win them when there were 8 teams from other conferences, licking their chops for a shot at the SEC, but sitting home because their respective AD's chose not to play 4 FCS schools in non conference play.theciscoshow said:
Yeah those 7 straight NT's were all hype! lolFire_Marshall_Bill said:
Yeah, but the avatar...Dardanus said:
I'm not always right and have never claimed to be. I thought Oklahoma would beat Clemson rather easily.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:You too Dardanus? wow...
But to discredit a good team because they are in the SEC and therefore get more credit and recognition by national media (which is partly earned and partly because it drives ratings) is as dumb as blindly supporting any team or conference while ignoring facts to the contrary.
I picked Bammer because they're a good team with a good coach. That doesn't mean the SEC hasn't been overrated, overhyped, and has received some bogus credit over the last 10 years...
As puppy duly noted, on countless occasions, the SEC was the minority in championships won over the last 40 years. Magically they found themselves in 7 straight bcs "championship" games, one against each other.
Basically, Alabama had to win 1 difficult game a year to be in the silver spoon championship game, with a red-carpet reception. Beat Auburn (after playing an fcs tune-up g a me vs Charelston Southern prior, and they were in (didnt matter how good Auburn was). Teams like Stanford were playing Oregon and Notre Dame in week 11 and 12.
Bama's starters are all rested, healthy because they didnt have to play vs fcs teams, while their depth got significant and important playing time prior to their rivalry game vs 6-6 Auburn, and an auto bcs bid.
Now that 4 conferences get an actual opportunity, the SEC just lost their inherent advantage of the corrupt bcs past..
Mark my words, despite the outcome of Clemson-Alabama, you will see the SEC average out like the prior 30 years before their 7-straight bcs freebie titles.
If Auburn, Alabama and LSU actually traveled to solid power 5 stadiums out of conference, they wouldnt be 12-1 every single year, with a free ride to title. Other conferences earn the trip, Alabama just has to win 1 big game a year and theyre in. So cut the shit cissy, I aint buying it. -
-
Hey J. The pac 12 and sec have exact same bowl win % over last 2 years. The difference? The SEC went 2-5 vs ranked teams last year, the pac 12 went 5-1. Hardy har. Remember too, oregon and asu beat their respective teams this year which would have given pac12 clear nod (remember too the pac12 has 2 less bowl eligable teams. ) However flukes got in the way of reality.
Its ok to declare the pac12 the better conference. The sta t s and facts say so, but if you want to believe what arbitrary and senseless ESPN sta t s tell you go right ahead. Puppy knows better (hence HH knows too). -
Blowing a 31 point lead is not a flukepuppylove_sugarsteel said:Hey J. The pac 12 and sec have exact same bowl win % over last 2 years. The difference? The SEC went 2-5 vs ranked teams last year, the pac 12 went 5-1. Hardy har. Remember too, oregon and asu beat their respective teams this year which would have given pac12 clear nod (remember too the pac12 has 2 less bowl eligable teams. ) However flukes got in the way of reality.
Its ok to declare the pac12 the better conference. The sta t s and facts say so, but if you want to believe what arbitrary and senseless ESPN sta t s tell you go right ahead. Puppy knows better (hence HH knows too). -
Last time I checked everyone here was changing to a Bama pic and chanting SEC SEC SEC. Purpy knows better (hence HH knows too).puppylove_sugarsteel said:Hey J. The pac 12 and sec have exact same bowl win % over last 2 years. The difference? The SEC went 2-5 vs ranked teams last year, the pac 12 went 5-1. Hardy har. Remember too, oregon and asu beat their respective teams this year which would have given pac12 clear nod (remember too the pac12 has 2 less bowl eligable teams. ) However flukes got in the way of reality.
Its ok to declare the pac12 the better conference. The sta t s and facts say so, but if you want to believe what arbitrary and senseless ESPN sta t s tell you go right ahead. Puppy knows better (hence HH knows too). -
Your reading comprehension or your ability to reply sucks, one of the other. But to your poont, Kansas and their one loss disagrees.theciscoshow said:
Because everyone had at least 2 losses that year, otherwise they would not have won. Stanford lost to 2 bad teams and you think they deserve to be in, lol.dnc said:
I like to complain that LSU won a national title with two losses AND bitch that Stanford got left out of the playoff with two losses.puppylove_sugarsteel said:Well of course I called ole-miss rather easily, say 34-17, now im calling Clemson over Alabama, by a nose. Alabama is good, not #2 good but good. Clemson is blocking very well on the offensive line, shaq lawson will need to play for clemson to win, if not it could be trouble. The defense has risen to the occasion in EVERY big game, thats important.
