Little Brother vs. Hokeamania I

[Van]

I don't claim to be a cfb pick'em expert

No?

I can't imagine anyone with even a modicum of real, actual football intelligence thought Michigan would win this game.

Enjoy your self reacharound.

And for Mace, bragging about how he's 27-3 in his office pool... err..

and how everyone in "Big 10 cuntry" knew what the outcome of this game was going to be, Goobs took Michigan. Oops, at least one homer didn't know.

Among non-Michigan fans here who are still Big 10 in-the-know types, snake and L45B also took Michigan.

[Mace]

No, you countered my challenge with a self-serving nothing. I told you to get in here and do what the rest of us have to do every week. For all the shit you're talking, you should have zero problem with proving yourself and being held accountable.

So what did you do? You queefed. All talk, no ass. (Sorry, this ain't Texas.)

Big shocker.

I don't have time Monday thru Friiday to get in here, so take my challenge, asshole, and I'll make time for one week. Otherwise, shut the fuck up. No surprise at all that you don't have the sack to accept my challenge, and it's obvious that you've got all kinds of time to do it. I don't.

[Terry in Crapchester]

There were only two people that thought Michigan would win this game: 1) Michigan fans 2) The casual cfb fan that got drunk off Michigan's ESPN highlights. Yet again. I can't imagine anyone with even a modicum of real, actual football intelligence thought Michigan would win this game.

I'll defer to your knowledge of the Little Brother-Big Brother Rivalry, but it's just a tad arrogant to say that "anyone with even a modicum of real, actual football intelligence" would think Michigan would win this game. I don't claim to be a Pick'Em expert, but I did manage to go 7-3 this week despite losing this game. Looks to me like you're 5-5 on the week.

[Van]

Mace, you're a fucking pussy. Do it right, with no wimpy qualifiers, or just take your empty boasts and fuck off. If you wanted to get your picks in before kickoff on Saturday morning, you easily could. You'll never convince me that you can't find five damn minutes out of your entire week, including Saturday morning. You simply don't want to commit to it, is all.

Yeah, just fuck off.

[M Club]

i have a modicum of football knowledge and picked michigan, though mostly because i'm a homer. thought it was entirely possible that they'd win, though. the michigan defense is legitimately middle-of-the-big-ten-pack now. same players as last year but they actually know their assignments this year and try to play them, which doesn't sound like much but does make teams work for points against us in a way they never had to under dickrod. figured they'd eat up the msu line but alas, state was only playing possum against florida atlantic and the rest of the weak schedule they haven't been able to run on, until now. that and figured they would check their weather vanes and scrap their "let's let denard sling the ball all day" game plan.

and hate to say, but van does have a point. for an entire state being so assured that msu would win, that game was dangerously close to turning out differently: that bizarre 4th and 1 call, devin gardner missing hopkins dancing by himself in the end zone, and the lateral cum fumble msu got away with right before scoring a td. if, buts, candy nuts, and all games turning on a play or two, but that game fit a different profile than the previous three, so the "we're from michigan and this happened before" narrative doesn't quite explain things.

[M Club]

i guess i do, since you just restated my point. thanks for the echo.

i think there's more than that there....but you read whatever gets you through the night. 4-17 is pretty much crap. that's my emphasis. not the Big Ten schedule....(which is also been pretty crap of late). ain't no MG. whatever, i even try and complement UM here....these are Vandy numbers not Michigan numbers.

props on the W to our Spartan (and anti-UM) posters. i liked Sparty at home in this one. was a little surprised to see so many take UM in the pickem.

really, more than that? guess i can't hang with your van-like nuance. michigan vomited out that record after the michigan state game because they've been fortunate to open their big ten schedule against teams even worse than they were. why don't you go ahead and include the state games so we can say 4-20. again, thanks for the added insight. someone should give you a column.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

I did, and that same math said that Sparty should've beaten ND again, which they decidedly didn't. You knew your team there too, and you certainly follow that series closely. Guess what? You got it dead wrong, as you have on countless other occasions. Further, the math said that the equations were entirely different this year since DickRod no longer coaches Michigan, and the Wolverines appear to be playing much better defense this season.

