Playoffs? Playoffs?!?

Vlad wrote:You kiddin' me!?! Playoffs???

Seriously, I think we're playing for a nice bowl bid. Unless the coaches can work some magic with the special-teams and the OL during the bye week, there won't be any playoffs for us.

just so ya know, my insecurities don't allow for you to have your own opinion.

Why do people on a message board, argue about their pet topics, but if they see another topic being argued about, they get indignant as if one side isn't allowing the other side to have an opinion?

Guns= "fuck you you better not have them, or we better reduce them and I'll tell you exactly why through sarcasm or fact."

Football= "you're mean if you don't allow one side to state their opinion and let it go unchallenged"

Are we really that collectively stupid or just big hypocrites?

DWags wrote:Why do people on a message board, argue about their pet topics, but if they see another topic being argued about, they get indignant as if one side isn't allowing the other side to have an opinion?....
 
Are we really that collectively stupid or just big hypocrites?    

I don't know, I'm just trying to grasp the irony of you raising this question.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Vlad wrote:You kiddin' me!?! Playoffs???

Seriously, I think we're playing for a nice bowl bid.  Unless the coaches can work some magic with the special-teams and the OL during the bye week, there won't be any playoffs for us.

just so ya know, my insecurities don't allow for you to have your own opinion.

You sir are a great American, and have the sharpest sense of humor on this board (and that other board too)!

I refuse to let you grasp the irony. Not allowed on this subject..

But fuck the gun nuts.

Vlad wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
just so ya know, my insecurities don't allow for you to have your own opinion.

You sir are a great American, and have the sharpest sense of humor on this board!

thanks, man.

You're a great American and a damn fine Spartan.

tTy wrote:I don't see anyone out there that fucking deserves to kick our ass on paper. suit the fuck up, show the fuck up, and try to score more points than we do. I don't fucking care if it looks pretty, so far, ain't nobody score more than us in a game yet.

I'm on board with #WinninUgly

Ty on point

DWags wrote:I refuse to let you grasp the irony.   Not allowed on this subject..

But fuck the gun nuts.

Sounds like you're in a good state of mind this morning.

As yes, fuck those gun nuts! Mother fuckers!

The_Dude wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Have special teams cost us a game? Yes or No.
Have we won a game because of special teams? Yes or No.

FYI...Our kick off returns are not below average.

Did you know Michigan is #1 in Special Teams Efficiency? Do you think they'd trade that for 2 more wins? Yes or No.

Too easy to predict your response.

You're such a bitch. I love it.

Question if we go undefeated is there any chance a one loss team could jump us?

steveschneider wrote:Question if we go undefeated is there any chance a one loss team could jump us?

I don't think so - when we beat Ohio State and then Iowa, we're in (and I will be the happiest Spartan on the planet). Of course, a one loss team could certainly be in, as well - but not over us.

Agree with Bob. I think beating #1 OSU and the BT-West rep in the champioship game will earn us enough respect that we won't get jumped by a 1-loss team.

steveschneider wrote:Question if we go undefeated is there any chance a one loss team could jump us?

Jump us and keep us out of the playoffs?  No way.

Jump us in the seeding?  Maybe. (I heard the committee puts a lot of emphasis on special teams.)

Death Roe wrote:

The_Dude wrote:


Too easy to predict your response.

You're such a bitch. I love it.

Plugging your thumbs in your ears doesn't make the horrendous special teams plays go away.

Vlad wrote:

DWags wrote:Why do people on a message board, argue about their pet topics, but if they see another topic being argued about, they get indignant as if one side isn't allowing the other side to have an opinion?....
 
Are we really that collectively stupid or just big hypocrites?    

I don't know, I'm just trying to grasp the irony of you raising this question.

So fuckin true!!! Lmao! The very definition

Vlad wrote:Agree with Bob. I think beating #1 OSU and the BT-West rep in the champioship game will earn us enough respect that we won't get jumped by a 1-loss team.

Look whomever is undefeated from the big ten will be a lock for a 1 or 2 seed. Period. Hell, even if we lose to osu I'm not positive we are out.

The_Dude wrote:

Death Roe wrote:

You're such a bitch. I love it.

Plugging your thumbs in your ears doesn't make the horrendous special teams plays go away.

If only we could be #1 in Special Teams Efficiency like UM...

NigelUno wrote:

The_Dude wrote:


Plugging your thumbs in your ears doesn't make the horrendous special teams plays go away.

If only we could be #1 in Special Teams Efficiency like UM...

Careful, you'll be accused of not letting them have their opinion because you're making an ass out of their argument.

They'll never grasp that.

steveschneider wrote:Question if we go undefeated is there any chance a one loss team could jump us?

It seems Bama could.

The worst scenario I can think of:
Clemson undefeated
Baylor or TCU undefeated
LSU undefeated (or one loss Bama wins and gets spot)
Then there would still be one spot left. Utah, Stanford and ND seem like the biggest threats with one loss if they were to win out. ND plays Stanford and then Stanford would play Utah in Pac10 title game.
...I am not worried. There might end up being a better chance of a one loss Big Ten team making it or even a 2 loss SEC team making it after everything sorts itself out.