Bama should be no different. Can Clemson shut Ridley down? Cokers play action deep ball? Henry's 4th quarter energy.? Watson, unlike Leaderless Cook, will loosen up Bama's defense, create some running room, and some play action.
Its a great matchup. I love the way alabama plays on both sides of the ball. Clemson can take them out of their comfort zone however, as they havent played anybody close to clemson in the SEC schedule. Ole miss is close (and they beat Alabama), but Kelly is a turdly comparison to Watson. Will be an awesome game.
Hey bama boofies, would you guys like to make a pick, and back it up with something other than "clemson sucks" or "alabama is just better". Why do you think your imaginary team will win?. I wont hold my breath with HH's 3 pony-tail tuggers moonlighting as grown men.
What's clear is Stanford would butt wipe either team, but the committee decided to make up for past wrongs by stiffing the best team in the country in favor of the big 12's affirmative action bastard child, Oklahoma. Imagine a head to head McCaffrey-henry dual. 348 all purpose yards in the rose bowl mean anything to you three amigas?? The real heisman and national champion is sitting at home next Monday.
Oh, and BAMA by 13 -
Everyone: 5 peoplePurpleJ said:
Last time I checked everyone here was changing to a Bama pic and chanting SEC SEC SEC. Purpy knows better (hence HH knows too).puppylove_sugarsteel said:Hey J. The pac 12 and sec have exact same bowl win % over last 2 years. The difference? The SEC went 2-5 vs ranked teams last year, the pac 12 went 5-1. Hardy har. Remember too, oregon and asu beat their respective teams this year which would have given pac12 clear nod (remember too the pac12 has 2 less bowl eligable teams. ) However flukes got in the way of reality.
Its ok to declare the pac12 the better conference. The sta t s and facts say so, but if you want to believe what arbitrary and senseless ESPN sta t s tell you go right ahead. Puppy knows better (hence HH knows too).
The people that chant "SEC" are just sad. How gay is it to chant for a conference? Nobody else does it. You don't hear Oklahoma fans chant "12!" -
That's because the Big 12 sucks. But for me, chanting SEC is just part of the game. We hate each other but we stand together sort of thing. It's what makes our conference special. We don't vote to give each other sanctions. We understand that bending the rules is expected and that the South will rise again.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Everyone: 5 peoplePurpleJ said:
Last time I checked everyone here was changing to a Bama pic and chanting SEC SEC SEC. Purpy knows better (hence HH knows too).puppylove_sugarsteel said:Hey J. The pac 12 and sec have exact same bowl win % over last 2 years. The difference? The SEC went 2-5 vs ranked teams last year, the pac 12 went 5-1. Hardy har. Remember too, oregon and asu beat their respective teams this year which would have given pac12 clear nod (remember too the pac12 has 2 less bowl eligable teams. ) However flukes got in the way of reality.
Its ok to declare the pac12 the better conference. The sta t s and facts say so, but if you want to believe what arbitrary and senseless ESPN sta t s tell you go right ahead. Puppy knows better (hence HH knows too).
The people that chant "SEC" are just sad. How gay is it to chant for a conference? Nobody else does it. You don't hear Oklahoma fans chant "12!"
-
You're funny J.PurpleJ said:
That's because the Big 12 sucks. But for me, chanting SEC is just part of the game. We hate each other but we stand together sort of thing. It's what makes our conference special. We don't vote to give each other sanctions. We understand that bending the rules is expected and that the South will rise again.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Everyone: 5 peoplePurpleJ said:
Last time I checked everyone here was changing to a Bama pic and chanting SEC SEC SEC. Purpy knows better (hence HH knows too).puppylove_sugarsteel said:Hey J. The pac 12 and sec have exact same bowl win % over last 2 years. The difference? The SEC went 2-5 vs ranked teams last year, the pac 12 went 5-1. Hardy har. Remember too, oregon and asu beat their respective teams this year which would have given pac12 clear nod (remember too the pac12 has 2 less bowl eligable teams. ) However flukes got in the way of reality.
Its ok to declare the pac12 the better conference. The sta t s and facts say so, but if you want to believe what arbitrary and senseless ESPN sta t s tell you go right ahead. Puppy knows better (hence HH knows too).
The people that chant "SEC" are just sad. How gay is it to chant for a conference? Nobody else does it. You don't hear Oklahoma fans chant "12!"
-
Part of that is serious. UW might still be a powerhouse if we were a SEC program.
-
There's no doubt most of those schools take their football seriously and the competition leads to good things. It's just weird how that conference was just ordinary until 10 years ago.... I know everyone who's anyone in this country cheats their way to the top now, but I don't like it...PurpleJ said:Part of that is serious. UW might still be a powerhouse if we were a SEC program.
