You should post stuff like this more often. Some of the most humorous reconstruction of facts I have read in a long time. Are you in politics?
I posed a question.....
- Thread starter gcb
- Start date
You should post stuff like this more often. Some of the most humorous reconstruction of facts I have read in a long time. Are you in politics?
Any time the two teams don't play, that is how it is.
In the delusional world of Marshall fans, the Herd is 92-12 against WVU.
I wasn't surprised that KSU beat us yet again.......I've got no problem giving credit where credit is due and Coach Bill Snyder has certainly had our number since we got in the Big 12. No excuses from me. No if only, no should've, or could've or would have. We lost to them again plain and simple. Too bad Marshall fans can't be humble like that.
that's FOUR ranked teams in ONE MONTH... which is more than you idiots play in TEN ****ing years...
there wouldn't be a mooooooooooo team after playing these four teams...
Oklahoma would have ended the season for half of your starters...
we gave up 181 points in those four games... your idiot team would be pushing 500+...
Baylor would have rolled you guys for 250...
Last edited:
Like I said, you guys will never admit it. I was posed with the question of why we were 0-12 against wvu and gave a reasoned answer. I even fully admitted that we were outclassed in some, or all, of the areas of talent, coaching or depth nearly every year.
Not one of you has contradicted anything I wrote. The reason for that is because you can't. Did I say we would have won in 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2013 or 2014? No, I did not. Any level of common sense would tell you we certainly wouldn't have gone 0-6 in those years, the debate would be more along the lines of it would have been 3-3 or would we have won 4,5 or 6 of those games. I think that would have depended on where the games were played. Personally, I don't even think 1999, 2001, and 2013 are debatable. You guys just weren't that good those three years. In 2002 your defense was bad, Leftwich, Watts and Davis would have had a field day, but your offense would have kept you in the game. 1998 and 2014 probably would be won by the home team.
Not one of you has contradicted anything I wrote. The reason for that is because you can't. Did I say we would have won in 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2013 or 2014? No, I did not. Any level of common sense would tell you we certainly wouldn't have gone 0-6 in those years, the debate would be more along the lines of it would have been 3-3 or would we have won 4,5 or 6 of those games. I think that would have depended on where the games were played. Personally, I don't even think 1999, 2001, and 2013 are debatable. You guys just weren't that good those three years. In 2002 your defense was bad, Leftwich, Watts and Davis would have had a field day, but your offense would have kept you in the game. 1998 and 2014 probably would be won by the home team.
No, we didn't respond because it doesn't matter and we'll never know.
Look up the word conjecture... it's what you mooooers live on.
I don't believe in you 'mr conjecture', because no matter how much you 'think' the mooooo would have won those games, they didn't.
I don't give a flying **** about those six games that were never played 'mr conjecture'.
Banker, you have to understand: wvu82 was called "a special kind of loser" by two wvu fans today. He is a little angry today.
Imaginary games: Marshall>WVU
Reality: WVU>Marshall
No one can say that WVU wouldn't have gone undefeated in those years, without it being merely an opinion.
Marshall's inflated wins by playing weak, triple-digit ranked schedules, can certainly cause delusion among a fanbase. Clearly it has among Marshall's fanbase. And occasionally playing a weak team and putting "Big 10" in front of that name, doesn't impress anyone.
These MVU fans are delusional. Not only did they not beat a team inside the top 65, they got hammered by those teams and they think they would have won 6 to 8 games against our schedule last year. Banker proposes a 3-3 split against us in a cherry picked 6 year span. In their greatest year they beat a 6-6 Clemson team by 3 with a schedule full of weak teams. The average score over the recent 7 game series was 38 to 16 with only one game finishing inside of a 3 score margin of victory. Somehow magically we only played them doing a down period. Delusional
Go look at Clemson's schedule in 1999. You know who else only beat them by three at Clemson? Oh yeah, national champs Florida State, almost the same identical score. Oh, and then we crushed a ranked BYU team in our bowl.
I was at that game, the first Bowden Bowl. MVU- yea we beat a team that lost to a great team by 3 so we are great. Yea guys are consistently delusional. Play a weak as schedule and hope your coach votes for you so you can pound your chest. Comical but sad.
Last year MVU played 8 teams ranked outside the top 100 and only one top 50 team. Their swing games are those ranked in the 70's. It really is hard to image just how bad CUSA is.
Marshall played Clemson in Clemson's first game, under a completely new coaching staff and a whole new system on both sides of the ball....Clemson's first game was a completely different team than it was in its seventh game. Plus you have the "rivalry factor"....Always leaving out important details.
