Red Dead Redemption
Starter
But that is not what others accused me of, is it now?
Nor was it the point that you claimed earlier that I was making.
Sports Illustrated: Why Mike Riley sees a bright future after the Huskers' 2015 nightmare
- Thread starter Saunders
- Start date
Nor was it the point that you claimed earlier that I was making.
Red Dead Redemption
Starter
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
1) Yes it is.
2) Yes it was.
It's a beautiful day today. Let's go out and enjoy it.
Redux
Assistant Coach
Red Dead Redemption
Starter
1) no it isn't. I was accused of "tearing down" the win. Show me where I did that. I even admitted that it was a good win. Suggesting in a single, passing comment that an overconfidence of the opponent and contraversial ref call may have aided the win is hardly tearing down. Nor was it the point I was making.
2) no it wasnt. You said my point was to not count the MSU win because of the Purdue loss. That was not my point at all. I can understand not reading what others post, but do you even read what you post yourself? If you can't remember, you only have to scroll back a little to look it up. Your welcome. If you are going outside, don't forget your helmet.
Last edited by a moderator:
Red Dead Redemption
Starter
RedDenver
Heisman Trophy Winner
Umm, ok? That changes it how exactly?
At least your addendum had some context:
But none of that changes my point: you're diminishing the Husker's win over a top 10 team. In fact, your addendum quite clearly makes that case. And being snarky about other people's reading comprehension doesn't help your cause when you're either unable to make the point you want to make or unable to comprehend the point you're making. Fail indeed.
Red Dead Redemption
Starter
Are you serious, Clark?
I don't know if any 3-6 team could be characterized as a "dumpster fire". A bad team, sure, but I think "dumpster fire" clearly implies a higher level of chaos under the hood. And if all someone did was look at an opponents record, then why would there be a reference to an opponent's opponent as the "worst team in the conference"? And why would they describe a loss as a "manhandling"? Even if they just looked at the score, a 10-point loss by itself could not be characterized as a "manhandling". This clearly implies evaluation of the games beyond just looking at a teams record.
I can't believe you're doubling down on your failure here, but when it's all you have I guess it's all you have...
Here's some more straws for you to grasp at:
You are really having trouble following chronology, aren't you?
Of course my addendum has more context, because I was addressing a specific reply instead of just making a general comment. It is somewhat orthogonal to the point made in my original post, but the addendum very clearly provides evaluation beyond just looking at the record, and you replied to a post I made right AFTER my addendum post, thus there is no reason for you to not have read it. That's on you, as it renders your above argument moot. You fail again. And fail further.
Again, you seem to have a comprehension problem. Read that post again. I acknowledge the MSU game as a great win. The case I am making in my addendum is that PRIOR to the MSU game, it would be very reasonable for MSU to regard Nebr as a pushover.
"Unable"? No, I am very able. I indicated where to find the necessary info.
More like "unwilling" to hold someones hand to help them after receiving snark; mischaracterizing my posts by taking them out of context, and allusions to trolling and lack of knowledge and reading.
I give what I get.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kiyoat Husker
All-Conference
Sorry, I'm not following the conversation, but I simply HAD to give you props fo' droppin' Nathan Hale bombs, an' gettin' COLONIAL on dat @ss!
History's commin' alive in dis shizzy
+1
RedDenver
Heisman Trophy Winner
Going back to the "I'm just super smart and it's everyone else that's wrong" well has grown thin. The gifs are cute, not at all convincing, but cute. And the ITG act is ridiculous - it made me laugh, so thanks for that.Are you serious, Clark?
I don't know if any 3-6 team could be characterized as a "dumpster fire". A bad team, sure, but I think "dumpster fire" clearly implies a higher level of chaos under the hood. And if all someone did was look at an opponents record, then why would there be a reference to an opponent's opponent as the "worst team in the conference"? And why would they describe a loss as a "manhandling"? Even if they just looked at the score, a 10-point loss by itself could not be characterized as a "manhandling". This clearly implies evaluation of the games beyond just looking at a teams record.
I can't believe you're doubling down on your failure here, but when it's all you have I guess it's all you have...