-
If you aint cheatin you aint tryin. I'm sure no other elite schools in other conferences do it. Maybe if the Pac wasn't such a bunch of candy apple cunt snitches they'd have someone other than USC able to win it all.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
There's no doubt most of those schools take their football seriously and the competition leads to good things. It's just weird how that conference was just ordinary until 10 years ago.... I know everyone who's anyone in this country cheats their way to the top now, but I don't like it...PurpleJ said:Part of that is serious. UW might still be a powerhouse if we were a SEC program.
-
8/10
-
Bump
-
Are you ever right?Tequilla said:I also like Sparty in this one - at least to cover. Not sure how Bama is going to score unless Henry runs wild which I doubt against Sparty. Cook is way better than Coker at QB.
-
To be fair, Tennessee, Florida, and Alabama all won Natties during the 90s.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
There's no doubt most of those schools take their football seriously and the competition leads to good things. It's just weird how that conference was just ordinary until 10 years ago.... I know everyone who's anyone in this country cheats their way to the top now, but I don't like it...PurpleJ said:Part of that is serious. UW might still be a powerhouse if we were a SEC program.
-
By the way, the draft proved that Ohio St's top end talent was better than Bama's.
-
The Big 10 was who we thought they were
-
Second best league in America after the SEC.PostGameOrangeSlices said:The Big 10 was who we thought they were
-
Not saying muchTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Second best league in America after the SEC.PostGameOrangeSlices said:The Big 10 was who we thought they were
-
True. Everyone sucks after all.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Not saying muchTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Second best league in America after the SEC.PostGameOrangeSlices said:The Big 10 was who we thought they were
-
You want to take the gloves off Race? You want to get down in a pissing match? Let’s do it. Let’s roll.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Are you ever right?Tequilla said:I also like Sparty in this one - at least to cover. Not sure how Bama is going to score unless Henry runs wild which I doubt against Sparty. Cook is way better than Coker at QB.
I’m getting completely fed up with your hate, negativity, and throwing people under the bus.
Quite frankly Race, I’m very, VERY happy that I don’t know you. I’m quite happy that I don’t lead what appears to be such a pathetic life that is faced with looking for the negativity in every situation. You need to go find something to smile at. Last I checked, it’s summertime. The weather in Seattle seems to be pretty damn good right now – why don’t you go check that out.
You are pretty damn wrong about things. You may think that the amount of time that you keep spewing your views that that you’ve now heard it enough times that you are right. Doesn’t make you right.
You talk about 12-47 like that happened out of the blue sky. I’ve never seen you once suggest that the process of the downfall of this program began well before Emmert arrived.
You want facts? You want truth? Here’s your truth.
Emmert came to the UW prior to the GLORIOUS 1-10 season under Gilby. The year before that (2003) Gilby managed to do enough to get us to 6-6, but that included the debacle at Cal where we gave up 700 yards (or thereabouts). It was an indifferent team that pretty much was at best mediocre. We lost 5 of our last 8, including the blowout to Cal, the blowout to UCLA, and a home loss to NEVADA. Yep, the program was heading in the right direction.
The 2002 season under Slick was another sterling season example that is most remembered for the “Northwest Championship.” That was great. But it hid the fact that going into the “Northwest Championship” we were a 4-5 football team that was pretty much a joke at 1-4 in the conference. In both 2002 and 2003, we finished the season with a 4-4 conference record.
These weren’t good football teams. The trend was heading downhill.
Emmert comes on board and immediately gets sadled with the Gilby 1-10 debacle.
Prior to Emmert coming on board, Babs jumps ship after a decade of mis-management, including allowing the stadium to begin the erosion process.
Throughout 2003, we’re faced with Slick leaving and the subsequent lawsuit(s), Dr. Feelgood, and a whole mess with the softball program and Teresa Wilson.
Now keep in mind the following: ALL THIS HAPPENED BEFORE EMMERT WAS ANYWHERE NEAR BEING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON.
Things were not in great shape. I think just about everybody knew that.
A search committee is formed to replace Babs. The BOR, upper campus, and the big donor supporters of the school are sick of the egg showing up on their face. They are sick of the country club that Babs ran and the loose way she ran the department – particularly in light of what went on with Slick. They wanted someone prim, proper, and who they could count on would not sully the University name. ENTER TODD TURNER.
Now, this pretty much gets you up to the point where Emmert was hired. Did he have to sign off on the hiring of Turner? Most likely. But whatever.
At this point, Emmert isn’t responsible for the on-field performance of the football program. There is a coach in place. It’s not Emmert’s job to oversee the football program or any other program in the athletic department. That job belongs to Todd Turner. It’s Emmert’s job to monitor the job performance of Todd Turner.
So 1-10 happens. Gilby is canned by Turner (rightfully so). Yes, the program went 1-10. But the actions of those charged with overseeing the program were correct. Turner fired the coach for poor performance. If I’m in Emmert’s shoes, I can’t complain.
