Marf

 

I am a new member. Been a Husker fan for 52 years. Loved Devaney and Osborne. Loved Frank as a player but recognized he was not the man for the HC job after losing TO recruits. Hated Peterson...knew him when he worked at AkSarBen...a worthless egotist then, who only got worse over time. He fired FS a year late...but since he delayed in 2002, he should have given FS another year, though I think FS was destined to fail as HC. Hated the Callahan hire all the way...though I think he actually had things coming around in 2005 and 2006 before losing the team after the USC debacle in 2007. I liked the Bo hire, finally realized he was destined to fail after the very first Wisconsin beat down we received in 2011. I am very relieved that we now seem to have a very competent, mature, capable and experienced staff.

 

I've been temporarily banned from another site for having my opinions and am hoping that the moderators on this site actually allow opinions and are not jackasses who enjoy "vacationing" folks for no reason at all. So...my question for the regulars here is...are opinions allowed here?

 

opinions are allowed

 

sadly, facts and reason sometimes are not

 

Unless your facts and reason are wrong and stupid. Then they aren't facts or reason. They're neither. Then you become tschu, and the board does not need more tschu.

LOL JK MODS IM MAKING A JOKE PLEASE DONT BAN ME ITS A JOKE JOKE JOKEY JOKSTER.

After 2011, sure i can see it. But trying to say you saw it after 2010 is some straight up revisionist, "i told you so" bullsh#t.

 

I had a pretty strong hunch he was gonna get fired in 2003. Does that make me a revisionist?

We hired a Gundy? How old is he?

I heard he killed a guy with a trident.

I'll give ya 10 bucks for your kidney stones... For research.. Or a snack.. Or something....

I entered my information and it told me since I have small wrists I must have a large penis. Can't argue with science, I guess.

The link had me hopeful. Disappointed.

The perfect position for the sock.puppet.

I prefer reliability in my punter.

 

 

I mean how much could a half dozen red light bulbs cost? Maybe the OP could just fund it himself instead of making a thread asking for the rest of us to join him in funding $8-$10 for some red bulbs. Ahhh the offseason. Where no topic is deemed ridiculous but we are all bored out of our minds. Quick side note- I like it!

 

 

Hey, I think they have just the thing we need at Autozone. Of course it'll take a lot more than half a dozen.

 

Man, can you imagine the Bro-tastic douche who drives that car?

 

ShawnWatson.

Could you imagine Riley bringing kids on the field for Armstrong to play catch with? It'd be like that Peyton Manning SNL skit. They'd be dead. Tommy throws heat. No exceptions.

We should run the one Urban Meyer likes, where he can start his 3rd string QB and still put up 40 a game. I'd like that one.

Dirk Chatelain and John Elway need to have a carrot-chomping contest. For obvious reasons.

Doesn't change my weekly ritual of taking a dump on Joe Pa's grave.

Wonder why so many people are at the stadium right now.

Liar. Yemen is an organic fluid produced in the testes and stored in the yeminal vesicles.

Ya, but they obviously made gas prices drop 2 dollars a gallon in 2 months. Because that's how economies work. SUCK ON THAT ONE OBAMA!

They can't even vote, why the hell would they be on a city council?

Scott Frost.

Meh. The SEC may only have one top-5 team in Bama (although man, Georgia might still be a legitmate top-4 team), but they still have 9 top-20 power teams. I don't know whether you call that top-heavy or what you call that.

What? How did you come up with that number? Even the media polls (which you have already admitted are grossly biased per contracts and whatever else) don't even manage that. Not even close. 9? You have Ole Miss in there, who exists in the rankings solely by beating an overanked Alabama, coming close against a laughable Auburn at #3, and an equally laughable Miss State at #4. 7-6 Arkansas is a top 20 team? 8-5 LSU? 8-5 Auburn? All top 20 huh? Are you using Sagarin rankings or what?

Here's what I think: I think you've created this narrative and held onto it for so long that you're too prideful to simply change your answer when faced with something that goes against it, such as the SEC's piss poor bowl performance. So now that it's all falling apart you make spreadsheets about Vegas spreads or whatever to try to convince people what you're saying still holds water, but it just doesn't pass the eyeball test.

Ok, so now that the Missouri game is over, I did a simple rudimentary exercise to see how well the SEC has performed compared to how the betting market expected them to perform prior to the bowls being played. Pretty cool the results that I found:

 

 

The SEC as a whole has underperformed by just 2 points per game. They're basically performing just like Vegas has expected them to perform. Almost exactly, really. (Note: Alabama and Tennessee have yet to play obviously). In fact, every team except the set of quadruplets from the SECW have actually outperformed their spread. Basically what this tells us is that any gloom and doom about the SEC is massively overstated. But, perception is a weird and fickle beast.

 

I'd like to do this for Sagarin's predictions as well, but I'll have to find an archive from early December, as his ratings update daily and will thus have some bowl outcomes already reflected in them, and I'd like to see the change that bowls may have had - can't use data that already has this factored in. I'll get around to that eventually.

I don't know how relevant those numbers are. If we're talking science like In the Deed the Glory states, this is like Natural News stuff. Did you really expect Vegas to be off? Vegas has a weird habit of ignoring perception to make money. I'm willing to bet if you run the numbers for every conference and their performance vs the spread during the bowl season they are pretty close to that margin. I think the win/loss record is significantly more telling, and as of now the SEC has dropped their big games. Is performance vs. the spread more important than the win loss record when evaluating a conference? I would say that is a resounding no. Without other conference numbers to compare, that table just doesn't mean anything to me. Even with those numbers, I'm not sure it will mean anything to me. Win/Loss is going to trump all, and as of now the SEC hasn't really impressed.

What is the difference between the poster category "Members" and "Members2"?

 

(Not a questions about the red dots, but I didn't want to start a new thread for this.)

Members2 are a select, chosen race of people destined to rule all.

 

 

I can't wait until all the baby boomers are dead

 

Worst American generation that ever lived, and my generation has to live with the consequences

 

Let's kill them. Seriously. Like. Gas chambers. Round 'em all up and put them in labor camps in the meantime.

 

 

Excuse me?

 

I was trying to come up with a comment equally as ridiculous as your own. Seems like I nailed it.

I can't wait until all the baby boomers are dead

 

Worst American generation that ever lived, and my generation has to live with the consequences

Let's kill them. Seriously. Like. Gas chambers. Round 'em all up and put them in labor camps in the meantime.

Remember this?