they might have a better resume but you said they are a better team. When it played out on court, they were not.
Pencil UT into the Sweet 16.
- Thread starter Hanmudog
- Start date
And whipped their *** on a neutral court, about 3 miles from their gym.
I don't give a **** what their "resume" says.
I don't give a **** what their "resume" says.
Sometimes I think you might just be really ignorant, like not being able to figure out this comparison.Coach34 said:
Bowden coached for 17 yearsand had numerous close calls before he won a title, Osborne 21 seasons, a few less close calls, but same story. If they hadn't been allowed to stay on that long they never would've gotten there.
Stans has gone to the second round (which is ONE game away from theSweet16) 4 times in 12 years, to say he hasn't ever gotten close is ridiculous, b/c that doesn't take into accounta HUGE1st rd upset. Getting a game or two away frombeing "over the hump" 1 out every 4 years is almost identical to the ratio of times Bowden and Osborne almost won titles before they actually won one.
We've been close 4 or 5 times actually, andwe had the ball w/ a chance to tie Memphis on the last possession of the game, so isn't that considered a one possession game?
Head to head results matter now?
Stans has a WINNING head to head record vs every team in the SEC outside of UK, UT, and UF (and is only 1 game below .500 vs UF)
Lots of coaches have come and gone in the SEC the last 12 years to, but I'd bet only 5 or less have a better head to head record vs him.
(He also owns the head to head vs Stallings)
Stans has a WINNING head to head record vs every team in the SEC outside of UK, UT, and UF (and is only 1 game below .500 vs UF)
Lots of coaches have come and gone in the SEC the last 12 years to, but I'd bet only 5 or less have a better head to head record vs him.
(He also owns the head to head vs Stallings)
as you want to make it suit your argument. Of course, I don't think you can think analytically about this.
Auburn : MSU <> Vandy : MSU
Auburn : MSU <> Vandy : MSU
I see you avoiding this post because you know it exposes your (probably intentionally contrived) idiocy.
I still can't fathom how me thinking that the STL Cardinals, who only scored 6 runs in a 3 game series, can't blame pitching on their losses against the Dodgers last year. 6 17'n runs.... and our pitching wasn't good enough? We didn't score enough damn runs to win and there's nothing else you can tell me that'll make me think different...
If this makes me wrong, then so be it... I'll be a moron.
If this makes me wrong, then so be it... I'll be a moron.
Have we or have we not underachieved in the regular season the last 3 years? Please answer the question.
If your answer is yes, can you not admit that is why we had to play Memphis in the second round?
If your answer is yes, can you not admit that is why we had to win the SECT last year and this year to even get in the NCAAT?
If your answer is yes, can you not admit that we would have had a better seed last year and not had to play Washington in the first round?
Can you not admit if we would play the majority of the year like we did in the SECT the last two years we'd have gotten in and been a decent seed? 6 or better.
If your answer is no to the underachievement question, then I don't have the time nor inclination to discuss this with your dumb asses any further.
If your answer is yes, can you not admit that is why we had to play Memphis in the second round?
If your answer is yes, can you not admit that is why we had to win the SECT last year and this year to even get in the NCAAT?
If your answer is yes, can you not admit that we would have had a better seed last year and not had to play Washington in the first round?
Can you not admit if we would play the majority of the year like we did in the SECT the last two years we'd have gotten in and been a decent seed? 6 or better.
If your answer is no to the underachievement question, then I don't have the time nor inclination to discuss this with your dumb asses any further.