Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
PM to Boobie
Comments
-
Head to head:RoadDawg55 said:
Wow, just wow. UCLA beat Arizona. Rather easily. The last time we saw Zona they were plungered by Oregon and lost to a MWC team. But the bowl season doesn't matter. All that matters is that Arizona (very luckily, but enough hypotheticals) went 7-2 in conference while the other teams went 6-3. Bowl season and head to head doesn't matter according to you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona beat Oregon and UCLA lost to Oregon. That's why Arizona won the South. Somehow beating the best team in the conference gets you no respect among Doog Nation.RoadDawg55 said:
UCLA beat Arizona. Will finish the year ranked higher when they win tonight. They also played a much tougher non conference schedule. In fact, there schedule was rated right at the top for toughest in the country.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.RoadDawg55 said:
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.RoadDawg55 said:
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.dnc said:
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.RoadDawg55 said:
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.RaceBannon said:You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
You will say it's all hypothetical, but Arizona skipped Stanford and Oregon State. UCLA skipped WSU and Oregon State. Switch schedules and UCLA wins the South.
I get that it's college football and there is no true right answer, but it's not hard to see Arizona is not the 2nd best team.
If you insist on only using facts, Arizona is not going to end the year ranked as the 2nd best team in the PAC 12.
When we last saw UCLA, they got plungered by Stanford 31-10 at home. Tell me again how UCLA is better than Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?id=400548317
UCLA beat Arizona and lost to Stanford.
In the NFL, Arizona wins the tiebreaker between the three teams by better conference record since all three teams didn't play each other.
If UCLA was so much better than Arizona, how come they lost three conference games?
Thanks for teaching me that 6-3 = 5-4 > 7-2 though. That was an awesome math lesson.
The fact that the second best team in the Pac-12 standings lost to a MWC team proves that the conference sucks though. At least we agree on that -
Twisting. I was using your fucktarded logic.TierbsHsotBoobs said:What we learned in this thread:
@RoadDoog55 thinks UCLA is better than Stanford and Arizona, even though UCLA lost at home to Stanford 31-10 in its last game and UCLA finished behind Arizona in the Pac-12 South. -
Here's my fucktarded logic:RoadDawg55 said:
Twisting. I was using your fucktarded logic.TierbsHsotBoobs said:What we learned in this thread:
@RoadDoog55 thinks UCLA is better than Stanford and Arizona, even though UCLA lost at home to Stanford 31-10 in its last game and UCLA finished behind Arizona in the Pac-12 South.
Arizona 7-2
UCLA 6-3
Stanford 5-4
Arizona > UCLA > Stanford -
Because UCLA played Stanford, while Arizona played the Coogs. Reverse that and it's very probable Ucla is 10-2 and south champs and Az is 9-3TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Head to head:RoadDawg55 said:
Wow, just wow. UCLA beat Arizona. Rather easily. The last time we saw Zona they were plungered by Oregon and lost to a MWC team. But the bowl season doesn't matter. All that matters is that Arizona (very luckily, but enough hypotheticals) went 7-2 in conference while the other teams went 6-3. Bowl season and head to head doesn't matter according to you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona beat Oregon and UCLA lost to Oregon. That's why Arizona won the South. Somehow beating the best team in the conference gets you no respect among Doog Nation.RoadDawg55 said:
UCLA beat Arizona. Will finish the year ranked higher when they win tonight. They also played a much tougher non conference schedule. In fact, there schedule was rated right at the top for toughest in the country.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.RoadDawg55 said:
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.RoadDawg55 said:
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.dnc said:
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.RoadDawg55 said:
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.RaceBannon said:You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
You will say it's all hypothetical, but Arizona skipped Stanford and Oregon State. UCLA skipped WSU and Oregon State. Switch schedules and UCLA wins the South.
I get that it's college football and there is no true right answer, but it's not hard to see Arizona is not the 2nd best team.
If you insist on only using facts, Arizona is not going to end the year ranked as the 2nd best team in the PAC 12.
When we last saw UCLA, they got plungered by Stanford 31-10 at home. Tell me again how UCLA is better than Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?id=400548317
UCLA beat Arizona and lost to Stanford.
In the NFL, Arizona wins the tiebreaker between the three teams by better conference record since all three teams didn't play each other.
If UCLA was so much better than Arizona, how come they lost three conference games?
Thanks for teaching me that 6-3 = 5-4 > 7-2 though. That was an awesome math lesson.
The fact that the second best team in the Pac-12 standings lost to a MWC team proves that the conference sucks though. At least we agree on that
HTH -
Stanford fucking sucks. If you couldn't beat them at home this year, you don't deserve the division title.BallSacked said:
Because UCLA played Stanford, while Arizona played the CoogsTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Head to head:RoadDawg55 said:
Wow, just wow. UCLA beat Arizona. Rather easily. The last time we saw Zona they were plungered by Oregon and lost to a MWC team. But the bowl season doesn't matter. All that matters is that Arizona (very luckily, but enough hypotheticals) went 7-2 in conference while the other teams went 6-3. Bowl season and head to head doesn't matter according to you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona beat Oregon and UCLA lost to Oregon. That's why Arizona won the South. Somehow beating the best team in the conference gets you no respect among Doog Nation.RoadDawg55 said:
UCLA beat Arizona. Will finish the year ranked higher when they win tonight. They also played a much tougher non conference schedule. In fact, there schedule was rated right at the top for toughest in the country.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.RoadDawg55 said:
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.RoadDawg55 said:
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.dnc said:
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.RoadDawg55 said:
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.RaceBannon said:You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
You will say it's all hypothetical, but Arizona skipped Stanford and Oregon State. UCLA skipped WSU and Oregon State. Switch schedules and UCLA wins the South.