Why are people still stuck on the special teams play?  Nigel has already proven everyone wrong by showing that:

1. We're at the bottom in those stats, but we have company at the bottom with LSU, etc.

2.  Our special teams won the game against UM, and haven't lost us a game yet, so there really is no reason to talk about what "might" happen down the road.

3.  Something about UM.

So, with that rock solid logic, I've stopped worrying about our kicker, both of our punters, our long-snapper, holder, and our coverage units.

Herbie Green wrote:

steveschneider wrote:Question if we go undefeated is there any chance a one loss team could jump us?

It seems Bama could.

The worst scenario I can think of:
Clemson undefeated
Baylor or TCU undefeated
LSU undefeated (or one loss Bama wins and gets spot)
Then there would still be one spot left.  Utah, Stanford and ND seem like the biggest threats with one loss if they were to win out.  ND plays Stanford and then Stanford would play Utah in Pac10 title game.
...I am not worried.  There might end up being a better chance of a one loss Big Ten team making it or even a 2 loss SEC team making it after everything sorts itself out.

agree - Stanford sort of seems to be the darling of everyone right now. And if they do win out, the Pac 10 (or whatever they call themselves) is arguably stronger than the Big Televenwelve.. so an undefeated Clemson, TCU/Baylor, LSU and a one loss Stanford would be difficult to argue with.

and that's if MSU has one loss - even a good loss. If the Big Televenwelve champ is undefeated, they're ahead of a one loss Stanford team.

Vlad wrote:Why are people still stuck on the special teams play?  Nigel has already proven everyone wrong by showing that:

1. We're at the bottom in those stats, but we have company at the bottom with LSU, etc.

2.  Our special teams won the game against UM, and haven't lost us a game yet, so there really is no reason to talk about what "might" happen down the road.

3.  Something about UM.

So, with that rock solid logic, I've stopped worrying about our kicker, both of our punters, our long-snapper, holder, and our coverage units.

Why do you care what I say? I'm just a random guy on the interwebs.

NigelUno wrote:

Vlad wrote:Why are people still stuck on the special teams play?  Nigel has already proven everyone wrong by showing that:

1. We're at the bottom in those stats, but we have company at the bottom with LSU, etc.

2.  Our special teams won the game against UM, and haven't lost us a game yet, so there really is no reason to talk about what "might" happen down the road.

3.  Something about UM.

So, with that rock solid logic, I've stopped worrying about our kicker, both of our punters, our long-snapper, holder, and our coverage units.

Why do you care what I say?  I'm just a random guy on the interwebs.

But a random interwebs guy has shown me the light regarding our special team non-problems. For that, I'll always care about you Nigel. Because now you're special to me.

Vlad wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Why do you care what I say?  I'm just a random guy on the interwebs.

But a random interwebs guy has shown me the light regarding our special team non-problems. For that, I'll always care about you Nigel. Because now you're special to me.

Glad I could help.

The Sky is Falling/Self Loathing Routine is great!!! No one does it better than you, in your own special way.

NigelUno wrote:

Vlad wrote:

But a random interwebs guy has shown me the light regarding our special team non-problems. For that, I'll always care about you Nigel. Because now you're special to me.

Glad I could help.

The Sky is Falling/Self Loathing Routine is great!!! No one does it better than you, in your own special way.

with all due respect, I think I come pretty darn close.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Glad I could help.

The Sky is Falling/Self Loathing Routine is great!!!  No one does it better than you, in your own special way.  

with all due respect, I think I come pretty darn close.

Please Bob, just back off!  I've committed to exellence in self-loathing, and would totally kick your ass in a face-to-face self-loating smackoff! I hate me more than you hate you, and don't you forget it!

BTW, were you the one who pointed out to Nigel that while our one special teams play did help us win the UM game, the rest of our special teams play is what allowed UM to maintain the lead up to that point, by giving UM a very short field all day long, and by forcing MD to go for it on a couple of very normal FG attempts, etc?

Or was that someone else? In any case, it was a worthy and obvious point, althought it probably didn't land with Nigel.

Vlad wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
with all due respect, I think I come pretty darn close.

Please Bob, just back off!  I've committed to exellence in self-loathing, and would totally kick your ass in a face-to-face self-loating smackoff! I hate me more than you hate you, and don't you forget it!

BTW, were you the one who pointed out to Nigel that while our one special teams play did help us win the UM game, the rest of our special teams play is what allowed UM to maintain the lead up to that point, by giving UM a very short field all day long, and by forcing MD to go for it on a couple of very normal FG attempts, etc?

Or was that someone else? In any case, it was a worthy and obvious point, althought it probably didn't land with Nigel.

no, that wasn't me. That seems like the kind of thing someone would only know if they watched the game.

Vlad wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
with all due respect, I think I come pretty darn close.