I got a prediction wrong. Amazing. Doesn't change the fact I had a pretty good feel for this one. Did I know what would happen? No. Did I have a pretty good feeling for what would happen? Yes. I took MSU and 42 pts. What more do you need?

There were so many things in MSU's favor: better defense, better coaching (at least to this point), home game, and simply put: just having to execute the same defensive game plan as last year. Yes, Michigan has new coaches and a new offense. But, as an opposing defense, everything is still completely centered around keeping contain on Robinson. The basic strategy in terms of stopping UM's O hasn't changed at all from last year to this year. So, yeah, I was pretty damn confident they would hold Robinson in check. My only real concern was the something-out-of-nothing busted big play for 60 yards, which Robinson is capable of making. Fortunately, that didn't happen.

I also thought the windy conditions would favor MSU, because I know Cousins can throw into a driving wind. I was in Evanston last year, and saw him do it vs Northwestern all second half, en route to a big comeback win. Meanwhile, Robinson is a less than average passer in normal conditions. Factor in 30 mph winds? Pfffft, forget about it. Guy had no chance, especially against MSU's D.

These are all nuances that I don't consider when picking a Tulane/UTEP game. Imagine that.

Yes, predictions are such that sometimes you're right, and sometimes you're wrong. Sometimes you have a good feel for a game, sometimes you're off base. Is this the kind of sky-is-blue banality you've reduced yourself to?

Essentially, Killian hit the nail on the head with this take:

Picking 10 games a week is hard, but there is usually a game a week that certain people can look at and know that it's as close to easy money as it comes.

Good christ, Van. Ever heard of "choose your battles wisely?" This ain't one of them. You've become bradhusker, but with better grammar.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

I don't claim to be a cfb pick'em expert

No?

I can't imagine anyone with even a modicum of real, actual football intelligence thought Michigan would win this game.

Enjoy your self reacharound.

Come on, I'm allowed a little drunken gloating and feigned arrogance after a big win over a rival. Look, even the "experts" and "analysts" I read all week picked MSU to win this game. There were sound reasons for that. But I guess none of them know wtf they're talking about either since they got a prediction wrong before.

[Van]

Mgo, gloating about a win over your rival is one thing. Gloating about a pick you claimed to have in the bag—which you clearly didn't, and nearly lost anyway—is quite another. That just makes you a graceless dick.

And yes, there were in fact plenty of 'experts' who picked Michigan. I guess they weren't in Mace's office pool or your war room, but they were most assuredly out there...

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... 15_MI@MIST

http://www.freep.com/article/20111014/S ... nav%7Chead

http://vernoncroy.com/8196/michigan-vs- ... icks-odds/

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/picks

CBS Sports...rivals.com...even the state of Michigan's largest newspaper, the Free Press. Imagine that. Actual supporting evidence to disprove yet another of your halfbaked, onanistic banalities. Yep, it would seem there are quite a few 'experts' out there who apparently don't possess the same sort of "actual, real football intelligence" that you delight in splattering all over Screwball's stupidly worshipful face.

Oh, and spare me your usual lame rejoinder wherein you attempt to discredit the messengers. They're not all ignorant douches just because they disagree with you. The bottom line is that once again you were proven to be simply talking out of your ass.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

The Freep?

Here's what I said:

Look, even the "experts" and "analysts" I read all week picked MSU to win this game."

Feel free to dredge up a few hundred links to disprove that. Oh...you can't. Of course some people picked Michigan. The majority of experts that I read or heard on local radio with more than just a peripheral view of both teams picked Michigan State to win. Both of ESPN's Big Ten bloggers, for example, (whose opinions I trust, because they're paid to obsessively cover just 12 football teams and whose knowledge of Michigan goes beyond just "ohhhhhhhh, that Shoelace is fast!") picked MSU to win.