I get that it's college football and there is no true right answer, but it's not hard to see Arizona is not the 2nd best team.
If you insist on only using facts, Arizona is not going to end the year ranked as the 2nd best team in the PAC 12.
When we last saw UCLA, they got plungered by Stanford 31-10 at home. Tell me again how UCLA is better than Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?id=400548317
UCLA beat Arizona and lost to Stanford.
In the NFL, Arizona wins the tiebreaker between the three teams by better conference record since all three teams didn't play each other.
If UCLA was so much better than Arizona, how come they lost three conference games?
Thanks for teaching me that 6-3 = 5-4 > 7-2 though. That was an awesome math lesson.
The fact that the second best team in the Pac-12 standings lost to a MWC team proves that the conference sucks though. At least we agree on that
HTH
Both teams played Oregon. Why do we keep ignoring that detail? -
And UCLA played a much tougher non conference schedule. And will very likely finish higher in the final polls. And beat Arizona head to head. But still...BallSacked said:
Because UCLA played Stanford, while Arizona played the Coogs. Reverse that and it's very probable Ucla is 10-2 and south champs and Az is 9-3TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Head to head:RoadDawg55 said:
Wow, just wow. UCLA beat Arizona. Rather easily. The last time we saw Zona they were plungered by Oregon and lost to a MWC team. But the bowl season doesn't matter. All that matters is that Arizona (very luckily, but enough hypotheticals) went 7-2 in conference while the other teams went 6-3. Bowl season and head to head doesn't matter according to you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona beat Oregon and UCLA lost to Oregon. That's why Arizona won the South. Somehow beating the best team in the conference gets you no respect among Doog Nation.RoadDawg55 said:
UCLA beat Arizona. Will finish the year ranked higher when they win tonight. They also played a much tougher non conference schedule. In fact, there schedule was rated right at the top for toughest in the country.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.RoadDawg55 said:
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.RoadDawg55 said:
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.dnc said:
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.RoadDawg55 said:
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.RaceBannon said:You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
You will say it's all hypothetical, but Arizona skipped Stanford and Oregon State. UCLA skipped WSU and Oregon State. Switch schedules and UCLA wins the South.
I get that it's college football and there is no true right answer, but it's not hard to see Arizona is not the 2nd best team.
If you insist on only using facts, Arizona is not going to end the year ranked as the 2nd best team in the PAC 12.
When we last saw UCLA, they got plungered by Stanford 31-10 at home. Tell me again how UCLA is better than Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?id=400548317
UCLA beat Arizona and lost to Stanford.
In the NFL, Arizona wins the tiebreaker between the three teams by better conference record since all three teams didn't play each other.
If UCLA was so much better than Arizona, how come they lost three conference games?
Thanks for teaching me that 6-3 = 5-4 > 7-2 though. That was an awesome math lesson.
The fact that the second best team in the Pac-12 standings lost to a MWC team proves that the conference sucks though. At least we agree on that
HTH -
A lot of hypotheticals here
Alabama is better than Ohio State and would beat Oregon
Trust me on that -
Why do you ignore the detail UCLA beat Az and Stanford never played Az?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Stanford fucking sucks. If you couldn't beat them at home this year, you don't deserve the division title.BallSacked said:
Because UCLA played Stanford, while Arizona played the CoogsTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Head to head:RoadDawg55 said:
Wow, just wow. UCLA beat Arizona. Rather easily. The last time we saw Zona they were plungered by Oregon and lost to a MWC team. But the bowl season doesn't matter. All that matters is that Arizona (very luckily, but enough hypotheticals) went 7-2 in conference while the other teams went 6-3. Bowl season and head to head doesn't matter according to you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona beat Oregon and UCLA lost to Oregon. That's why Arizona won the South. Somehow beating the best team in the conference gets you no respect among Doog Nation.RoadDawg55 said:
UCLA beat Arizona. Will finish the year ranked higher when they win tonight. They also played a much tougher non conference schedule. In fact, there schedule was rated right at the top for toughest in the country.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.RoadDawg55 said:
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.RoadDawg55 said:
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.dnc said:
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.RoadDawg55 said:
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.RaceBannon said:You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
You will say it's all hypothetical, but Arizona skipped Stanford and Oregon State. UCLA skipped WSU and Oregon State. Switch schedules and UCLA wins the South.
I get that it's college football and there is no true right answer, but it's not hard to see Arizona is not the 2nd best team.
If you insist on only using facts, Arizona is not going to end the year ranked as the 2nd best team in the PAC 12.
