You see how easy it is to hijack one of your pointless threads????
I even got your little Nazi sister Gaytown to chime in.
SO what is it Dio,
You're always on subject and you have valid takes,
or you're just have a huge man crush on JGW and you can't help but trolling?
SO what is it Dio,
You're always on subject and you have valid takes,
or you're just have a huge man crush on JGW and you can't help but trolling?
Actually you give better head than he does from what your dad hears @ Heat.
That thing you do with your tongue drives the guys @ Hard Bodies.
Oh!, Wait, that post of yours was supposed to stop me from posting this.
GayTown's pissed off reply in 3, 2, ...
Actually you give better head than he does from what your dad hears @ Heat.
That thing you do with your tongue drives the guys @ Hard Bodies.
Oh!, Wait, that post of yours was supposed to stop me from posting this.
Licking your pussy lips, although very sour and smell like a rotting shamu corpse is not too bad. It's the vaginal discharge that gets in the way. Personally i'd take your moms pussy over yours except that i don't know what stray dogs and Trojan players have been in that pink and stink.
Oh and i'm not going anywhere. I know you may want me to leave cuz you feel butthurt, but i love punkin your ass all round this forum.
I just love how you walk bow legged and spit ridiculous putdowns at the same time. Mandingo must be proud of his ass slave.
GayTown's spewage on my face in 3, 2, ...
Licking your & balls, although very sweet and smell like a ripe walnut! Is not too bad. It's the vaginal discharge of mine that gets in the way. Personally i'd take your dad's wad over yours except that i don't know what to suck sometimes because I'm such a silly sucker and Trojan players have been in me over & over.
Oh and i'm not going anywhere. I know you may want me to leave cuz you are tired of my mom & I sucking your til we have no more of your DNA to gargle with
It does tickle!
I love it when you hold it with the tweezers like that & make your head the size of an ant!
Last edited by Mr Dio; 08-10-2006 at 06:46 PM.
Do we really need 2-3 "my is bigger than yours" types of threads here? Geez people. Grow up.
real talk usc u beezies
Sorry, we don't speak Ebonics
Well it's only a 1.5 peat so it doesn't really matter.
Let's see.....LSU 1, SC 1 & the Current & Still National Champions UT 1.
FACT: Those look like real BCS trophies up there. The article above deals with shoulda, coulda & woulda.
Is it me or do the LSU & UT pics look nice & glossy & the SC one looks dirty, tarnished & smudged up?
What did I say? polls. They are horrible and don't mean anything. I'm speaking on the field, and on the field Auburn did exactly what Sc did. Exactly.
...i don't disagree with what Auburn did. but your argument is lacking in that the Polls decide the champion. and USC was #1 in both polls going into the bowl games. case closed. Auburn was never thought by the pollsters to be deserving of the national championship. game over.
your argument, then, is with the polls.
Last edited by johngateswhiteley; 08-11-2006 at 05:48 PM.
Nice pic.
Accurately shows the true BCS National Champions.
So I guess Mack or Tressell are going to be lofting the National Champion trophy this yr.
Nice.
Nebraska beats USC at the Coliseum. Mark it down!
Huskers' DBs/LBs/DL are prob good enough to do it. SC o-line not impressive enough.
SC D will have to win more games for them this yr than last.
SC going to miss Bush a whole lot.
Who will SC get to make an illegal play @ the end of the game vs ND to win it?
I may have a chance to go see NEB v SC. Might be in LA for a few days that time frame.
look like mah bush doin it live while dat weak ass vinceyoung aint doin
real talk . bush > v.yong
It's still such a stupid argument to say USC won the championship in 2003. Look at each of your points..they're almost all faulted.
1. USC was ranked #1 by the coaches poll and the AP poll at the end of the season in 2003 going into the bowls
2. BCS had USC #3
Very true, but what gives that Polls more credibility than the BCS system? Seems like apples and oranges. Prove to us why a coaches poll and AP poll determines the outright champion.
3. naturally, when USC won over #4 michigan in their bowl....AP left them #1 b/c they were already # ing 1
Yes that was the rankings according to the Polls but not the BCS rankings, so what gives those polls more credibility?
4. lsu was number #2 and played #3 ou, so obviously one cannot put them over the #1 team when they were NEVER #1 to begin with and did not beat the #1 team
They were never #1 in the coaches polls but when factoring in strength of schedule, performance against good teams, etc they were calculated to be number 1. I am not saying BCS is flawless or right, but I am trying to show you that it has no more or less credibility than a coaches poll simply for the fact that both are being used by the NCAA so thats what we are stuck with.
5. the ONLY reason the coaches poll put lsu ahead of the Trojans (who were #1 going into their bowl game) is b/c they were contractually forced
Number 1 going into their bowl game according to the coaches and ap polls. Again, I ask you to prove to us why those are more credible.
6. the BCS was put into place to put the #1 and #2 teams together, never to decide the national champion. that obviously failed miserably in 2003 and was why the BCS started to get tinkered with
And here you are just flat out wrong, man. It was ins uted to bring in money, but the ostensible reason was to determine the national champ. What you just said in your sentance was:
The Bowl Championship Series was put into place [...] never to decide a national champion.
Think about how silly that sounds. Just think.
To summarize and conclude:
John, you're basically just hinging on the fact that the Coaches and AP poll are more credible than the BCS system. I am not advocating that EITHER is perfect, but I think its just flat out silly to truely believe USC was an undisputed champion in 2003. It just did not happen--If you had any aggie in you, you would realize your error and be a man and admit it. The only half assed reason you can give for polls being more credible is that they were around before the BCS. But that was then, this is now. I am not saying BCS is more important than coaches poll, but I think that with both of them being used, and the system only really working like twice, its pointless to say there was any undisputed champion otherwise, ESPECIALLY when you consider blunders like 2003.
So they changed the BCS after that season, big deal. The changes affect the new season. What makes the polls so objective? What makes them so much more credible? Prove this to all of us, and we'll all shut up and agree they were undisputed champs. But its a stupid argument to say they were undisputed champions. Number 1 in a couple polls, yes, champions, no. If you look up number 1 and the word champion in a dictionary, I'm pretty sure the definitions are different. Its actually quite simple. Saying you shared the championship is nothing to be ashamed of, its just the logical thing to believe.
Let us put the childish taunts aside for a couple posts, and prove to me why those polls determine the undisputed champion.
Last edited by LaMarcus Bryant; 08-12-2006 at 09:51 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
