Printable View
You know, you fit the mold of the true "fanatic". You choose to totally ignore statistics and results over top competition given to you that show the disparity in the top teams just because you "believe" that they would be even. That's so irrational. But, hey, what do you expect from a bunch of people who tore their goalposts down not too many years ago after beating a crappy Louisiana Tech team.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRaiderFn
BlueRaiderFan Congrats on your conference success. However, I do not feel this is the right forum for you to make petty little arguments about your little conference. Just b/c it is free doesn't mean you have to keep coming on here defending your little conference. The sunbelt has only scratched the surface of what the WAC has done over the last 10-15 years. You can't argue that and if you do than you are just proving that you are obnoxious and would argue with a telephone post. I think that people should have to pay a one time fee to post their opinions on this board. That would eliminate a lot unwanted B.S. on the board.
I would definitely consider it and I wouldn't call the WAC PATHETIC. See the difference? and I wouldn't belittle Central Michigan etc etc etc. It's the attitude I'm talking about and the fact that this particular fan can't seem to just agree that he has no head to head mathc ups and no common oponents to speak of. It's what every other person inthe college football world uses as a measuring stick. You see: I have seen improvement in the teams I'm talking about, so it's not exactly a guess. It's more reasonable after seeing improvement in the Sunbelt to say that they have improved and may be able to hang that it is to say that they have no shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
Our wins were just as impressive as yours and the reason we tore the goal posts down is you guys were our first 1A victory since going 1A.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtydawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtr002
Duh, we haven't been a conference (in football) for that long. What was that? "PETTY"...more arrogance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRaiderFn
Dude. It's our freakin' message board. We can be as arrogant as we like. If you don't like it, then get the hell out of here.
We could put on disclaimer before they pay this money is donated to LTAC and will support Louisiana Tech Athletics. I wonder how many people such as BRF would pay to come on here and posts. That way we know that when we are reading bunch of B.S., there is some good coming from it. At any rate it sounds like a good idea to me.
$25.00 sounds fair to me. one time fee to pay if you really care about TECH athletics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtydawg
Well..."Dude" when you come to an MT board, people don't start trashing your team without you trashing theirs first. It's called common friggin' courtesy. I NEVER insulted Tech or the WAC, just made an observation that I htought we could hang with you guys at the top. I even stated that we maybe a little below the WAC at the top (several posts back) and my friendly argument was meet with insults and Sunbelt bashing. It's one thing to state that you disagree and why you disagree, but to just be rude without provocation shows a lack of character. And BTW: The rest of the college football world uses TWO catergories when comparing teams: Head to head wins and common opponents.
No, it wasn't arrogance. I just think of a conference that has to rely on secondary bowl tie-ins is not on the same level as the WAC. So to me, compared to the WAC the sunbelt is, "petty".Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRaiderFn
Fair enough. Good luck to the WAC.Quote:
Originally Posted by rtr002
Sorry I will use the word, "inferior" next time. Does that sound arrogant. I don't know what adjective to use. I guess I will use the phrase, "not as good". Whatever!
I wonder how many belt coaches will go around telling recruits that they have tie-ins to all of these bowls without telling them the stipulations. Does the secondary contract only apply to SEC teams, what about the other conferences, such as the BigXII in the I-bowl. Do the sunbelt teams get their spots also?
But "Dude," saying that we are wrong to disagree with you because there are no head to head wins or common opponents is EXACTLY a reason we can say to you that the Sunbelt is not as good as the WAC, because all we have to go on is the information that has been posted over and over in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRaiderFn
You are right, until there are head to head games and common opponents, we can't say that the wac is superior to the sunbelt...but by that logic, that is just as ridiculous as you saying they are equal at the top...not to mention every other conference and team.
I don't go to the MT board because I really don't give a crap about MT. You made an observation that was refuted by facts and stats that might not show head to head competetion but shows comparable competition which, incidentally, is what the rest of the college football world uses, not your two categories despite what you would want to believe, considering that it's nearly impossible to compare head to head competition and common opponents simply because most teams don't play common opponents or head to head. Think of the logistical impossibility of all the FBS schools to play enough head to head or common opponents, and you'll see that your two categories aren't how it's done. How many common opponents do the top 25 teams have or even head to head match ups? Very few.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRaiderFn
So, the college football world assumes that these BCS conferences and perceived next level conferences are tougher because of their results against perceived tough competion. You're trying to base your argument on criteria that you wish to exist but doesn't. If the college football world used your two categories when comparing teams, there would be no preseason top 25 and really no top 25 for several weeks as no teams would have played any common opponents yet and head to head match ups would only mean that one team was better than the next but without a common opponent you wouldn't be able to tell how much better and then not until that common opponent played other common opponents later in the year etc...
Look, you've already stated that it doesn't matter what you are shown, your mind can't be changed that the top of the WAC is much better than the top of the Sunbelt simply because that's what you believe. It doesn't matter that you've been shown that our conference's OOC wins came against higher regarded teams by the experts than your conference's OOC wins. Your attempt to create criteria that renders what most people use to base those judgements on as insignificant is just a futile attempt to cover your ignorance. So, then you get all riled up when your argument is shown to be as shallow as your conference and complain about our arrogance. Once again, if you don't like it, get the hell out of here.