Just so I'm clear, can we go back to what your original argument is? Was it that I didn't actually have a good feel for how this game would go, even though there is evidence to the contrary?

Here are the facts.

1) I said MSU would win the game 23-17. They won 28-14.
2) In pick'em I had MSU covering, with a total of 40 points. MSU covered, and the total was 42 points.
3) I said the high winds would be a factor, and to take the UNDER. Wind was a factor, and the total was UNDER.
4) I said I didn't think either offense would score a ton of points, and the two just mustered a combined 35.

So what's your take? That there's no way I saw any of that coming, because I suck at picking games involving teams I know almost nothing about?

Van Logic: Mgo doesn't know Tulane/Utep, therefore, he doesn't know MSU/UM.

Sound about right?

[Mace]

Mace, you're a fucking pussy. Do it right, with no wimpy qualifiers, or just take your empty boasts and fuck off. If you wanted to get your picks in before kickoff on Saturday morning, you easily could. You'll never convince me that you can't find five damn minutes out of your entire week, including Saturday morning. You simply don't want to commit to it, is all.

Yeah, just fuck off.

Ahhh, look at little vannie getting all pissy and throwing a little girly fit. :roll: There are no "wimpy qualifiers", dumbass, just a one week challenge for you to pick the same games I do in my local contest and for me to enter the Pick 'em in here for one week. That doesn't sound too complicated to me. You're right about one thing though.....I don't want to commit to entering the Pick 'Em every week because, like I have repeatedly told you, I don't have time. If that qualifies me as a pussy in your eyes, so be it. It's not like I give a shit about your opinion anyway, but I've given you an opportunity to enter a one week challenge picking college football games and you've declined the challenge. And I'm the pussy??

[Van]

Like I said, Mgo, for once try to refrain from immediately denigrating the messengers. Included among those links I provided are people who follow the Big 10 very closely, and to deny this is simply self-serving nonsense.

You go to the gratuitous laughing smilie over the Detroit Free Press while offering nothing specific with which to back up your derision regarding Drew Sharp or Mark Snyder, who both picked Michigan. I'd hazard a guess that those guys follow the sport much more closely than you ever will, so what's your beef with them?

In point of fact, you have no beef with them. You don't know shit about them, except that they're paid to offer their football knowledge while you sit around getting your ass kicked on a message board full of casual hobbyists.

The same holds true regarding you vs Feldman, Fornelli and Hinnen from CBS Sports, as well as the Mighty Mgo vs Hugeunin and Ahern from yahoosports.

So, what I just disproved was your patently stupid notion that no one with "real, actual football intelligence" could have picked Michigan. Quite a few people who follow the sport and even your own conference/team much more closely than you do still picked Michigan to beat Michigan St.

The main point of all this is that you aren't nearly sharp enough with your picks to go around boasting that you knew what was going to happen and that those who disagreed with you lack "real, actual football intelligence." Since you don't even nail your Michigan St picks often enough to justify labeling yourself some sort of 'expert' on them, who are you to question anyone's football acumen, much less that of people who routinely kick your ass?

[Cornhusker]

Well I'm a B1G homer know-it-all and picked Michigan State.

Hint: Print the pick 'em list, place in parrot cage..wha la. Of course he's been crapping in a lot of the wrong places this year. Bastard, maybe he could substitute for the turkey next month.

[Van]

Yep, Mace, declining a challenge to prove it every week makes you a pussy. Offering up lame excuses as to why you won't can't set aside five minutes to post your picks makes you a pussy. Telling us you went 27-3 in your office pool full of like-minded mensans definitely makes you a pussy.

Claiming you're some sort of football wagering super-genius where the Big 10 is concerned while declining the opportunity to prove it where we can all see it every week makes you a stone-lock pussy.

