Quote:
Originally Posted by E.J.
See...you keep justifying(the schedule thing), if you had the tougher schedule, you wouldn't be doing that...IMO, you'd be bringing it up to back your side. See, that is how I feel like you have an inability to look at this objectively.... That said, I am not saying I have to be right.... Just discussing...
Wisconsin Badgers I believe
|
Sorry, I only bring up the schedule because you do. And of course I can't look at it completely objectively because I have a stake in it. Now couple years back, I thought it should have been us throttling Oklahoma instead of Florida, but objectively, they beat us striaght up. Interestingly enough, we were ranked 1 coming into the SECCG, Florida was ranked 2, and Oklahome got in with it's only loss coming to Texas earlier in the year. I didn't feel we got shafted, we lost when it mattered.
Yep. Wisconsin. Beat Michigan State in the title game. After Michigan State already beat them earlier this year. Not that it matters, I'm just making a point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLS
Yes I do recall you saying that, sorry, I did not want to paraphrase where I needed to quote.
You saved me the trouble, that IS indeed what you said. Also right in that we will never agree
on it. But what I still can't see is how can you say Complete and adamantly oppose Balanced?
I know that next year you guys have a top kicker inbound, & will be more 'balanced' and a much closer
match to us in that regard, but what does semantics have to do with it if you will admit the idea?
Here is where I do not want you to get offended, but if you were beaten basically by your own weakness in
your "completeness", the kicking game, how could you deny that you were at least semantically "inferior"?
That, then, to me was arguing a point and covering your ears on my points, which is likely where
you got the idea I thought you guys were lunatics..
|
Oh, I
still think we have the better team. Don't you?