Are you're actually comparing Marshall to Florida State that year?...
![[jumpingsmile]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/happy/happy0028.r191677.gif "Jumping Smile [jumpingsmile]")
Weak schedules = delusion
Listening to Herdiots gets better with each passing day. I've read their comments where they think they are the Notre Dame of G5, where they put themselves on the same level of importance to CUSA as Texas and Oklahoma are with the Big 12........other threads where they think they are on par with Boise State, and others where they want to become the BYU of the East. Now they are comparing themselves to Florida State. How much more delusional can they get?
If only you could buy yourself a clue, Jackass.
Clemson had the misfortune of having to play all 3 undefeated teams that year, Marshall being one of them.
One thing is certain, WVu would not have won had they gone down to play that year.
Marshall played Clemson in Clemson's first game, under a completely new coaching staff and a whole new system on both sides of the ball....Clemson's first game was a completely different team than it was in its seventh game. Plus you have the "rivalry factor"....Always leaving out important details.
Are you're actually comparing Marshall to Florida State that year?...
Weak schedules = delusion
Still burns your ass Marshall best Clemson that year, doesn't it?
Excuses, excuses... First time game, new offense, etc. Whatever 30Excuses.
Just like WVU would have lost to Marshall every year we didn't actually play.
More conjecture. You guys are the king of it.
Pick my lottery numbers for me this weekend.
It's like the eers all got the same memo on the word of the day. Try some synonyms, you guys are getting repetitious in your denial.
12 tries and 12 losses....Nothing but excuses.
Anyway, I laugh at your feeble attempt to blow off the fact that Clemson was playing its first game, with a new coaching staff and news systems on both sides of the ball, like it's no big deal....You're just pissed that it gets pointed out when you all try to brag about beating a team that barely finished .500.
I noticed another Herd fan bragging about beating 1-10 South Carolina....
Last edited:
I remind you that MU agreed to all those games and not one time was there any caterwauling about the circumstances MU might face in any one of those agreed upon games. On the contrary, much chest thumping went on pretty much guaranteeing multiple MU wins.
Did Herd fans pull their horns in and acknowledge that they were wrong? Uhhhhhh, NO, not even close.
In fact, the dust hadn't even settled until the old standby "You guys are scared to play us," came oozing up out of the slime that tries to pass for legitimate discourse. Does it help? What do you think?
But all those excuses that you threw out to justify your inabilities to beat us, in fact, mostly to be non-competitive are the same crap that can be bandied about by anybody.
You simply weren't good enough, circumstances be damned.
And btw, I thought you guys might very well beat us in one of those 7 games but I didn't realize just how far off you were......and still are.
As an aside......we offered you a game in '96 but you guys said no, anticipating an undefeated season and national championship which came to pass that year.
Another point.......it's okay to lose to us....we're pretty good so make peace with yourself about us.....you'll feel better.
Clemson was a bad team that year plain and simple. Funny how proud you are beating a 6-6 team. Clueless and angry but at least you are consistent.
Hey, Still....based on a comment riflemouth made to you on another thread, do you have a daughter with Down Syndrome?
YAGS made that comment. RifleGod has been too busy over the last week bagging a Disney star while she was in town (and gently denying the new 17 year old Disney star who was all over him trying to get it both nights), going with 98 Degrees to two of their concerts and boating with them in Tampa, letting Cam play her new records for him while talking sports with her fiancé, and tomorrow, linking up with Yo Gotti and Logic . . . YG was supposed to slide through, but he has to fly back to LA now to be in Drake's video.
My comment was a somewhat unsubstantiated claim. It was just based on the little slvt's appearance. Put it this way: her TOD (Touch of Down) makes Corky Thatcher look like Einstein.
Still5-0 has some severely tainted swimmers. His sperm always results in Down, Autism, Tourette's, or an odd number of nipples . . . and sometimes all of those things. To compound the issues, his wife has some abnormally huge feet with a deathly odor. They make RitaRod's crotch smell like roses in comparison, instead of her usual tanning lotion mixed with spoiled mayonnaise scent.
So, his kids end up being retards (has that word gone back to being PC yet?) walking around with clown shoes repeatedly yelling "Let's Go . . . Mountaineers, you a$$holes" in the middle of the Southern Baptist church service all while having 5 nipple hard-ons protruding out of their two-sizes-too-small tank tops.
And, hey, dildo. What do you do- go to Rifle's and my profile and just read through our posts? You're a fvcking weirdo.
