Started By
Message
re: Texas A&M vs lsu 74-72
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:40 pm to Bamax
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:40 pm to Bamax
quote:
You are responding to me under the fallacy, and it is a fallacy, that Alabama and LSU are rivals.
And yet I've never stated ONCE that they were. In fact, I've repeated numerous times that we are not. Not only that, the first post of mine that you responded to I specifically said that LSU doesn't have a rival. You are so bad at this that it's embarrassing.
1
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:43 pm to jnethe1
The poster you are arguing with didn’t go to aggy. He is a UH alum named Daniel and his idiocy has been well documented for years.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:44 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
Now as for my point, I don't think any decision was made by anyone except the FINAL ref. There were a butt load of bad calls in OT, all going anms way, and I'd be glad to debate them. We won several times over in that aspect
Look everyone, it wasn't all the refs that decided to end the game in A&M's favor to save the children, it was just the FINAL referee.
Moreover, LSU could have won the game 3 or 4 times if only not for "MUH REFS".
I fricking love LSU fans. They are like an isolated group of aboriginals deep in the wilds of an undiscovered land that don't think or reason like modern man. When we come into contact with them, their ignorant ideas and thoughts seem logical and reasonable to them but, to modern society, they seem to be retarded.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:53 pm to Bamax
Do I really need to repeat myself again on your inability to debate and read or have you embraced the fact that you're very dull minded and unintelligent person?
Lmk so I can copy and paste earlier messages with the hope that the reading comprehension section of your brain stops farting out and kicks on.
Arguing with a faggie, gaytor, or bama fan is like arguing with a crumbling brick wall.
Can be a lot of fun sometimes though.
Lmk so I can copy and paste earlier messages with the hope that the reading comprehension section of your brain stops farting out and kicks on.
Arguing with a faggie, gaytor, or bama fan is like arguing with a crumbling brick wall.
Can be a lot of fun sometimes though.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:53 pm to TigerLunatik
quote:
And yet I've never stated ONCE that they were. In fact, I've repeated numerous times that we are not. Not only that, the first post of mine that you responded to I specifically said that LSU doesn't have a rival. You are so bad at this that it's embarrassing.
Yet you have devolved into arguing this point, as evidenced below.
quote:
Yet your also saying that LSU is not a rival to Bama because LSU isn't competive and we do play every year. By your definition of Tulane and LSU being rivals, then LSU and Bama should be bitter rivals. You are 100% being hypocrtitical and arguing against yourself.
Your point is that it should be acceptable for everyone to agree with you that LSU and Tulane's rivalry ended in the year 1969.
My point is that the rivalry ended when the games quit being played.
In your myopic view of what constitutes a rivalry, Ohio State and Michigan are no longer rivals because Michigan has only won 2 games against OSU since 2001.
Do you agree that Ohio State and Michigan are no longer rivals? If so, can you give us a TigerLunatik date on when that rivalry ended?
As far as I know, the games between them haven't actually ended at a concrete date like they did between LSU and Tulane. So, if you don't mind, give the board a TigerLunaTik date on when their rivalry ended like you did with LSU and Tulane?
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 10:07 pm
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:57 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
Do I really need to repeat myself again on your inability to debate and read or have you embraced the fact that you're very dull minded and unintelligent person?
Lmk so I can copy and paste earlier messages with the hope that the reading comprehension section of your brain stops farting out and kicks on.
Arguing with a faggie, gaytor, or bama fan is like arguing with a crumbling brick wall.
Can be a lot of fun sometimes though.
Why did that FINAL referee decide to end the game? Try to provide an answer without throwing in 8 reasons why you have won the conversation.
Has that FINAL referee given a statement as to why he decided that A&M deserved to win?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:02 pm to Bamax
So I really do need to copy and paste? Jesus christ... hold on. This is where arguing with stupid people gets annoying.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:04 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
So I really do need to copy and paste? Jesus christ... hold on. This is where arguing with stupid people gets annoying.
