OT: HOKIES!!!!

by **Uno_up** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:08 pm

That 17 pt. lead was cut down fast. 24-21 was certainly not a decisive victory. It was actually a shitty mistake-filled game. Kansass gets the victory for sucking less. These team play ten times in a row and Tech beats them eight of the ten. Damn, I forgot to tivo The Apprentice.
Onto the next bowl.

by **Saint John** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:13 pm

One_Up wrote:That 17 pt. lead was cut down fast. 24-21 was certainly not a decisive victory. It was actually a shitty mistake-filled game. Kansass gets the victory for sucking less. These team play ten times in a row and Tech beats them eight of the ten. Damn, I forgot to tivo The Apprentice.
Onto the next bowl.

If that's how you spin being 1-3 against good teams, so be it. That number 5 national ranking before last night's game was a farce. Kansas merely proved that they could play a sloppy game and still beat them. If these teams played ten times Kansas would beat them 9 out of ten.

by **Uno_up** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:20 pm

Saint John wrote:
One_Up wrote:That 17 pt. lead was cut down fast. 24-21 was certainly not a decisive victory. It was actually a shitty mistake-filled game. Kansass gets the victory for sucking less. These team play ten times in a row and Tech beats them eight of the ten. Damn, I forgot to tivo The Apprentice.
Onto the next bowl.

If that's how you spin being 1-3 against good teams, so be it. That number 5 national ranking before last night's game was a farce. Kansas merely proved that they could play a sloppy game and still beat them. If these teams played ten times Kansas would beat them 9 out of ten.

VT 17, ECU, 7
LSU 48, VT 7
VT 28, Ohio 7
VT 44, Wm&Mary 3
VT 17, UNC 10
VT 41, Clemson 23
VT 43, Duke 14
BC 14, VT 10
VT 27, GT 3
VT 40, FSU 21
VT 44, Miami 14
VT 33, UVa 21
VT 30, BC 16

I'm assuming you've made yourself believe BC is the only good team Tech beat? Look again.

by **Saint John** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:35 pm

One_Up wrote:
Saint John wrote:
One_Up wrote:That 17 pt. lead was cut down fast. 24-21 was certainly not a decisive victory. It was actually a shitty mistake-filled game. Kansass gets the victory for sucking less. These team play ten times in a row and Tech beats them eight of the ten. Damn, I forgot to tivo The Apprentice.
Onto the next bowl.

If that's how you spin being 1-3 against good teams, so be it. That number 5 national ranking before last night's game was a farce. Kansas merely proved that they could play a sloppy game and still beat them. If these teams played ten times Kansas would beat them 9 out of ten.

VT 17, ECU, 7
LSU 48, VT 7
VT 28, Ohio 7
VT 44, Wm&Mary 3
VT 17, UNC 10
VT 41, Clemson 23
VT 43, Duke 14
BC 14, VT 10
VT 27, GT 3
VT 40, FSU 21
VT 44, Miami 14
VT 33, UVa 21
VT 30, BC 16

I'm assuming you've made yourself believe BC is the only good team Tech beat? Look again.

To be ranked number 5 with two losses and cupcakes like Ohio, William and Mary, NC, Duke, and Miami is silly. You split with BC, got throttled by LSU, lost to Kansas and beat some non Top 25 teams like Virginia (sure to fall from the Top 25), FSU (7-6) and Georgia Tech (7-6). Clemson might finish in the Top 25. VT is somewhere between the 15th and 20th best team in the land. Deal with it.

by **Uno_up** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:00 am

Saint John wrote:To be ranked number 5 with two losses and cupcakes like Ohio, William and Mary, NC, Duke, and Miami is silly. You split with BC, got throttled by LSU, lost to Kansas and beat some non Top 25 teams like Virginia (sure to fall from the Top 25), FSU (7-6) and Georgia Tech (7-6). Clemson might finish in the Top 25. VT is somewhere between the 15th and 20th best team in the land. Deal with it.

Show me a schedule without playing a cupcake or two or three.
(prebowl records)
VT 17, ECU, 7 (7-5)
LSU 48, VT 7 (11-2)
VT 28, Ohio 7 (6-6)
VT 44, Wm&Mary 3 (4-7)
VT 17, UNC 10 (4-8)
VT 41, Clemson 23 (9-3)
VT 43, Duke 14 (1-11)
BC 14, VT 10 (10-3)
VT 27, GT 3 (7-5)
VT 40, FSU 21 (7-5)
VT 44, Miami 14 (5-7)
VT 33, UVa 21 (9-3)
VT 30, BC 16 (10-3)
(90-68)
I'm simply refuting your statement that they are 1-3 against "good teams". Hell, there was only one game (LSU) that they weren't in. If you have a hard-on for Virginia Tech and their fans, you don't have to misrepresent the FACT that they defeated some good teams and not just ONE good team. Virginia, Boston College, & Clemson certainly qualify as good teams unless you have erected some unknown standard that I'm clueless about. Florida State & Georgia Tech should qualify as decent (not great) teams. Tech will finish somewhere between 11-20.