[Mace]

So, what I just disproved was your patently stupid notion that no one with "real, actual football intelligence" could have picked Michigan. Quite a few people who follow the sport and even your own conference/team much more closely than you do still picked Michigan to beat Michigan St.

There ya go, MGO. You made the mistake of offending Van by classifying him as someone who possesses no "real, actual football intelligence." You should have been able to predict that the arrogant prick would take exception to that comment....and you probably did, and it was just as easy as predicting the outcome of the UM-MSU game.

[Mace]

Yep, Mace, declining a challenge to prove it every week makes you a pussy. Offering up lame excuses as to why you won't can't set aside five minutes to post your picks makes you a pussy. Telling us you went 27-3 in your office pool full of like-minded mensans definitely makes you a pussy.

Claiming you're some sort of football wagering super-genius where the Big 10 is concerned while declining the opportunity to prove it where we can all see it every week makes you a stone-lock pussy.

I wasn't boasting and I've made no claims to be a football wagering genius. I simply offered you a challenge and, as I could easily have predicted (okay, now I'm boasting), your arrogant pussy ass declined to accept. Man up or shut up.

[Van]

Mace, here is the sum of Mgo's brilliance in this thread...

There were only two people that thought Michigan would win this game: 1) Michigan fans 2) The casual cfb fan that got drunk off Michigan's ESPN highlights.

...and...

May I be a dick, for just one moment?

He got the first one flat-out wrong while nailing the second one. So, fifty-fifty, or right about where he usually is with his picks.

[Mace]

Mace, here is the sum of Mgo's brilliance in this thread...

There were only two people that thought Michigan would win this game: 1) Michigan fans 2) The casual cfb fan that got drunk off Michigan's ESPN highlights.

And I'm guessing that you're not a Michigan fan. Yep, MGO was spot on.

[Van]

Mace, you seem to be (unusually) confused. See, I was the one who posted the original challenge. Ergo, it's on you either to accept or decline said challenge; a challenge, btw, that everyone here but you has manfully accepted.

Here it is, pussy...

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=39560

Either quit your whining and accept the same yardstick by which we're all judged here or SHUT THE FUCKING FUCK UP, YOU PINK, WEEPING FERENTZ GASH!

[Van]

Mace, here is the sum of Mgo's brilliance in this thread...

There were only two people that thought Michigan would win this game: 1) Michigan fans 2) The casual cfb fan that got drunk off Michigan's ESPN highlights.

And I'm guessing that you're not a Michigan fan. Yep, MGO was spot on.

Doesn't account for Snake, Goober, L45B, or any of the countless college football 'experts' from around the country who picked Michigan.

You both lose.

[Mace]

Mace, you seem to be (unusually) confused. See, I was the one who posted the original challenge. Ergo, it's on you either to accept or decline said challenge; a challenge, btw, that everyone here but you has manfully accepted.

Here it is, pussy...

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=39560

Either quit your whining and accept the same yardstick by which we're all judged here or SHUT THE FUCKING FUCK UP, YOU PINK, WEEPING FERENTZ GASH!

I DID accept your challenge, you arrogant piece of shit, by saying that I would play the game for one week, but also challenged you to enter the same contest that I do play every week....you know, the one you thought was so simple because there are no spreads involved. Unlike you, I don't live in here and my responsibilites with my job don't allow me the time to give two shits about your little Pick 'em contest. Now man up or shut up, you self absorbed pussy.

[Mace]

You both lose.

Actually, I won. I picked MSU and it was the easiest pick of the week in my local contest. The Iowa-Northwestern game was a much tougher pick.

[Van]

Pick 'Em isn't a one-week contest, whiner. It's a season-long contest that separates the men from the Iowans.

