re: TU is all hat and no cattle

quote:

---

And you stretched the truth tremendously in your “summary”

---

Where exactly did I stretch the truth in my summary? It was factual. 2 decades were successful.. 1 was decent.. and 2 were not successful.

quote:

---

But you danced around whether you consider 4 losses per season or 5 losses per season a successful 10 year period

---

I didn’t dance around it at all. I don’t care about average losses per decade at all. If we win a NC in a decade, it is successful. Outside of that, it takes several CC to be decent.. otherwise it is not successful.

I realize why you define success that way, but average number of losses is meaningless to me.