Go ahead, take your time, I'll wait. As soon as you prove that LSU won the game, I'll crown you as Champion of SECRANT.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:06 pm to Bamax
I believe the last call was a single ref, old asf, looking irritated as hell, fed up with how long this game was dragging on, and observed all the injuries stacking up, decided to just end the game there by throwing a flag before the play even developed assuring it didn't go into an 8th overtime, as this game wasn't deciding a playoff spot. Nothing about that is hard to believe, the flag was so blatantly bad that it was called out by the head representation of the sec. He then threw a flag on greedy for arguing it, which is just absurd. If you're only argument is that that completely logical line of thinking is insane, then you've clearly lost. Everything Ive said is reasonable human thought processes and actions.
Once again, without that flag, this game becomes the LONGEST COLLEGE FOOTBALL GAME IN HISTORY.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:09 pm to Bamax
And why would a ref make a bogus call to end a game then come out and incriminate himself by saying he's fixed a game thus making him untrustworthy in future games when his other option is to let it blow over??
Honest question, do you have any idea how people think or act? Any sort of understanding of simplistic reasoning and psychology? You're incredible dense in this area.
Honest question, do you have any idea how people think or act? Any sort of understanding of simplistic reasoning and psychology? You're incredible dense in this area.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:15 pm to Bamax
quote:
Your point is that it should be acceptable for everyone to agree with you that LSU and Tulane's rivalry ended in the year 1969.
For the 10,000th time, I told you that that was an approximation because Tulane hasn't been competitive or even in a competitive conference for decades. You mentioned Tulane as a current rival and now you've changed to 2009 just because they played here and there and they haven't beaten LSU since 1982.
quote:
My point is that the rivalry ended when the games quit being played.
They weren't even playing every year then. Plus, you were the one that said that Bama had LSU for homecoming which is exactly how LSU has been with Tulane when they have played them for at least the last 20 years if not longer.
quote:
Do you agree that Ohio State and Michigan are no longer rivals?
You're seriously using this divisional rivalry as an example of LSU and Tulane??????? Bwahahahahahaha ... Tulane isn't even in a Power 5 conference and hasn't been a part of the SEC since 1966. Your description of the LSU/Tulane "rivalry" is less of a rivalry than Bama and LSU.
So, according to you even though Tulane hasn't beaten LSU since 1982, but the rivalry ended in '09. However using your same definition of a rivalry in that series that haven't been in the same conference, Bama and LSU aren't rivals even though they've been in the same division and have played every single season since Tulane has beaten LSU. You are an absolute idiot.
Eta: I looked it up. Tulane has beaten LSU 4 times since 1950, but yeah it's a rivalry.
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 10:33 pm
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:16 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
I believe the last call was a single ref, old asf, looking irritated as hell, fed up with how long this game was dragging on, and observed all the injuries stacking up, decided to just end the game there by throwing a flag before the play even developed assuring it didn't go into an 8th overtime, as this game wasn't deciding a playoff spot. Nothing about that is hard to believe, the flag was so blatantly bad that it was called out by the head representation of the sec. He then threw a flag on greedy for arguing it, which is just absurd. If you're only argument is that that completely logical line of thinking is insane, then you've clearly lost. Everything Ive said is reasonable human thought processes and actions.
Once again, without that flag, this game becomes the LONGEST COLLEGE FOOTBALL GAME IN HISTORY.
Have you ever considered that the referee wasn't tired at all, not as old as frick as you thought, and wasn't fed up with how long the game was dragging on?
Maybe this referee was on the payroll of the REC and was working on behalf of A&M and Jimbo to further relegate LSU to mediocrity?
Or, another scenario is that maybe the referee simply did not want either LSU or A&M to hold the distinction of having played in the longest game in FBS college football history. Maybe he was just jealous; jealousy is a powerful, powerful emotion.
Maybe Jared Lorenzen was to blame for LSU's loss? Lorenzen was involved in the longest FBS game in college football and maybe he contacted that referee and told him not to let LSU break his record?
Have you ever thought about any of thse possibilities for LSU losing?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:21 pm to bigbopper
Wait, he didn’t even go to A&M?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:39 pm to Bamax
Nope, because while my observation is reasonable and very understandable line of thought and action by someone, the rest are farfetched. I'm sure you'll argue that mine is and yours aren't but we've already established that you fail to understand what is a reasonable thought process fueled by critical thinking skills when you felt the same ref would come out and admit his transgression.