And enough already with this bullshit about your not having the time to do it. We both know that's utter nonsense. If you have the time to post your picks for the office pool, you can also find five minutes to post here. Moreover, I know you don't work 24-7-365. You've described your work, and it leaves you time to go home at night. Assuming you can't post from work, at least once between Tuesday and Saturday mornings you can spare five minutes before heading into or returning home from work. Zipping off ten college football picks is simply not that time-consuming.

Besides, there are six Big 10 games most weeks, so that only leaves you with four other games to mull over. With all your lock-solid Big 10 insights guaranteeing you an easy 6-0 headstart, how difficult will it be to tax your infallible brain for just those four other lay-ups?

[Van]

Oh, and I'll gladly enter your office pool. Tell me what I need to do and where to send my picks, and I'm in. Hell, I'll even do it every week, not just once.

[Mace]

You don't know shit about my job, dumbass, just as you don't know anything about college football except for what the talking heads tell you. I can give you one week, but the football/volleyball seasons at my job consume my time.....12-14 hours a day....not that it's any of your fucking business, so pardon me if your little Pick 'em game isn't a high priority for me. If you don't want to accept the challenge I offered you, even though you obviously have plenty of time and nothing better to do, that's fine. You can also continue to make false assumptions, embellish and fabricate if that's your game. :roll:

[Mace]

Oh, and I'll gladly enter your office pool. Tell me what I need to do and where to send my picks, and I'm in. Hell, I'll even do it every week, not just once.

Fine. I'll post the games we have to pick when I get them...ususally on Tuesday or Wednesday, but it will only be this week because I don't have the time to post them every week. If I could do that, I'd enter the Pick 'em here. I'll start a thread to list the games and you can post your picks there.

[The Seer]

Fellers, pick'em is a fun little diversion that is 75% luck 25% knowledge. Those percentages can be tweaked a bit if some no-life spent hours researching trends, injuries, etc. etc. If it was JUST picking the winner, yes; but beating spreads is pure unadulterated luck.

Sin,

non-winner yet this season.

[Van]

So, Mace...you come in here and freely tell us about your line of work, your pending retirement, your decision to go back to work, your other football pools, and how nicely life is treating you, then you say that I haven't a clue about any of it. On top of that, you conveniently claim to be unable to spare even five minutes of 'puter time once per week.

Goddamn but you are one unrelenting pussy.

Whatever. It's probably a good thing that you won't post your picks here each week. I don't want to hear your incessant whining.

(Edit: I'll post my picks for your pool whenever you have them ready for us.)

[Killian]

Don't opine about a regional newspaper or their columnists when you don't know dick about them. Drew Sharp follows college football as closely as you follow the Heisman race.

[Mace]

So, Mace...you come in here and freely tell us about your line of work, your pending retirement, your decision to go back to work, your other football pools, and how nicely life is treating you, then you say that I haven't a clue about any of it. On top of that, you conveniently claim to be unable to spare even five minutes of 'puter time once per week.

Goddamn but you are one unrelenting pussy.

Whatever. It's probably a good thing that you won't post your picks here each week. I don't want to hear your incessant whining.

(Edit: I'll post my picks for your pool whenever you have them ready for us.)

I'm not whining, you ignorant, arrogant prick, just stating the facts. You don't have a clue how many hours a day/week I spend at my job (at least not until I told you) or the fact that I have more important priorities than entering a contest on this board or any other. I'll enter the Pick 'em this week, as I agreed to do, and I'll post the games you need to pick. Now, that wasn't so hard, was it, doucher?

[Van]

The Seer, yep, pretty much. I'll give a bit of credence to historical trends such as Dins's favorite (home teams dominating against the spread in-conference on Thursday night), or a certain program/coach beating another every damn year. I'll also put stock in injuries, the locale, and other difference-making circumstances.

