You ahve been crowing about Maryland as that was the highlight of a creampuff non-conf sched for WVU. It wasnt' a big deal beating them, they had a good record b/c the ACC stunk.
I hadn't even mentioned beating Maryland as being big until the ACC-Big East thread took off. Then the "Clemson is playing great" thing took off. Then Maryland was mentioned. Then the WVU beating of Maryland was noted.
I was at the Olive Branch for the game. Considering that school is on winter break now, the place was packed and had a line to get in. Was it as long as it was for Louisville game? no.... but it was still packed, and there was still a lot of fun to be had and plenty of enthusiasm.
I've been on campus for all the games, no question the fans there are still buzzing on gameday like they've never been before.
Rutgers is for real. A nice story in NCAA Football. Too bad they didnt beat WV in that OT thriller to end the season.
Big East is now 4-0 in bowl games with Cincinnati still to play one. Kind of sticks it to all the people who thought our big three ranked teams were a sham.
I said the top 3 were good teams but they haven't beaten any top teams and Ul & WVU struggled against teams they should have crushed.
Let's see. Louisville won a BCS game. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't the BCS teams the top teams? Who are you to decide Wake Forest is not a top team? Let's see. Pat White playing injured. Steve Slaton too injured to stay in game. West Virginia goes down 35-17, then comes back to win game.
WVU had injuries but Tech did not? Their starting QB didn't play(I think he was suspended). The ACC stunk, Wake was a nice stroy but not a legit big time team. It's not the fault of UL but they played the worst BCS team and struggled mightily w/ them.
If the backup was better he would have been playing all year. ND played a much better team than Wake did, LSU would crush UL, WVU, Wake or whoever.
Not true. Just look at the Jets. Pennington sat on the bench in 2001. I don't need anymore examples than that. I could go on and on, though. Not true. Two of those teams they would not crush. LSU would be involved in a high-scoring affair with WVU. Ditto if they played Louisville. LSU would probably beat Wake Forest by a couple touchdowns. I rank them: 1. LSU 2. Louisville 3. West Virginia 4. Wake Forest 5. Notre Dame
Chad wasn't rady in 2001, maybe this guy wasn't ready this year? i don't follow them closely to know. I wouldn't rank WF ahead of ND and I do think LSU would crush any of those teams. Not a knock on the BE teams I just see a different kind of athlete at LSU.
First of all, LSU is my 2nd favorite college football team. I go back further with them than I do WVU. LSU would be my favorite team had I never attended WVU. I used to watch LSU games on tape delays on Sunday mornings in the mid-1980s. I don't badmouth LSU football too often. So don't think I'm even remotely annoyed at you saying LSU would pummel WVU. Did you read my comments in the Sugar Bowl thread? You'll have to try a different avenue. Again, I don't know how LSU would stop WVU's offense. LSU would certainly score on WVU. LSU would probably win by a score of 41-34 or so. Ditto with a Louisville-LSU game. Funny that you started with these hypotheticals. You're the guy who claims he wins 90% of all arguments by sticking to the FACTS. I had been discussing facts in this thread. Then you started with your shtick. (Note: these lines may not be verbatim. I am paraphrasing.) "They beat a bad Purdue team." "This team's not any good." "They should have crushed them." "Not a legit team." "LSU would crush those teams." Then I got in and offered my opinions on those hypothetical matchups to play along. At the end of the day, what's the point discussing hypotheticals? **** As for my Pennington-Testaverde '01 example, keep in mind that is one example. I could provide many more. However, I don't think you are dumb enough for me to have to provide any more, so I will not bother. I will note something about that specific example while I'm here. Who are you to say Pennington was not ready? Do you have proof of this? Now, you can say who am I to say Testaverde should have been benched in 2001? Well, I saw Testaverde playing mostly garbage football for the Jets in 2001. He was 37 when the season began and 38 when it ended. The services of a quarterback who was taken in the 1st round of the 2000 draft were being wasted on the bench. The December 2 game was particularly tough to take. Testaverde threw a horrible interception late in the game and the game really put the Patriots on their way. Pennington did not get a chance to play in a meaningful spot till the fourth game of the 2002 season. He performed excellently from that spot through the Wild Card game. Was he all of sudden ready right at the time Testaverde got injured against Jacksonville? Is it possible Pennington was ready in 2001 and the head coach was too dumb and/or scared to make the move? Is it possible if Pennington had taken over as the starter at some point in 2001 that the Jets would have gone 12-4 or 11-5 instead of "only" going 9-7 in 2002? Is it possible the Jets would have been the 1 seed or the 2 seed or the 3 seed instead of the 4 seed in the 2002 AFC Playoffs? I think so. No way to prove any of it. But it's what I think. That 2001 season was disgusting down the stretch. The first month of 2002 was equally sick.
Chad wasn't ready to play in 2001, that's the bottom line. He was in his 2nd year here he msised most of his first year w/ a knee injury(he wasn't playing anyway but he missed valuable practice time) and he was on his 3rd offense in 3 years. Vinny was a good caretaker for the O in that season. W/ some guys you throw them to the wolves right away and it works(see Big Ben) but somtimes it doesn't work(see Eli) and some guys sitting and watching is best for them(see Chad and Rivers).
See above post. I'll try to revive this. Maybe you can up your argument winning percentage from .900 to .901 or .905 or whatever. You got a chance now, Jethro! Testaverde was a good caretaker in 2001? Okay, fine. Let's suppose I agree for the sake of argument. (Of course, I wholeheartedly disagree, but this is just pretend.) Okay, fine. What the hell is the excuse for 2002? Pennington wasn't ready then, either? You'll remember he finally got to play only after Testaverde got injured. Then, the day or the day after that game, the light finally went off and Edwards grew a pair and made the transition.
Oh, one other thing for now. I meant to ask this earlier. How does a team "struggle mightily" but still win by double digits? "Struggle mightily" is quite harsh. To me, struggling mightily is a game in which the team loses. See Jets vs Jaguars in 2006. The Jets struggled mightily that day. Football is a 60-minute game. After 60 minutes, Louisville had a 24-13 win. You want to tell me Louisville let Wake Forest hang around too long, maybe I'd buy that. You want to tell me Louisville didn't beat Wake Forest by enough points to satisfy you, that would be fine. But don't say they "struggled mightily." ___ It is interesting how you are knocking ACC teams in order to knock Big East teams. The hate runs that deep. I have always tried to tell it like I see it. If an ACC team was better, I said as much. I don't knock teams just to try to support a team I like.