Exaggerative comparisons are not a counterpoint. Wanna go another round or you had enough?
Exaggerative comparisons are not a counterpoint. Wanna go another round or you had enough?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:41 pm to TigerLunatik
quote:
Your point is that it should be acceptable for everyone to agree with you that LSU and Tulane's rivalry ended in the year 1969.
Did I say that Tulane was LSU's current rival? If I did, I misspoke. Let me get a link to that post.
Your "approximation" that the LSU/Tulane rivalry ended in '69 is not correct. The rivalry ended in 2009 when the series ended.
quote:
My point is that the rivalry ended when the games quit being played.
And Michigan might as well be OSU's homecoming opponent at this point in time, correct? In the last 20 years, Michigan has won a grand total of 3 games.
quote:
Do you agree that Ohio State and Michigan are no longer rivals?
Yet is was the only rivalry LSU football has ever had and it did not end in, or approximately in, 1969 because message board poster TigerLunaTik says so.
Now, you are switching the goalposts and claiming that rivals have to be in the same conference, yet another stipulation you have belatedly added. I suppose Notre Dame and Southern Cal need to consult with TigerLunaTik and correct their unreasonable thoughts to agree with yours.
Now, to add another dimension to this argument we are having, I propose that Alabama may need to end their games against LSU due to lack of competition.
This could be done in the same manner as LSU liquidated Tulane from their schedule and for the same reasons. Alabama doesn't have to follow SEC rules so, that should not be an obstacle as far as the SEC is concerned.
Alabama is (53-25-5) against LSU
LSU is (69-22-7) against Tulane
There isn't a very large margin of difference between these two. For God's sake, Tulane was LSU's rival and they ended the game due to lack of competition.
Alabama isn't LSU's rival so we don't even have that deep of a tie to LSU like LSU had with Tulane.
Do you think it's time for the Alabama vs. LSU games to end?
Your point is that it should be acceptable for everyone to agree with you that LSU and Tulane's rivalry ended in the year 1969.
quote:
For the 10,000th time, I told you that that was an approximation because Tulane hasn't been competitive or even in a competitive conference for decades. You mentioned Tulane as a current rival and now you've changed to 2009 just because they played here and there and they haven't beaten LSU since 1982.
Did I say that Tulane was LSU's current rival? If I did, I misspoke. Let me get a link to that post.
Your "approximation" that the LSU/Tulane rivalry ended in '69 is not correct. The rivalry ended in 2009 when the series ended.
quote:
My point is that the rivalry ended when the games quit being played.
quote:
They weren't even playing every year then. Plus, you were the one that said that Bama had LSU for homecoming which is exactly how LSU has been with Tulane when they have played them for at least the last 20 years if not longer.
And Michigan might as well be OSU's homecoming opponent at this point in time, correct? In the last 20 years, Michigan has won a grand total of 3 games.
quote:
Do you agree that Ohio State and Michigan are no longer rivals?
quote:
You're seriously using this divisional rivalry as an example of LSU and Tulane??????? Bwahahahahahaha ... Tulane isn't even in a Power 5 conference and hasn't been a part of the SEC since 1966. Your description of the LSU/Tulane "rivalry" is less of a rivalry than Bama and LSU.
Yet is was the only rivalry LSU football has ever had and it did not end in, or approximately in, 1969 because message board poster TigerLunaTik says so.
quote:
So, according to you even though Tulane hasn't beaten LSU since 1982, but the rivalry ended in '09. However using your same definition of a rivalry in that series that haven't been in the same conference, Bama and LSU aren't rivals even though they've been in the same division and have played every single season since Tulane has beaten LSU. You are an absolute idiot.
Now, you are switching the goalposts and claiming that rivals have to be in the same conference, yet another stipulation you have belatedly added. I suppose Notre Dame and Southern Cal need to consult with TigerLunaTik and correct their unreasonable thoughts to agree with yours.
Now, to add another dimension to this argument we are having, I propose that Alabama may need to end their games against LSU due to lack of competition.
This could be done in the same manner as LSU liquidated Tulane from their schedule and for the same reasons. Alabama doesn't have to follow SEC rules so, that should not be an obstacle as far as the SEC is concerned.
Alabama is (53-25-5) against LSU
LSU is (69-22-7) against Tulane
There isn't a very large margin of difference between these two. For God's sake, Tulane was LSU's rival and they ended the game due to lack of competition.
Alabama isn't LSU's rival so we don't even have that deep of a tie to LSU like LSU had with Tulane.
Do you think it's time for the Alabama vs. LSU games to end?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:49 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
Nope, because while my observation is reasonable and very understandable line of thought and action by someone, the rest are farfetched. I'm sure you'll argue that mine is and yours aren't but we've already established that you fail to understand what is a reasonable thought process fueled by critical thinking skills when you felt the same ref would come out and admit his transgression.
Exaggerative comparisons are not a counterpoint. Wanna go another round or you had enough?
During your last 7 posts, you have exclaimed in some form or another, that you are the winner and I should give up.
I'm starting to believe that you can't have a normal conversation without first relating how you are right and you win. Try to watch that, Pensa. It's starting to shine a negative light on you.
Do you think this "FINAL", old, tired, cheating, mean-spirited, LSU hating referee was being paid in any way to gift A&M with the victory that wasn't theirs, but had already been won by LSU 3 times over?
Has there been any suggestion of a cash payment?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:52 pm to Bamax
quote:
Bamax
Hey! Tuna's cousin!
Can you ask Tuna why he threw da bawl to Clemson for da TD?
That is da wrong team.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:54 pm to Bamax
quote:
Did I say that Tulane was LSU's current rival? If I did, I misspoke. Let me get a link to that post.
Your post...
quote:
LSU fans try their best to convince anyone that will listen that because Saban once coached their team and now coaches Alabama that they now have a rivalry with Alabama and not Tulane.
LINK
Key word, now.
I'm going to sum up the rest of your ridiculousness in this manner, if you are going to say Tulane and LSU are rivals, then you are going to have to say LSU and Bama are rivals. Tulane has only beaten LSU 4 times in the last 70 years, they are in a 2nd rate conference and have been an afterthought as a program for the last 3 or 4 decades. You're comparing them to teams that have won multiple national championships since then and that play each other every single season. By comparison LSU beat Bama less than 10 years ago. You have lost your mind. There is no need to debate this any further. Unless you're trolling, you should be really embarrassed.
Eta:
quote:
Do you think it's time for the Alabama vs. LSU games to end?
They're in the same division in the same conference you dumbass. It's not a possibiltiy.
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 10:56 pm
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:12 pm to Bamax
You seem to forget I destroy your argument with every post.
This one will be very easy.
No. I've never felt refs were paid to throw a game against lsu, ever. I also haven't complained about refs against a single game against Bama. Surprised? I clearly stated what I felt his motivation was, so here's my question.
Why do you have reading comprehension problems? Is it because you're carrying two debates at once and half assing this one with unintelligent drivel to drag it out or are you a complete moron?
This one will be very easy.
No. I've never felt refs were paid to throw a game against lsu, ever. I also haven't complained about refs against a single game against Bama. Surprised? I clearly stated what I felt his motivation was, so here's my question.
Why do you have reading comprehension problems? Is it because you're carrying two debates at once and half assing this one with unintelligent drivel to drag it out or are you a complete moron?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:14 pm to Bamax
It seems you've been stomped so hard in this debate that you do whatever does online, switch gears and pretend you've been trolling all along and you aren't a complete idiot after all.
Bit of a coward, aren't ya? Why do you care what these morons think of you? I mean hell, I'm over here talking like a nerd because I couldn't care less what a forum board full of dumbasses think. It's just been a lot of fun putting you idiots in your place while I pass time at work.
Stop worrying about being exposed as the idiot you are, you'll never have to face any of these people anyways man, Jesus lol.
Bit of a coward, aren't ya? Why do you care what these morons think of you? I mean hell, I'm over here talking like a nerd because I couldn't care less what a forum board full of dumbasses think. It's just been a lot of fun putting you idiots in your place while I pass time at work.
Stop worrying about being exposed as the idiot you are, you'll never have to face any of these people anyways man, Jesus lol.
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 11:18 pm
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News