In other words, the same basic shit all the rest of you here likely account for when making your picks. I highly doubt anyone on this board is devoting more than ten minutes per week to making their picks. I know I'm not. All I do is pull up 88's list and quickly go through it with an eye towards any games that jump out at me. If I end up with more than ten, I cull the iffiest ones. If I can't find ten, I go into Scramble Mode. The entire process takes less than five minutes, usually while arguing with Mgo or Dins about some stupid thing or another.

Even the games in which I'm most confident are more or less a crapshoot. Who the hell knows whether some goofball team is going to fuck up the spread by falling into a late score or three? Look at the Clemson game. I was counting that one as a loss nearly the whole night when Clemson suddenly came back to take an improbable lead before adding the even-more-unlikely covering score.

I just got lucky, plain and simple. That's how it goes.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Like I said, Mgo, for once try to refrain from immediately denigrating the messengers. Included among those links I provided are people who follow the Big 10 very closely, and to deny this is simply self-serving nonsense.

You go to the gratuitous laughing smilie over the Detroit Free Press while offering nothing specific with which to back up your derision regarding Drew Sharp or Mark Snyder, who both picked Michigan. I'd hazard a guess that those guys follow the sport much more closely than you ever will, so what's your beef with them?

You really want to open this can of worms?

You guessed'er. I don't go to the Freep or, gah, Drew Sharp when I want info on MSU. I don't know a single Spartan fan walking this earth who would.

The MSU fan base in general hates the Free Press, and specifically Drew Sharp, with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns.

Just go to the Red Cedar Message Board:

http://michiganstate.247sports.com/Boar ... d-Forum-93

and do a simple search for "Drew Sharp" and you will witness page after page demonstrating their vitriol. You could most certainly say that he's "in their dome." Personally, I wish they'd stop obsessing over his horrible columns, and just let the man drift into obscurity.

The running joke over the years has been "Guess the Free Press headline" after Michigan State beats Michigan. The gist being no matter what happens, the Freep tries its damndest to avoid giving MSU any credit, while maintaining a sunny disposition on what's happening in Ann Arbor. The Freep knows where their bread is buttered, and they pander to that audience. In that sort of smart business sense, I can't really fault them. Same deal with the Detroit News, but I suppose to a lesser extent.

Is the hate justified? Yes? No? Doesn't matter. You asked my beef, so there you go.

We can argue these kinds of sub-points all day long. The bottom line is I called my shot - multiple shots - and was correct on all of them. You didn't take exception to this until I started drunkenly gloating. You can call me a classless asshole if you'd like (guilty as charged), but you'd have to call me a correct classless asshole, and no amount of endless caveats, sub-points, topic-veering, and other trivialities from you will change that fact. No amount of "well, uhhh, errrr, you suck at picking other games" and "well, uhhh, errrrr, you were wrong about Notre Dame!" will change that fact.

So we're left to discuss the true source of your ire in this thread, which was this comment from me:

I can't imagine anyone with even a modicum of real, actual football intelligence thought Michigan would win this game.

Of all things to get worked up about. Sheesh.

Complete over the top, Dinsdale-esque assholishness, yes. But...I figgered that was also pretty obvious. It should've been shrugged off, not taken at face value.

Nevertheless, it was a dumb remark on my part, and I admit that. I can understand how someone on the outside looking in, possessing just surface knowledge and ESPN highlights, would think that Michigan would win this game. No, getting this one wrong was not a fair knock against their "real, actual football intelligence." Dumb take, I admit it.

That said, I would question an individual who picked Michigan to win, if said individual claimed to have a good pulse on the game and a familiarity for both teams. If that angers you, I don't know what to tell you. But since you don't fall into that group of people, it shouldn't bother you.

That's my last post on this subject. I'm not going to belabor this, because I'm well aware of your undying need to win at the internet. This could go days, weeks, months, if I let it, and you'll just continue to claim your own bode, a custom you've recently taken to. And while you can claim it, I can take solace in knowing I actually have it, evidenced by my predictions of the game coming to fruition.

Don't like it? Too fucking bad. Deal with it.