by **Saint John** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:12 am

One_Up wrote:
Saint John wrote:To be ranked number 5 with two losses and cupcakes like Ohio, William and Mary, NC, Duke, and Miami is silly. You split with BC, got throttled by LSU, lost to Kansas and beat some non Top 25 teams like Virginia (sure to fall from the Top 25), FSU (7-6) and Georgia Tech (7-6). Clemson might finish in the Top 25. VT is somewhere between the 15th and 20th best team in the land. Deal with it.

Show me a schedule without playing a cupcake or two or three.
(prebowl records)
VT 17, ECU, 7 (7-5)
LSU 48, VT 7 (11-2)
VT 28, Ohio 7 (6-6)
VT 44, Wm&Mary 3 (4-7)
VT 17, UNC 10 (4-8)
VT 41, Clemson 23 (9-3)
VT 43, Duke 14 (1-11)
BC 14, VT 10 (10-3)
VT 27, GT 3 (7-5)
VT 40, FSU 21 (7-5)
VT 44, Miami 14 (5-7)
VT 33, UVa 21 (9-3)
VT 30, BC 16 (10-3)
(90-68)
I'm simply refuting your statement that they are 1-3 against "good teams". Hell, there was only one game (LSU) that they weren't in. If you have a hard-on for Virginia Tech and their fans, you don't have to misrepresent the FACT that they defeated some good teams and not just ONE good team. Virginia, Boston College, & Clemson certainly qualify as good teams unless you have erected some unknown standard that I'm clueless about. Florida State & Georgia Tech should qualify as decent (not great) teams. Tech will finish somewhere between 11-20.

I gave you Boston College as a good win. However, Virginia lost to Wyoming, NC State and Texas Tech and had NO quality wins. They were the recpient of a soft schedule...something you should be able to relate to. And Clemson's biggest win was either Maryland or FSU...hardly elite programs. Review VT's season and you are left with a 15 to 20th best team in the land. Virginia and Clemson probably won't finish in the Top 25, leaving you with 1 quality win. Again, you probably be 1-3 against Top 25 teams.

by **Uno_up** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:43 am

Saint John wrote:I gave you Boston College as a good win. However, Virginia lost to Wyoming, NC State and Texas Tech and had NO quality wins. They were the recpient of a soft schedule...something you should be able to relate to. And Clemson's biggest win was either Maryland or FSU...hardly elite programs. Review VT's season and you are left with a 15 to 20th best team in the land. Virginia and Clemson probably won't finish in the Top 25, leaving you with 1 quality win. Again, you probably be 1-3 against Top 25 teams.

While it may have it's flaws, I'll stick to the BCS rankings (combination of Harris/USA Today/Computer rankings) which includes STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE and QUALITY WINS, unless I hear of a better formula.

by **Red13JoePa** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:47 am

Yea but The Goiters also LOST to BC.

by **Uno_up** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:54 am

Red13JoePa wrote:Yea but The Goiters also LOST to BC.

The Gators didn't play BC.

by **Red13JoePa** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:06 am

I know.

by **Uno_up** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:25 am

Red13JoePa wrote:I know.

?

by **hoagiepete** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:11 am

Rock Chalk Jayhawk! Go KU!

What a game.

It was punt return, a ghost interference call and an unbelieveable reception off a prone player after a botched gimme interception from being a blowout.

And now on to basketball!

by **Red13JoePa** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:18 am

And Kansas gets called for highstepping????

Dude gimme a break, USC does flips over the goalline with no flag.

Kansas and Mizzu are the 2 best teams right now.

by **chf34jmac** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:29 am

Uh oneup I do believe that someone bearing a striking resemblance to me stated last night that the Hokies were going to lose. I reiterate what I said last night. PSU won their bowl game last weekend, can you say the same thing today?

by **Uno_up** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:47 am

chf34jmac wrote:Uh oneup I do believe that someone bearing a striking resemblance to me stated last night that the Hokies were going to lose. I reiterate what I said last night. PSU won their bowl game last weekend, can you say the same thing today?

Nice prediction while the game was in progress, chef.
I don't care to debate what inferior bowl games that lower ranked teams may have won or lost though.
It will be interesting to see the final rankings when they come out.
I'll be considerate and let you have the last word, as I thought this thread had expired.

by **Rhiannon** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:48 am

Hey guess what... this thread was hilarious to read.

