(10-07-2015 10:10 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 09:47 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 09:43 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 09:11 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 06:00 AM)Otacon Wrote:  No, that's after the fact....Was there a better matchup between top 10 schools before we knew the outcome of the game? I'll answer for you; NO. I dislike the SEC as much as anyone else, but they are the best conference. Therefore, pregame, the game was indeed the best game in the best conference. I agree the game was a total let down, but everyone takes a whoopin' sometimes.

Wow, you should have looked up what match ups there were last week before you went off like this. Now you look like a jack ass.

#6 Notre Dame vs #12 Clemson was the hyped match up for the week. Moral of the story? Don't EVER answer for me if you are going to answer wrong.

He didn't really answer you wrong - in his opinion. And that's what I think he was doing there.

It doesn't have to agree with the physical evidence when you're talking to FANS.

I realize you want to defend your fellow WVU guy and I shall say that I like Otacon. I'll call anyone a jack ass, its not a big deal for me and I am likely to simply laugh if someone calls me a jack ass.

With that being said....he said "Was there a better matchup between top 10 schools before we knew the outcome of the game?". Both teams weren't even in the top 10. The same could be said of Notre Dame and Clemson but collectively their ranks were higher and neither one had a loss. So, if he wants to simply say his opinion then that is fine but he was stating it as a matter of fact so I could tell he overlooked the Notre Dame and Clemson game.

That CBS person was hyping the game that CBS had versus the game that ESPN was hyping. That should be obvious.

It WAS obvious, Oblivia. THAT should have been obvious in my post.

But what I was saying is that FACTS often mean little in sports board discussions. There are FANS we're talking with. Remember?

Yes, I get it but I don't think his choice of wording belies the point that it was simply his opinion. If it was simply his opinion he was expressing then he wouldn't try to tell me what my opinion should be on it. That is what you do when you believe you are stating a fact.

In regards to it being a fact, he would then be wrong because the more compelling match up factually speaking was the Notre Dame vs Clemson match up of the higher ranked unbeaten teams.

(10-07-2015 09:11 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  #6 Notre Dame vs #12 Clemson was the hyped match up for the week. Moral of the story? Don't EVER answer for me if you are going to answer wrong.

I stand corrected. I forgot that Alabama dropped out of the top 10 with their loss. Please ignore the ramblings of a lost soul!

(10-07-2015 11:01 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 10:10 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It WAS obvious, Oblivia. THAT should have been obvious in my post.

But what I was saying is that FACTS often mean little in sports board discussions. There are FANS we're talking with. Remember?

Yes, I get it but I don't think his choice of wording belies the point that it was simply his opinion. If it was simply his opinion he was expressing then he wouldn't try to tell me what my opinion should be on it. That is what you do when you believe you are stating a fact.

In regards to it being a fact, he would then be wrong because the more compelling match up factually speaking was the Notre Dame vs Clemson match up of the higher ranked unbeaten teams.

Never mind. You still don't get it. And after spending all day undergoing medical tests, I have neither the desire nor the energy to break it down into its simpler terms. I'm kind of brain dead now.

Perhaps we can address this later when I feel like a human being again.

(10-07-2015 05:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 11:01 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 10:10 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It WAS obvious, Oblivia. THAT should have been obvious in my post.

But what I was saying is that FACTS often mean little in sports board discussions. There are FANS we're talking with. Remember?

Yes, I get it but I don't think his choice of wording belies the point that it was simply his opinion. If it was simply his opinion he was expressing then he wouldn't try to tell me what my opinion should be on it. That is what you do when you believe you are stating a fact.

In regards to it being a fact, he would then be wrong because the more compelling match up factually speaking was the Notre Dame vs Clemson match up of the higher ranked unbeaten teams.

Never mind. You still don't get it. And after spending all day undergoing medical tests, I have neither the desire nor the energy to break it down into its simpler terms. I'm kind of brain dead now.

Perhaps we can address this later when I feel like a human being again.

Nah, I think you were creating an argument that didn't exist in the first place...just check out the post above yours. It's all good.

(10-07-2015 05:23 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Nah, I think you were creating an argument that didn't exist in the first place...just check out the post above yours. It's all good.

He pulled a DuPont, and drug his feet admitting he was wrong? Well, at least it didn't take decades for his admission.