When we last saw UCLA, they got plungered by Stanford 31-10 at home. Tell me again how UCLA is better than Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?id=400548317
UCLA beat Arizona and lost to Stanford.
In the NFL, Arizona wins the tiebreaker between the three teams by better conference record since all three teams didn't play each other.
If UCLA was so much better than Arizona, how come they lost three conference games?
Thanks for teaching me that 6-3 = 5-4 > 7-2 though. That was an awesome math lesson.
The fact that the second best team in the Pac-12 standings lost to a MWC team proves that the conference sucks though. At least we agree on that
HTH
Both teams played Oregon. Why do we keep ignoring that detail? -
Both teams played USC. One lost at home. The other plungered USC. In the big picture, UCLA is better.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Stanford fucking sucks. If you couldn't beat them at home this year, you don't deserve the division title.BallSacked said:
Because UCLA played Stanford, while Arizona played the CoogsTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Head to head:RoadDawg55 said:
Wow, just wow. UCLA beat Arizona. Rather easily. The last time we saw Zona they were plungered by Oregon and lost to a MWC team. But the bowl season doesn't matter. All that matters is that Arizona (very luckily, but enough hypotheticals) went 7-2 in conference while the other teams went 6-3. Bowl season and head to head doesn't matter according to you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona beat Oregon and UCLA lost to Oregon. That's why Arizona won the South. Somehow beating the best team in the conference gets you no respect among Doog Nation.RoadDawg55 said:
UCLA beat Arizona. Will finish the year ranked higher when they win tonight. They also played a much tougher non conference schedule. In fact, there schedule was rated right at the top for toughest in the country.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.RoadDawg55 said:
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.RoadDawg55 said:
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.dnc said:
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.RoadDawg55 said:
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.RaceBannon said:You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
You will say it's all hypothetical, but Arizona skipped Stanford and Oregon State. UCLA skipped WSU and Oregon State. Switch schedules and UCLA wins the South.
I get that it's college football and there is no true right answer, but it's not hard to see Arizona is not the 2nd best team.
If you insist on only using facts, Arizona is not going to end the year ranked as the 2nd best team in the PAC 12.
When we last saw UCLA, they got plungered by Stanford 31-10 at home. Tell me again how UCLA is better than Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?id=400548317
UCLA beat Arizona and lost to Stanford.
In the NFL, Arizona wins the tiebreaker between the three teams by better conference record since all three teams didn't play each other.
If UCLA was so much better than Arizona, how come they lost three conference games?
Thanks for teaching me that 6-3 = 5-4 > 7-2 though. That was an awesome math lesson.
The fact that the second best team in the Pac-12 standings lost to a MWC team proves that the conference sucks though. At least we agree on that
HTH
Both teams played Oregon. Why do we keep ignoring that detail? -
I'll grant you the OOC schedule argument. UCLA played a better (but not great) OOC schedule.RoadDawg55 said:
And UCLA played a much tougher non conference schedule. And will very likely finish higher in the final polls. And beat Arizona head to head. But still...BallSacked said:
Because UCLA played Stanford, while Arizona played the Coogs. Reverse that and it's very probable Ucla is 10-2 and south champs and Az is 9-3TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Head to head:RoadDawg55 said:
Wow, just wow. UCLA beat Arizona. Rather easily. The last time we saw Zona they were plungered by Oregon and lost to a MWC team. But the bowl season doesn't matter. All that matters is that Arizona (very luckily, but enough hypotheticals) went 7-2 in conference while the other teams went 6-3. Bowl season and head to head doesn't matter according to you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona beat Oregon and UCLA lost to Oregon. That's why Arizona won the South. Somehow beating the best team in the conference gets you no respect among Doog Nation.RoadDawg55 said:
UCLA beat Arizona. Will finish the year ranked higher when they win tonight. They also played a much tougher non conference schedule. In fact, there schedule was rated right at the top for toughest in the country.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.RoadDawg55 said:
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.RoadDawg55 said:
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.dnc said:
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.RoadDawg55 said:
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.RaceBannon said:You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
You will say it's all hypothetical, but Arizona skipped Stanford and Oregon State. UCLA skipped WSU and Oregon State. Switch schedules and UCLA wins the South.
I get that it's college football and there is no true right answer, but it's not hard to see Arizona is not the 2nd best team.
If you insist on only using facts, Arizona is not going to end the year ranked as the 2nd best team in the PAC 12.
When we last saw UCLA, they got plungered by Stanford 31-10 at home. Tell me again how UCLA is better than Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?id=400548317
UCLA beat Arizona and lost to Stanford.
In the NFL, Arizona wins the tiebreaker between the three teams by better conference record since all three teams didn't play each other.
If UCLA was so much better than Arizona, how come they lost three conference games?
Thanks for teaching me that 6-3 = 5-4 > 7-2 though. That was an awesome math lesson.
The fact that the second best team in the Pac-12 standings lost to a MWC team proves that the conference sucks though. At least we agree on that
HTH
I love how somehow shitting their pants at home against Stanford is actually an argument on behalf of UCLA's superiority to Arizona though.
Head to head don't matter if there isn't a tie to break.