As a lifelong Hokie, allow me to say that I was never more thankful for the satellite to go out than I was at halftime last night. We sucked. It happens. We beat the teams that I really cared about beating (UVA, Miami, and retaliating on BC), we won the conference title. We finally got the south endzone parking lot to look a little less like a demilitarized area. A guy I've been friends with since 7th grade is one of Beamer's assistants and now I can point out TWO of my high school's alumni on the sidelines. ...Beamer finally came home and actually wasn't a snobby douche to people at the diner on Main Street. We're for the better part of the argument a young team, and pending armageddon, there's another season that will be here soon enough. I'm happy.

Hoki, Hoki, Hoki Hy! Tech, Tech, VPI!! :wink:

by **Rockindeano** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 8:09 am

Red13JoePa wrote:

Dude gimme a break, USC does flips over the goalline with no flag.

Wrong, SC got flagged twice for their stunts and Pete was pissed.

Kansas and Mizzu are the 2 best teams right now.

Yep, Kansas plays Florida Int'l National, Toledo, SE Louisiana, and Central Michigan, all of whom are tough cookies I tell ya. They didn't play Oklahoma or Texas. Big giant fraud. The Big twelve is shit. They would rather play 4 cupcakes and miss the juggernaut teams and fool voters into thinking they are a solid team. Kansas would not win 7 games in the SEC or Pac 10.

Mizzou I can respect. At least they played Illinois and Mississippi in OOC.

by **Uno_up** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:47 am

Saint John wrote:Like I said last night...1 and 3 versus good teams. Hardly a top 10 team. Somewhere between 15 and 20 is a bit more accurate.

Final AP rankings have them at number 9.

by **Saint John** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:53 am

Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:Like I said last night...1 and 3 versus good teams. Hardly a top 10 team. Somewhere between 15 and 20 is a bit more accurate.

Final AP rankings have them at number 9.

I don't give a fuck if they're 1a. They were 1-3 against good teams. They had 4 tough games and they lost 3 of them. You should be proud.

by **Uno_up** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:00 pm

Saint John wrote:
Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:Like I said last night...1 and 3 versus good teams. Hardly a top 10 team. Somewhere between 15 and 20 is a bit more accurate.

Final AP rankings have them at number 9.

I don't give a fuck if they're 1a. They were 1-3 against good teams. They had 4 tough games and they lost 3 of them. You should be proud.

Your definition of "good teams" appears to be a tad off from what the 65-member media panel may deem as opposing "good teams".
#9 baby!...a top-10 TEAM!...Proud as hell!

by **Rhiannon** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:03 pm

Uno_up wrote:Your definition of "good teams" appears to be a tad off from what the 65-member media panel may deem as opposing "good teams".
#9 baby!...a top-10 TEAM!...Proud as hell!

C'mon... I was born and bred in the Hokie nation and even I can admit that this season was good, but not THAT good. Anytime I get delusions of grandeur I remember the final 2:00 vs. BC (the first time)... we'll be up for a great run next year, though.

by **Saint John** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:14 pm

Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:
Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:Like I said last night...1 and 3 versus good teams. Hardly a top 10 team. Somewhere between 15 and 20 is a bit more accurate.

Final AP rankings have them at number 9.

I don't give a fuck if they're 1a. They were 1-3 against good teams. They had 4 tough games and they lost 3 of them. You should be proud.

Your definition of "good teams" appears to be a tad off from what the 65-member media panel may deem as opposing "good teams".
#9 baby!...a top-10 TEAM!...Proud as hell!

You beat ONE Top 20 team...ONE. You'd be proud if your kid finished second in a fucking boxing match. Get the fuck out of here.

by **Uno_up** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:20 pm

Rhiannon wrote:
Uno_up wrote:Your definition of "good teams" appears to be a tad off from what the 65-member media panel may deem as opposing "good teams".
#9 baby!...a top-10 TEAM!...Proud as hell!

C'mon... I was born and bred in the Hokie nation and even I can admit that this season was good, but not THAT good. Anytime I get delusions of grandeur I remember the final 2:00 vs. BC (the first time)... we'll be up for a great run next year, though.

Bad game (choke) for sure....but history will remember the final rankings.

by **Rhiannon** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:23 pm

Uno_up wrote:
Rhiannon wrote:
Uno_up wrote:Your definition of "good teams" appears to be a tad off from what the 65-member media panel may deem as opposing "good teams".
#9 baby!...a top-10 TEAM!...Proud as hell!

C'mon... I was born and bred in the Hokie nation and even I can admit that this season was good, but not THAT good. Anytime I get delusions of grandeur I remember the final 2:00 vs. BC (the first time)... we'll be up for a great run next year, though.

