• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

If Bzz succeeds ...

ChrisL68 said:
There are alot of top 50 players not committed. Our class ranking will likely fall for the final rankings.

Even then, it is a class with 3 top 100 players and no top 50 players. Expecting that to transform one of the worst ACC teams top a NCAA contender as rookies is just not realistic.

I NEVER said ANYTHING vaguely like "Top NCAA Contender."

How the fuck do you get "top NCAA contender" out of 7-9 to 9-7 in the ACC?

Once again you allege things I never said as if i did. Is it possible for you not to intentionally and grossly misrepresent what I say for your own purposes.

To say I said anything that even someone high on PCP could make into "Top NCAA contender is total BS.

I will be happy if we are 6-10 or 7-9 next year, and you are saying that this is borderline firing territory.
Click to expand...

...
 
Deacsfan27 said:
I do think that 8-8 next year in the ACC is a little higher than we will finish, but I want to see how many we win this year before I set any bar for next years record. I also want to see how good the freshmen actually are when they get in here.

Making a prediction at this juncture is nothing more than an educated guess (and one without all of the facts as well).
Click to expand...

I think we'll go 8-8 this year.
 
I think it's a typo RJ, "to an NCAA contender" is probably what he meant, meaning contenders to make the tourney. 8 wins in the ACC would put us somewhere in the vicinity of the bubble usually.
 
I meant to type "to an NCAA contender"

get your panties out of your buttcrack.
 
cookout that may be his excuse, but it's not close to what he said...and an "NCAA contender" does imply much more than making The Dance.
 
ChrisL68 said:
I meant to type "to an NCAA contender"

get your panties out of your buttcrack.
Click to expand...

of course you did....just like you meant to say I never said what you allege I said about Lobo.
 
RJKarl said:
cookout that may be his excuse, but it's not close to what he said...and an "NCAA contender" does imply much more than making The Dance.
Click to expand...

Maybe, that's really up for interpretation, and I tend to give fellow WFU fans the benefit of the doubt, regardless of which side of the Bzzz issue they find themselves on.
 
RJKarl said:
which puts me light years ahead of you.
Click to expand...


Hey, at least I don't argue with people about what they really meant to say when they clarify a typo they made. That puts you in rare air.
 
A tourney contender can certainly mean a contender to make the tourney, like in this case. You are being really stupid here RJ. Does anybody say an NCAA bid contender?

The entire discussion of this thread has been whether it is realistic to expect Bzzzz to have us at .500 or above in the ACC (see your comment about how Bzzzz should be fired if we are not at least 7-9 next year, which I think is completely ridiculous). Now in this context, does the term "NCAA contender" likely mean

a) a contender to make the NCAA tournament, or
b) a contender to win the national championship.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
Hey, at least I don't argue with people about what they really meant to say when they clarify a typo they made. That puts you in rare air.
Click to expand...

but I admit when I make a mistake, you refuse to do so. you still can't admit I not only didn't slam Lobo, I gave specific reasons why ANY coach in his position would have huge hurdles to overcome to get a D1 HC job.

But you still can't admit you are wrong.
 
an NCAA contender is one who has a chance win the NCAA. Before today I've not seen someone use the term to mean contend for a berth without saying something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top