Yes, Clemson was bad. So bad in fact that they ended up #24 in the Sagarin rankings that year. wvu that year finished 67th in Sagarin while Marshall finished 13th. Marshall also beat BYU that year who ended up at #30 in the ratings. But yeah, even though we beat #24 and #30, also #70 twice, we would have had no shot against #67.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/1999/team/
All good science begins with a hyoothesis that is based on facts, conclusions based on those facts and predictions that can be tested. Stick to porn fluffing and bank tellering dumbshit.
You know, Dave, sometimes it's just better to keep your mouth shut when you are ill equipped to enter a conversation. Do you even know what a hypothesis is? Sorry, rhetorical question as you obviously have no idea. The definition is a proposition made on the basis of reasoning without any assumption of its truth.
Since you won't understand that, I'll give you an easy example like they teach every 5th grader that has ever participated in a science fair, a hypothesis is basically "if I do this, then I believe this will happen." At the point of the hypothesis that are no facts to determine whether it's true or not, that's what the science is for.
My hypothesis is "if Marshall and wvu had played a football game in 1999, then Marshall would have won." Since we can't go back in time and play that game, you have to then collect data and analyze that data to draw conclusions as to the likelihood of the hypothesis being correct. Like many things with science, you can never be 100% certain of the outcome, but you can develop a level of certainty through the proper collection and analysis of the data. For example, there was no way for NASA to know for sure that they could launch a rocket and successfully put people on the moon, but their extensive analysis indicated that it was highly probable that they could. It didn't become a fact until the lunar lander touched down, several years after the original hypothesis was made.
Now you have the level of understanding concerning a hypothesis that is consistent with a 5th grade education. Congratulations.
Since you won't understand that, I'll give you an easy example like they teach every 5th grader that has ever participated in a science fair, a hypothesis is basically "if I do this, then I believe this will happen." At the point of the hypothesis that are no facts to determine whether it's true or not, that's what the science is for.
My hypothesis is "if Marshall and wvu had played a football game in 1999, then Marshall would have won." Since we can't go back in time and play that game, you have to then collect data and analyze that data to draw conclusions as to the likelihood of the hypothesis being correct. Like many things with science, you can never be 100% certain of the outcome, but you can develop a level of certainty through the proper collection and analysis of the data. For example, there was no way for NASA to know for sure that they could launch a rocket and successfully put people on the moon, but their extensive analysis indicated that it was highly probable that they could. It didn't become a fact until the lunar lander touched down, several years after the original hypothesis was made.
Now you have the level of understanding concerning a hypothesis that is consistent with a 5th grade education. Congratulations.
No my daughter graduated from UNC (in three years) and is certainly smarter than him. I have Rifle on ignore. The guy is an idiot and not worth my time. I choose not to feed the troll's narcissium.
Marshall played the 111th ranked schedule in 1999. It was extremely lucky to have faced Clemson in its first game of the year, with new coaches and systems on both sides of the ball. Clemson also missed 3 fieldgoals and was still looking for a kicker after its first game of the year.
Then, as usual, Marshall goes through a schedule of cupcakes, where good teams go through the wear and tear of playing decent to tough schedules.
Marshall goes to a bowl against an overrated BYU team that finished its year on a 3-game losing streak.
Since entering the FBS Marshall has made its living playing a bunch of nobodies with a good or tough team sprinkled in here and there.
Give Marshall Clemson's schedule in 1999 and that "mighty" Herd team wouldn't even have gone bowling.
That's my hypothesis.
Then, as usual, Marshall goes through a schedule of cupcakes, where good teams go through the wear and tear of playing decent to tough schedules.
Marshall goes to a bowl against an overrated BYU team that finished its year on a 3-game losing streak.
Since entering the FBS Marshall has made its living playing a bunch of nobodies with a good or tough team sprinkled in here and there.
Give Marshall Clemson's schedule in 1999 and that "mighty" Herd team wouldn't even have gone bowling.
That's my hypothesis.
Last edited:
What kind of low life scum tries to put people down by making fun of down syndrome children? Oh a Marshall asshat.
He's a WVU fan you stupid piece of shit.
If you want to reference the comment made by someone about downs syndrome, you need to quote that person's statement.
Regardless, I agree that no one with special needs should ever be made fun of on here, or anywhere in life, for that matter.
Isn't it amazing that when you add one Herdiot to your ignore list that several variations of them also disappear from every thread ? That's what happens when one person tries to take on multiple personalities. And every one of those personalities goes into melt down mode and spawns off even more identities... . Sad when you think about it.
Well kitty, go ahead and try supporting your hypothesis with some facts. Here are the facts I will start with, not my opinion, but recorded facts.