Bad game (choke) for sure....but history will remember the final rankings.

True, but I as a fan will remember how my guts stayed knotted up all fall. What pisses me off most is the thought that we might just be recipients of courtesy rankings... since an honest rank this year was about as likely as Stephen Hawking doing "Puttin' on the Ritz". :oops:

by **Uno_up** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:29 pm

Saint John wrote:
Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:
Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:Like I said last night...1 and 3 versus good teams. Hardly a top 10 team. Somewhere between 15 and 20 is a bit more accurate.

Final AP rankings have them at number 9.

I don't give a fuck if they're 1a. They were 1-3 against good teams. They had 4 tough games and they lost 3 of them. You should be proud.

Your definition of "good teams" appears to be a tad off from what the 65-member media panel may deem as opposing "good teams".
#9 baby!...a top-10 TEAM!...Proud as hell!

You beat ONE Top 20 team...ONE. You'd be proud if your kid finished second in a fucking boxing match. Get the fuck out of here.

Hokies are #9...Not "somewhere between 15 and 20"...my factual observation and point of my original post today. One message board poster who thinks differently isn't going to change that despite whatever spin-doctoring technique he chooses to perform.
...And sure, I would be proud if my son finished second in a boxing match, provided he put 100% of his heart into the match.

by **Rhiannon** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:39 pm

Uno_up wrote:Hokies are #9....

Don't get me wrong... I'm damned happy to be #9.
We're 9th, but it feels like 30th, when with a few different twists could've been #3... and for real.
Beamer is a flippin' moron. "I don't believe in the two QB offense..." he says three years ago... but that's all we've been since Randall left!!! :evil:

Does NOT work for us! We have no leadership on the team, save for one or two seniors. But next year... MAYBE. Knots in my tummy already.

by **Rockindeano** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:43 pm

Rhiannon wrote:
Uno_up wrote:Hokies are #9....

Don't get me wrong... I'm damned happy to be #9.
We're 9th, but it feels like 30th, when with a few different twists could've been #3... and for real.

3? Put the pills and the booze away.

You are going to tell me VT is better than USC, Mizzou, Kansas(ok Kansas sucks), and OSU?

Dude, check yourself.

by **Rhiannon** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:47 pm

Rockindeano wrote:
Rhiannon wrote:
Uno_up wrote:Hokies are #9....

Don't get me wrong... I'm damned happy to be #9.
We're 9th, but it feels like 30th, when with a few different twists could've been #3... and for real.

3? Put the pills and the booze away.

You are going to tell me VT is better than USC, Mizzou, Kansas(ok Kansas sucks), and OSU?

Dude, check yourself.

I don't pay attention to Mizzou, Kansas (sucks, but they beat us), or OSU, you know that. If we had beat BC the first go around, and by some miracle of baby Jesus beat LSU, then yes, I could see us being #3... since we were (undeservedly) already this year. Hence what I meant by 'few different twists'. Just daydreaming.

by **Enigma869** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:48 pm

Rockindeano wrote:You are going to tell me VT is better than USC, Mizzou, Kansas(ok Kansas sucks), and OSU?

Dude, check yourself.

USC would SMOKE VA Tech! I also think USC would have beat LSU! This is yet another example of why college football is a disgrace, and in DIRE need of a playoff system! It's the only damn major sport that isn't decided by a playoff system!

John from Boston

by **Saint John** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:49 pm

Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:
Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:
Uno_up wrote:
Saint John wrote:Like I said last night...1 and 3 versus good teams. Hardly a top 10 team. Somewhere between 15 and 20 is a bit more accurate.

Final AP rankings have them at number 9.

I don't give a fuck if they're 1a. They were 1-3 against good teams. They had 4 tough games and they lost 3 of them. You should be proud.

Your definition of "good teams" appears to be a tad off from what the 65-member media panel may deem as opposing "good teams".
#9 baby!...a top-10 TEAM!...Proud as hell!

You beat ONE Top 20 team...ONE. You'd be proud if your kid finished second in a fucking boxing match. Get the fuck out of here.

Hokies are #9...Not "somewhere between 15 and 20"...my factual observation and point of my original post today. One message board poster who thinks differently isn't going to change that despite whatever spin-doctoring technique he chooses to perform.
...And sure, I would be proud if my son finished second in a boxing match, provided he put 100% of his heart into the match.

I said they're somewhere between the 15th and 20th best team in the country. I don't think I ever said that's where they'd finish in the voting. This is just sympathy because of that dude shooting everyone. If you're too dumb to see that it's not my problem. Hell, if they voted every 3 loss team with 1 win versus the Top 20 in the Top 10, we'd have to add more numbers between 1 and 10. A lot of them.

MR

OT: HOKIES!!!!

Who is online