Coaching search takes place and Turner has his heart set on Tyrone Willingham. It’s Turner’s hire. It’s not Emmert’s hire. Surely Emmert had to sign off on the hire. That’s fine. You want to throw some blame on him for not having the foresight to negate the hire. That’s fine. But the hire isn’t Emmert’s responsibility. It’s Turner’s responsibility. It’s Emmert’s responsibility to hold Turner accountable for the hire (which he did 3 years later when it was obvious that Tyrone wasn’t the answer).
So Tyrone goes 2-9 the first year after a 1-10 year. Not great. Warning signs start going off, particularly with some poor performance to close games. But it’s the first year of the regime and really hard to get too critical.
The next year the program goes 5-7 and has 2 significant events. The first significant event is the loss of the QB to injury. I think many could argue that without the loss of Isaiah that year, we go 6-6. The second event that was significant was the “suddenly senior” day and the unexplicable loss to Stanford with the most emotionless football team anybody had ever seen. Again, there’s not enough there to fire Tyrone at that point. There are warning signs. There is ground to pretty much tell Tyrone that the following year is an action year where something needs to happen. He’s on a short leash at this point in my opinion.
The following year we lose games in ways that are unexplainable. Blow a huge loss to Arizona – a game we should have never lost. The most ridiculous ending to an Apple Cup I’ve ever seen where a guy was open by 20 yards coming out of a timeout. Blowing a pair of 21 point leads to Hawai’i. It was pretty obvious at this point that things weren’t working. Coaching change was in order. Perhaps an AD change was also in order. The coaching change was blocked and complicated. The AD’s head fell – and rightfully so due to some other issues that he had and such a terrible hire of a head coach.
Prior to the decision to fire Tyrone after 2007, it’s really hard to argue with ANYTHING that Emmert had done with respect to the football program.
I will say that bringing Tyrone back for 2008 was a disasterous mistake. It should have never happened. You want to throw 0-12 on Emmert – I’m all for it. I think if you caught Emmert in a reflective, truthful moment, he would tell you in hindsight that he should have made the move and that it wasn’t worth the carnage of 0-12.
Throw Emmert under the bus for 2008. That’s his responsibility. 2004-2007? Not so much. By all means, please, please tell me where he has responsibility for 2004 and 2007 other than the fact that he’s the University President. Please tell me what specific actions that he did to undermine the program. You aren’t going to find them – they aren’t there.
Your criticism of Emmert is ridiculous. Your criticism of Woodward is just downright comical.
Where has Woodward screwed this program? He has only been responsible for this program in the summer of 2008 in a full-time role. Are you going to hold him to the fire for being the interim AD for the first half of 2008? How is he responsible for anything from 2004-2007 when he wasn’t even involved with the Athletic Department? Talk about conspiracy theories. This may be one of the greatest conspiracy theories I’ve ever seen.
I don’t like losing. I don’t like what I’ve seen the last 5 years. It’s made me sick to my stomach many times over. But unlike you, I can at least take a step back and realize that the genesis of this problem began well before Mark Emmert became President of the University of Washington.
If I spent my time being a “mindless Race Bannon minion,” then I’d be convinced that the only logical explanation for our failures have been Mark Emmert and Scott Woodward.
Quite frankly, that opinion is one of the most idiotic insanely stupid opinions that I’ve ever seen in my life.
I don’t defend the “wrong targets.” There is blame to be thrown Emmert’s way. I readily acknowledge that. But it isn’t his full blame. Babs deserves blame. Gerberding deserves blame. McCormick deserves some blame. Slick deserves some blame. Gilby deserves some blame. Turner deserves some blame. Tyrone deserves some blame. Of the names I’ve listed, only 3 of those names have any timeline that extends into any portion of Emmert’s tenure. That’s less than half of those names.
Quite frankly Race, you are a world class donkey. When I hear people bitch and moan about the people in the State of Washington – you are a crystal example of why people bitch about the State of Washington. When I hear people that bitch about the fans of the University of Washington and what their complaints are, you represent what those complaints are.
In my opinion, you are not good for the University of Washington. You aren’t helping the program. You aren’t helping the University. You are entirely self-serving and a pompous, egotistical jerk.
You are barking up the wrong tree if you are going after me. I’m not naive enough to shove my head so far up my arse to ignore what I am seeing. I don’t think that there is anybody that knows me that would say that I wouldn’t call a spade a spade.
All that paying for and attending games longer than I’ve been alive has done for you is given you a perceived ability to go be a bitter old man. Congrats on that.
Thanks for showing those of us in a younger generation how not to act in 20-30 years when we are in your shoes. -
Classics bump
