Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - TrojanChispas

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 461
1
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 05, 2006, 01:52:28 AM »
only people that wanted to see a rematch are big 10 folks.  And yes Wisconsin does play us

Soooo not true. I couldn't care less about the Big 10 conference or the SEC or whatever the hell Florida is in, I just think Michigan got royally screwed. It's about fairness, plain and simple, and Michigan got robbed.

Does anyone else see a "hey, we were REALLY the national champions" la USC in '03 (*pukes*), if osu goes down to florida?

Michigan gets royally screwed because it doesn't get a rematch?  ::)


TITCR

2
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 05, 2006, 01:52:04 AM »
UM is not the second best team in the country.

Who do you think is?

I meant, It isnt the clearly second best team in the country.

3
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 05, 2006, 01:49:36 AM »
let's face it. NO ONE KNOWS DEFINITIVELY WHO'S BETTER.

we can guess, conjecture, hypothesize, estimate, and assume all we want, but how can you compare UF and UM?

both are deserving. only one gets a spot. lou holtz said it well when he said (paraphrasing) that he could give a number of reasons florida deserved it and a number of reasons michigan deserved it. however, he couldn't give any good reasons why florida deserved it over michigan or why michigan deserved it over florida.

this is the system. it's how it works.

I have a good reason that UF deserves it more than UM. 
UM and OSU played already and UM lost.
So, we KNOW OSU is better than UM, but we do not KNOW how UF will fare.
Thus, UF is more deserving of a chance to dethrone OSU rather than UM getting a second chance to dethrone OSU.

4
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 04, 2006, 11:12:23 PM »
UM is not the second best team in the country.

5
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 04, 2006, 09:27:38 PM »
to say that Cal deserves a share of the Pac-10 title would be like saying that two fighters who have the same record and have fought recently are perfectly equal even though one fighter whooped the other's azz

I never argued which team deserves a share of the Pac-10 title. I said that we have a share of the title, and you (incorrectly) disputed that.

And all of this talk about USC being a better team is completely out of scope.

I knew the system was rotten, but I had no idea that the system was rotten to the core.  YOu have to admit that Cal doesnt deserve a share of the Pac-10 title. 

Lame.

6
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 04, 2006, 07:14:49 PM »
to say that Cal deserves a share of the Pac-10 title would be like saying that two fighters who have the same record and have fought recently are perfectly equal even though one fighter whooped the other's azz

7
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 04, 2006, 07:12:18 PM »
If two teams have the same record and have played each other, then the winner of the matchup is the better team.  there should be no question about that, especially considering how tough USC's schedule was.

8
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 04, 2006, 07:11:05 PM »
http://www.pac-10.org/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/120406aag.html

co-champions.

That's total bs.  USC beat Cal and thus is the better team and shouldnt have to share the title with a lesser team.

by your logic:
Cal>WSU>OSU>ASU>Arizona>Oregon>Stanfurd>UW>UCLA>USC

HTH.

You forgot USC>Cal

9
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 04, 2006, 07:10:09 PM »
http://www.pac-10.org/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/120406aag.html

co-champions.

That's total bs.  USC beat Cal and thus is the better team and shouldnt have to share the title with a lesser team.

using your logic....ucla and oregon state beat usc, and thus are the better team and should be ranked higher than usc?

Using your logic, we dont even have to play the games, we can just look at the spread.

Even though USC and Cal had the same number of losses, USC had a better season than Cal because it beat Cal.  There should be no question about that.

10
General Off-Topic Board / Re: College Football
« on: December 04, 2006, 06:01:07 PM »
http://www.pac-10.org/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/120406aag.html

co-champions.

That's total bs.  USC beat Cal and thus is the better team and shouldnt have to share the title with a lesser team.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 461