Douschebag Hall of Fame

huskerfan74 said:
It seems like everyone is attacking me because I refuse to agree that college football should not be about the money. Your response is flawed. What do old rich dudes in suits making money have anything to do with what I said.

I will give you an example and after that I will rest my case since I guess “I am in a coma” seems to be the funny part of the night.

Let us assume that EJ did all this as a plan to get more money and we give him more money. What is stopping Dowdell from doing the same, and then the next guy and so on. Where does it stop? Also, let us say EJ gets more money and Dowdell or any other player who entered the portal didn’t, what does that do to the morale of the other players. When the driver is money then let us stop calling them student athletes. Instead they are professional players who are using college to showcase their talent and academics have nothing to do with college football then. However, if that is the norm, and players are now getting paid then people shouldn’t use the “they are still teenagers” excuse when they don’t perform. You can’t have it both ways. You are either a student athlete getting an education while playing sports or you are a professional player getting money and should understand that you will be criticized when you underperform. Point is, when money becomes the driver, then Husker pride and tradition have no meaning. I still believe that you can’t buy loyalty. You are either a Husker through and through or a mercenary. I guess I would rather be in a coma until this s#!tshow improves. Or I will just focus on volleyball. At least I can feel Husker pride in that team.

Students go to college to learn and develop their skill sets before entering the job market. If you are good, then you will make the money and become an old rich dude in a suit. You should not sell out while you are in college.
Click to expand...




This guy is a nutjob. I know we'd all love it if it worked this way but this isn't fantasyland.

 
I think that it would be nice if, once a certain number of people put an individual on ignore, it came with an automatic ban hammer. "Congratulations, you have just reached a milestone of being added to 20/50/1,000 ignore lists! We wish you well in your future forum posting endeavors, now kick rocks." 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ZRod said:
Everyone predicts 6 and 6, or 7 and 5 at the beginning of the season. Not making a bowl is still a real possibility. The team goes 6 and 6 making a bowl, and they lose their goddamn minds! Buncha douchebags
Click to expand...
Apparently a fair chunk of us are either living and dying with every game because we have no lives outside football or are just plain addicted to being pissed off all the time.

Buncha f#&%ing weirdos.

 
Danny Bateman said:
Apparently a fair chunk of us are either living and dying with every game because we have no lives outside football or are just plain addicted to being pissed off all the time.

Buncha f#&%ing weirdos.
Click to expand...


Watched Ben Stiller on Hot Ones today. They asked him about being a fan of a once great team (Knicks) and now having to adjust your expectations and enjoyment considering where they are now. 

Kinda hit home with me and the Huskers. Could also be the sleep deprivation and a few beers lol 

 
GSG said:
Watched Ben Stiller on Hot Ones today. They asked him about being a fan of a once great team (Knicks) and now having to adjust your expectations and enjoyment considering where they are now. 

Kinda hit home with me and the Huskers. Could also be the sleep deprivation and a few beers lol 
Click to expand...


I get the Husker vibe watching the Dallas Cowboys find entertaining new ways to lose at home game after game after game. I know they've had some good records in recent seasons, saving the worst embarrassments for the playoffs, but their 25 year run of high expectations and unsatisfying seasons seems to parallel Nebraska's. 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
I get the Husker vibe watching the Dallas Cowboys find entertaining new ways to lose at home game after game after game. I know they've had some good records in recent seasons, saving the worst embarrassments for the playoffs, but their 25 year run of high expectations and unsatisfying seasons seems to parallel Nebraska's. 
Click to expand...


Try being a fan of both

tenor.gif


 
Nominating random sports commentators and like 4 people on Huskerboard. This is another sports pet peeve I have.

Team A got blown out by Team B which is one of the top 10 teams in the country, therefore Team A had no right to be on the field and it proves they sucked all along. Rather than the rational conclusion: Team B is really good.

 
Moiraine said:
Nominating random sports commentators and like 4 people on Huskerboard. This is another sports pet peeve I have.

Team A got blown out by Team B which is one of the top 10 teams in the country, therefore Team A had no right to be on the field and it proves they sucked all along. Rather than the rational conclusion: Team B is really good.
Click to expand...


My buddy texted me: "I knew SMU would get blown out."

I said

tenor.gif


 
I think the narrative I'm most frustrated by is the one that posits another team should've gotten in because the team that did get in got blown out.

A) That's why we play the games and decide things on the field
B) Win the games you're supposed to win and then you'll get in (cough Alabama cough, who lost three games this season and is bellyaching about not being in)

Would Alabama have shown up better than a SMU or an Indiana? Probably. However, part of the point of the playoff is to reward teams that handled their business on the field all year, regardless of what we think would happen in a hypothetical matchup. We can’t just give the nod to teams like Alabama because they "might" have done better. When you lose the games you’re supposed to win, you concede that spot.

 
Enhance said:
I think the narrative I'm most frustrated by is the one that posits another team should've gotten in because the team that did get in got blown out.

A) That's why we play the games and decide things on the field
B) Win the games you're supposed to win and then you'll get in (cough Alabama cough, who lost three games this season and is bellyaching about not being in)

Would Alabama have shown up better than a SMU or an Indiana? Probably. However, part of the point of the playoff is to reward teams that handled their business on the field all year, regardless of what we think would happen in a hypothetical matchup. We can’t just give the nod to teams like Alabama because they "might" have done better. When you lose the games you’re supposed to win, you concede that spot.
Click to expand...




I doubt Alabama would have done much better. They beat SC by 2 and 5-7 Auburn by 14. It’s not like they destroyed every team they didn’t lose to. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
People in a tizzy about the boring blowouts in the first year of the 12 team playoff are conveniently forgetting that a huge chunk of the 4 team playoff games were also non-competitive snoozefests. 

There are and have pretty much only ever been 3-5 teams each year that have a bona fide shot at being the best and winning it all. The problems in the past were that some of those teams never got a chance. We no longer have that problem, but to act surprised that we're gonna have blowouts in the playoff is some S tier ignorance.

 
Back
Top