[Van]

Don't opine about a regional newspaper or their columnists when you don't know dick about them. Drew Sharp follows college football as closely as you follow the Heisman race.

And you know this, how? And you know anything, how?

Quit talking out of your ass. You don't know: 1. What other people know, except who's paid for their picks and who isn't. 2. What will happen during any given game.

What I know is this: 1. Mgo claimed that only Michigan fans and Michigan Kool-Aid drinkers picked Michigan to win. There was no other possibility. 2. Mgo feels that no one with "real, actual football intelligence" could have chosen Michigan. 3. He was demonstably wrong on both counts. 4. Even regarding your own teams your picks don't lead any reasonable person to believe that your opinions ought to carry any more weight than anyone else's.

See, for all your ballyhooed confidence in your pick, it hung by a thread. That game could have very easily ended up 24-21, Michigan. If it had, the silence coming from you, Mgo and Mace would have been deafening, the same as it always is when you narf up your "I had a good feel for this one!" picks.

[Mace]

That game could have very easily ended up 24-21, Michigan. If it had, the silence coming from you, Mgo and Mace would have been deafening,

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. :roll: If your aunt had balls, she'd be.....well, she'd still be a pussy. It's a family tradition.

[Killian]

1, I've lived in Michigan my entire life and have read Drew Sharp for 20 or so years. So I know that he has a history of writing bullshit columns with little to no substance besides his own personal opinion, which is typically poorly researched. Kind of like your whole "Russell Wilson isn't a serious Heisman candidate, Denard Robinsion is" bullshit.

But I forgot, Van, you're always right, except when you're wrong. Still waiting on those links that show Robinson as a serious Heisman contender.

Notre Dame could very easily be 6-0 right now, but they're not. There are a lot of "if's and buts" in every game, and you fucking know that. For you to point to one or two plays and say "If those turn out different, Michigan wins..." is beyond fucking stupid. There are plays that MSU can point to and say that if those went their way, the game wouldn't have been close.

My prediction hung by a thousand threads, you choosing to focus on 1 is stupid. Notre Dame should have blown out UofM, and you would be hard pressed to find a Michigan fan that would argue the alternative. But those threads broke, and they lost the game. If's and buts.

You know how many "I've got a good feeling about this one picks" I've had? 4. I'm 3-1. But again, you're right in your own mind, even when you're wrong.

[Mace]

Great points, Killian. Van's stance is right up there with theJON's "Iowa was only 3 plays away from the National Championship game."

[Van]

Mgo, I gave you four links. Of those four, you pick on one, using the same dubious reasoning TiC always uses whenever the subjects of ESPN and ND come up.

What about the other guy from the Freep? What about all those people from the other links who picked Michigan? They're all idiots who know nothing about Sparty/Michigan?

Spin...dodge...obfuscate...repeat.

We can argue these kinds of sub-points all day long. The bottom line is I called my shot - multiple shots - and was correct on all of them.

It's just one pick, and you nearly lost it. BFD. You used all the same brilliance to produce a prediction of a victory over ND, and guess what? We both got that one wrong. Again...BFD.

Try to take a cue from your 'favorite' manager, Jimmy Smokes. Win or lose, don't get too high or low, and certainly don't thump your chest. You didn't do shit here, just like you aren't reduced to shit for getting all those other Sparty picks wrong.

Sometimes the coin flips your way, and this time it did. Were the odds in your favor? Yeah, I would say they were...slightly. It sure as hell wasn't the slamdunk you're making it out to have been.

You didn't take exception to this until I started drunkenly gloating.

Bingo. It wasn't your prediction with which I take issue. It was your later characterization of everyone else that painted you as an asshole, especially once you drew your pissy little line in the sand and stupidly tried to stand firm behind an indefensible set of positions.