Please Bob, just back off!  I've committed to exellence in self-loathing, and would totally kick your ass in a face-to-face self-loating smackoff! I hate me more than you hate you, and don't you forget it!

BTW, were you the one who pointed out to Nigel that while our one special teams play did help us win the UM game, the rest of our special teams play is what allowed UM to maintain the lead up to that point, by giving UM a very short field all day long, and by forcing MD to go for it on a couple of very normal FG attempts, etc?

Or was that someone else? In any case, it was a worthy and obvious point, althought it probably didn't land with Nigel.

Seems like you're still worrying...

Did you ever answer that question I asked about the Indiana game? Or if we've given up any returns for TDs lately? I don't want to scroll back. Just let me know if you answered or not. OK? Thanks.

Special teams could be better. Defense could be more stout. Offense could run the ball better.

We're 8-0.

So far, they've been good enough. When/if we lose, We can be told by the armchairs why we lost. It will be for one of the following reasons. Our defense should have played better, our special teams should have done better, our offense should have been better. Maybe it will be because of all three. And if it is, it will be because our coaching could have been better.

If we go undefeated. Offense defense special teams and coaching were good enough.

Have I covered everything?

I'm a fucking genius.

DWags wrote:Special teams could be better.

Nigel disagrees.

I'm a fucking genius.

I disagree

Vlad wrote:

DWags wrote:Special teams could be better.

Nigel disagrees.

I'm a fucking genius.

I disagree

See, Vlad...this is where you lose credibility. You resort to making stuff up.

FYI...the Chicken Little stuff plays better on tRCMB.

NigelUno wrote:

Vlad wrote:

Nigel disagrees.



I disagree

See, Vlad...this is where you lose credibility.  You resort to making stuff up.

FYI...the Chicken Little stuff plays better on tRCMB.

I had credibility?? Who knew!?

As for what plays better on the RCMB versus here, all I can say is that I was invited here.

Vlad wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

See, Vlad...this is where you lose credibility.  You resort to making stuff up.

FYI...the Chicken Little stuff plays better on tRCMB.

I had credibility?? Who knew!?

someone here the other day - in the midst of some sort of rage-filled rant - told me that I was the reason for stagnant growth at tSwill.

I was like.. wow - I control the internet!!!

Vlad wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

See, Vlad...this is where you lose credibility.  You resort to making stuff up.

FYI...the Chicken Little stuff plays better on tRCMB.

I had credibility?? Who knew!?

Maybe at one time? No idea.

I guess in this case it's probably more of a 0 - X (credibility) = - X (credibility)

Herbie Green wrote:

steveschneider wrote:Question if we go undefeated is there any chance a one loss team could jump us?

It seems Bama could.

The worst scenario I can think of:
Clemson undefeated
Baylor or TCU undefeated
LSU undefeated (or one loss Bama wins and gets spot)
Then there would still be one spot left. Utah, Stanford and ND seem like the biggest threats with one loss if they were to win out. ND plays Stanford and then Stanford would play Utah in Pac10 title game.
...I am not worried. There might end up being a better chance of a one loss Big Ten team making it or even a 2 loss SEC team making it after everything sorts itself out.

I like how in your "I'm terrified of the universe" post you just automatically put Clemson in with us as the team that could get left out.

Wouldn't happen. Not a single chance in hell.

NigelUno wrote:

Vlad wrote:

I had credibility?? Who knew!?

Maybe at one time?  No idea.

I guess in this case it's probably more of a 0 - X (credibility) = - X (credibility)

You're still giving me too much credit, I feel. I can't recall a thing I've said in my 20 year posting history that would qualify as credible.

Which reminds me to ask you, how old are you? About 20 or so?

Vlad wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Maybe at one time?  No idea.

I guess in this case it's probably more of a 0 - X (credibility) = - X (credibility)

You're still giving me too much credit, I feel. I can't recall a thing I've said in my 20 year posting history that would qualify as credible.

Which reminds me ask you, how old are you? 20?

I'm not giving you credit. I'm just saying it's possible at one time...maybe you had a shred of credibility.

But, if you're insisting you never had any...then it does explain your posts, I guess?

It's cool. You've got a 20 year Chicken Little routine going. Congrats?

Vlad wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

See, Vlad...this is where you lose credibility.  You resort to making stuff up.

FYI...the Chicken Little stuff plays better on tRCMB.

I had credibility?? Who knew!?

As for what plays better on the RCMB versus here, all I can say is that I was invited here.

Ever see that movie where you had to invite an idiot to dinner? Guy who invites the biggest idiot wins. I'm just saying the same guy invited you and me. Think about it

DWags wrote:

Vlad wrote:

I had credibility?? Who knew!?

As for what plays better on the RCMB versus here, all I can say is that I was invited here.

Ever see that movie where you had to invite an idiot to dinner? Guy who invites the biggest idiot wins. I'm just saying the same guy invited you and me. Think about it

I invited that guy though.