1. In the coaches poll we were voted as a superior team to wvu, who received no votes.
2. In the press poll we were voted as a superior team to wvu, who received no votes.
3. In the polls only 9 teams where considered superior to Marshall, wvu was not one of them.
4. In every computer poll used in the BCS era, Marshall was ranked considerably higher than wvu, without exception.
5. Specifically, Sagarin, often considered the most reliable of the computer ranking, ranked Marshall 13th taking into consideration the SOS. This was 54 spots ahead of wvu.
6. Marshall beat every team they played. Two of those teams were rated substantially higher than wvu by either the computers or humans, or both. Several of the other opponents were ranked in the same vicinity as wvu. Marshall was 2-0 against the top 50, 2-0 against 51-75 and 9-0 against 76-128.
7. wvu had a record of 4-7 in 1999. Their losses were to Sagarin #31 ECU, #61 Maryland, #42 Syracuse, #79 Navy, #11 Miami, #3 VT, and #55 Boston College. Navy was 5-7 that year against the #87 ranked schedule. Maryland, at 5-6 also had a losing record against the 64th rated schedule. wvu's 4 wins were against Miami (OH), Rutgers, Temple and Pitt. Those 4 schools were ranked 80, 128, 100, and 63. So your best win was against the #63 team and you were 0-4 against the top 50, 1-3 against teams ranked 51-75 and 3-1 against teams ranked 76-128.
8. Marshall and wvu had one common opponent in 1999, Miami (OH). You beat then by 16 at home, we beat them by 18 on the road.
My belief is that any unbiased person would look at those 8 points and believe that Marshall was superior to wvu in 1999 and, if the two teams had played, Marshall would have been favored to, and most likely, won the game.
If you actually go run the simulation at whatifsports.com it shows, based on their program, that it wouldn't even really be close with a final of 47-10 Marshall if the game was played in Morgantown.
So what facts do you have that if those two specific teams met that wvu would be the likely winner?
1. In the coaches poll we were voted as a superior team to wvu, who received no votes.
2. In the press poll we were voted as a superior team to wvu, who received no votes.
3. In the polls only 9 teams where considered superior to Marshall, wvu was not one of them.
4. In every computer poll used in the BCS era, Marshall was ranked considerably higher than wvu, without exception.
5. Specifically, Sagarin, often considered the most reliable of the computer ranking, ranked Marshall 13th taking into consideration the SOS. This was 54 spots ahead of wvu.
6. Marshall beat every team they played. Two of those teams were rated substantially higher than wvu by either the computers or humans, or both. Several of the other opponents were ranked in the same vicinity as wvu. Marshall was 2-0 against the top 50, 2-0 against 51-75 and 9-0 against 76-128.
7. wvu had a record of 4-7 in 1999. Their losses were to Sagarin #31 ECU, #61 Maryland, #42 Syracuse, #79 Navy, #11 Miami, #3 VT, and #55 Boston College. Navy was 5-7 that year against the #87 ranked schedule. Maryland, at 5-6 also had a losing record against the 64th rated schedule. wvu's 4 wins were against Miami (OH), Rutgers, Temple and Pitt. Those 4 schools were ranked 80, 128, 100, and 63. So your best win was against the #63 team and you were 0-4 against the top 50, 1-3 against teams ranked 51-75 and 3-1 against teams ranked 76-128.
8. Marshall and wvu had one common opponent in 1999, Miami (OH). You beat then by 16 at home, we beat them by 18 on the road.
My belief is that any unbiased person would look at those 8 points and believe that Marshall was superior to wvu in 1999 and, if the two teams had played, Marshall would have been favored to, and most likely, won the game.
If you actually go run the simulation at whatifsports.com it shows, based on their program, that it wouldn't even really be close with a final of 47-10 Marshall if the game was played in Morgantown.
So what facts do you have that if those two specific teams met that wvu would be the likely winner?
We played 12 times and MVU did not win a single game. Speculating that MVU may have beat us in one of the 100 years we did not play would not be a fact but speculation. Based on 12 points of real data of head to head meetings, where WVU's margin of victory averaged more than 3 scores, I have concluded that MVU is our bitch. But hey when Nehlen took the first team out you guys where able to score on us in 1997, so maybe you would have been close. Of course MVU could have played us in 1999 but MVU over played their hand. Funny how MVU does not learn from its mistakes. Speculate all you want but once again real data says you are our bitch. I hope that is not confusing.
In other words, you have no facts. College football teams turn over players at a rapid pace. What happens one year is no basis for what will happen the next year. Didn't Pitt own you guys for a long time? You should have never beaten Penn State if what you are saying is true.