You can call me a classless asshole if you'd like (guilty as charged), but you'd have to call me a correct classless asshole, and no amount of endless caveats, sub-points, topic-veering, and other trivialities from you will change that fact. No amount of "well, uhhh, errrr, you suck at picking other games" and "well, uhhh, errrrr, you were wrong about Notre Dame!" will change that fact.

You got a pick correct. Again...BFD. What do you want, a medal?

How about some accountability? Here's an idea. The next time you get one of your "good feel" games wrong, which will likely be the very next pick you make, come back in and loudly suck Screwball's dick as hungrily as you're doing now. Don't just thump your chest when you occasionally get one right. Try to understand that your same brilliance leads to all sorts of blown Sparty picks.

So we're left to discuss the true source of your ire in this thread, which was this comment from me:

I can't imagine anyone with even a modicum of real, actual football intelligence thought Michigan would win this game.

Of all things to get worked up about. Sheesh.

It wasn't just that, of course. It was the way you compounded it by delineating the only two types of people who could have possibly chosen Michigan, then you reiterated it. You made it your standard, until it became time to gore you with it.

Complete over the top, Dinsdale-esque assholishness, yes. But...I figgered that was also pretty obvious. It should've been shrugged off, not taken at face value.

Which it would have been, had you not stuck to your guns and pursued it. Check the chronology of the thread. When you first stated it, I merely added a little correcting aside. That's when you took up the cudgels and truly went after it by restating it in no-uncertain terms.

Nevertheless, it was a dumb remark on my part, and I admit that. I can understand how someone on the outside looking in, possessing just surface knowledge and ESPN highlights, would think that Michigan would win this game. No, getting this one wrong was not a fair knock against their "real, actual football intelligence." Dumb take, I admit it.

Alcohol is a bitch.

That said, I would question an individual who picked Michigan to win, if said individual claimed to have a good pulse on the game and a familiarity for both teams. If that angers you, I don't know what to tell you. But since you don't fall into that group of people, it shouldn't bother you.

And had Michigan won? How would you have responded to said individual questioning your intelligence? See, plenty of people who had a good pulse on the game still managed to disagree with each other as to its probable outcome. Whenever that isn't the case for a game carrying a -2.5 spread, that's when you'll have some real news.

That's my last post on this subject. I'm not going to belabor this,

...at which point you predictably go on to do just that...

because I'm well aware of your undying need to win at the internet. This could go days, weeks, months, if I let it

It takes two to tango, missy. For all your mewling claims of "last-word whore," you're every bit as guilty of it as anyone else.

[Van]

Killian, I'm tired of coming up with links that directly refute what you and Mgo say—up to and including your silly contentions that such things don't even exist—only to have you clowns attempt to parry by shooting down the credibility of the provided sources.

See, no matter what you seem to think of yourself, I don't place you on some higher pedestal. To me, as well as to the guys on TV and radio who conduct college football shows, your opinions matter fuckall. If you're not aware that much of the media was including Robinson in their "Heisman watch list" discussions, well, there's nothing I can do to help you see through such a high degree of self-serving myopia. It was a fact as of forty-eight hours ago, and no amount of edifying links is ever going to dissuade you, so what's the point?

[The Seer]

Can one just imagine if Gobbles and Van were able to reproduce? That offspring could post til beyond eternity....and a few eons past that.

[Killian]

That Robinson was never mentioned for that this year, except in passing. Yet you puffed your chest out about him as another player who had a better shot at Russell Wilson for that award. Because, as you said, you listen and follow that stuff. So hell, just post one link. Even if it is from some gambling website that no one has ever heard of. Just one of Denard Robinson being considered as a serious Hesiman candidate.

You are like JON. You post about absolutes and then don't have anything to back it up. Even after MGo's mea culpa, you can't simply say "you know what, people in Michigan might have a better grip on that game and what's going on." It's quoting everyother line and parsing every word. It's tiresome. Go back to posting about your if's and buts, because you're right about that. And we all know that's what you long for, people to say "you're right, Van."