Here's some more straws for you to grasp at:
You are really having trouble following chronology, aren't you?
Of course my addendum has more context, because I was addressing a specific reply instead of just making a general comment. It is somewhat orthogonal to the point made in my original post, but the addendum very clearly provides evaluation beyond just looking at the record, and you replied to a post I made right AFTER my addendum post, thus there is no reason for you to not have read it. That's on you, as it renders your above argument moot. You fail again. And fail further.
Again, you seem to have a comprehension problem. Read that post again. I acknowledge the MSU game as a great win. The case I am making in my addendum is that PRIOR to the MSU game, it would be very reasonable for MSU to regard Nebr as a pushover.
"Unable"? No, I am very able. I indicated where to find the necessary info.
More like "unwilling" to hold someones hand to help them after receiving snark; mischaracterizing my posts by taking them out of context, and allusions to trolling and lack of knowledge and reading.
I give what I get.
So you admit the MSU win was a great win for the Huskers. But then why say, "Can't blame MSU for (insert reasons)" if it's not to diminish the win? Examine the phrase "Can't blame..." and understand the context you're giving the rest of what you say.
Red Dead Redemption
Starter
(Sigh...) here's the recap for you...Going back to the "I'm just super smart and it's everyone else that's wrong" well has grown thin. The gifs are cute, not at all convincing, but cute. And the ITG act is ridiculous - it made me laugh, so thanks for that.Are you serious, Clark?I don't know if any 3-6 team could be characterized as a "dumpster fire". A bad team, sure, but I think "dumpster fire" clearly implies a higher level of chaos under the hood. And if all someone did was look at an opponents record, then why would there be a reference to an opponent's opponent as the "worst team in the conference"? And why would they describe a loss as a "manhandling"? Even if they just looked at the score, a 10-point loss by itself could not be characterized as a "manhandling". This clearly implies evaluation of the games beyond just looking at a teams record.
I can't believe you're doubling down on your failure here, but when it's all you have I guess it's all you have...
Here's some more straws for you to grasp at:
You are really having trouble following chronology, aren't you?
Of course my addendum has more context, because I was addressing a specific reply instead of just making a general comment. It is somewhat orthogonal to the point made in my original post, but the addendum very clearly provides evaluation beyond just looking at the record, and you replied to a post I made right AFTER my addendum post, thus there is no reason for you to not have read it. That's on you, as it renders your above argument moot. You fail again. And fail further.
Again, you seem to have a comprehension problem. Read that post again. I acknowledge the MSU game as a great win. The case I am making in my addendum is that PRIOR to the MSU game, it would be very reasonable for MSU to regard Nebr as a pushover.
"Unable"? No, I am very able. I indicated where to find the necessary info.More like "unwilling" to hold someones hand to help them after receiving snark; mischaracterizing my posts by taking them out of context, and allusions to trolling and lack of knowledge and reading.
I give what I get.
So you admit the MSU win was a great win for the Huskers. But then why say, "Can't blame MSU for (insert reasons)" if it's not to diminish the win? Examine the phrase "Can't blame..." and understand the context you're giving the rest of what you say.
In speculating where our program actually is, there was an assertion that too much emphasis was placed on the first 9 games and very little on the last 4. I merely postulated that perhaps too much emphasis could be placed on the last 4 games as well. Then someone cherry-picked a phrase from my post and it went down a rabbit hole.
In regards to the MSU specifically, yes it was a great win. Any win against a top ten opponent is great, moreso considering where our program was at the time. But after the season was over and the euphoria has worn off, and looking at how MSU played the rest of their season, maybe they didn't deserve their top 10 ranking, which would take some of the shine off our win over them. Couple that with the possibility that they took us lightly and/or we were aided by a contraversial call, etc., our win over them (while still good) may not seem as great as it originally did, and doesn't necessarily define where our program is at, particularly when the remaiming 3 games weren't undoubtedly convincing either.
You're welcome.
Last edited by a moderator:
Red Dead Redemption
Starter
Count 'Bility
Banned
It's come to the point where each is so deadset on their opinion that they cant even see theyre almost completely in agreement now.
Last edited by a moderator:
