Started By
Message
re: Why do most people assume Auburn will beat SC
Posted on 11/28/10 at 1:50 pm to cyde
Posted on 11/28/10 at 1:50 pm to cyde
quote:
Please show me in my statement where I claimed it was all because we choked.
See how that works?
LOL you know what your statement was implying so nice try, but fail on you.
quote:
Also, if you want to start throwing out language cracks, it really, really helps to not misspell "comprehension". Just sayin'.
You got me on spelling very bad on my part. Touche'
1
Posted on 11/28/10 at 2:03 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
LOL you know what your statement was implying so nice try, but fail on you.
Yes. I do. Obviously you don't, though, so I'll go back through and diagram it for you:
quote:
I'm not saying whether or not the Auburn team was impressive last night.
This part is key. I've made my opinion on Auburn's second half performance known already and, for the record, as of 2:00 PM today, I still can't fault them for it.
quote:
I do think, however, that the Auburn win
Not the Auburn team, mind you, but that particular win. I even italicized "win" in the original post so that people wouldn't trip over it. Apparently, I should have underlined it and put it in bold too. I apparently wasn't expecting RockyMtn to stumble upon my post and go full retard.
quote:
would've been more impressive if Alabama hadn't choked and Auburn had come back to win.
Here's where I think the reading comprehension you like to tout so much sort of broke up on the rocks. This isn't an either/or statement. Two things are being declared in this statement and one does not obviate (or even modify) the other.
To wit, Alabama choked (fact) and Auburn came back to win (also fact).
Two entirely independent concepts, as you can see.
I made this distinction clear, once again, by italicizing the word "and" in the original post.
Again, though, I wasn't expecting you to go full retard, so I probably should have drawn a picture to illustrate my point.
To sum up, if you want to presume to 'tell' me what I was implying, it might be a pretty wise idea to actually know what I was fricking implying to begin with.
Thanks for playing; better luck next time.
This post was edited on 11/28/10 at 2:07 pm
Posted on 11/28/10 at 2:32 pm to DocHog
quote:
South Carolina will win this game.Coach Spurrier, your senior quarterback,your great receiver, and Marcus Lattimore give you the edge.
Lattimore won't be a factor....can't run on Auburn. If Spurrier throws it 60 times...may be a game.
Posted on 11/28/10 at 2:45 pm to cyde
quote:
cyde
Hey that is a great book you wrote maybe posting on a blog is not your calling.
Here is the statement that says it all for me that you so conveniently omitted from your rambling BS.
"Basically, we tainted your victory by sucking."
So after saying all that you so flamingly pointed out in your book, it doesn't mean shite when you finish with the above sentence.
You are summarizing it all up by saying our victory has less value because Bama choked.
My original comment is saying BS our defense helped you choke and was the reason for our victory just as your defense and Offense was the reason for your first half lead.
If bama had gone onto victory would you have accepted that Auburn choked in the game and thus tainted your victory? I would say you would not. So Cyde enjoy the SECCG next Sat I know I will with our tainted bama victory and all.
Posted on 11/28/10 at 2:53 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
Hey that is a great book you wrote maybe posting on a blog is not your calling.
Sorry, I know you don't care for reading, seeing as how you're posting on an internet message board and all.
quote:
that you so conveniently omitted from your rambling BS.
Argumentum ad hominem. Attacking the post's length rather than its content is a sure sign of desperation. Testicle points for not even TRYING to disguise the logical fallacy, though.
quote:
"Basically, we tainted your victory by sucking."
Why would I need to go back over that? It was a truism. The victory would've looked far better for Auburn if we had kept playing for sixty minutes rather than thinking we had it wrapped up at the half. I'm not sure where you're going with this one... I know a win is a win is a win, but it seems to me that a glorious win would be... well... more glorious than an anticlimactic win.
quote:
So after saying all that you so flamingly pointed out in your book, it doesn't mean shite when you finish with the above sentence.
Try reading the book. The point you missed had nothing to do with the last line of my original post.
quote:
My original comment is saying BS our defense helped you choke and was the reason for our victory just as your defense and Offense was the reason for your first half lead.
The reasons we choked are irrelevant. The fact that we choked at all is relevant.
quote:
If bama had gone onto victory would you have accepted that Auburn choked in the game and thus tainted your victory? I would say you would not. So Cyde enjoy the SECCG next Sat I know I will with our tainted bama victory and all.
Never said the victory was tainted in the way you're implying I did. Do us both a favor and stop trying to read between the lines of my posts. You're reading Italian whereas the actual language is Spanish. Just because the two languages are related doesn't mean you're not butchering it all to shite.
If Alabama had won Friday, I would have felt a little cheated. I like a win as much as everyone else, but I also enjoy watching a good ballgame. The first half of the game, while sort of funny, was disappointing. I want to watch a slugfest, not a cakewalk.
This post was edited on 11/28/10 at 3:14 pm
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News