theboardref
thewhite_00 ESPN board
Congrats, maybe Missouri should print up some shirts that read ‘We don’t suck as bad as you think we do, an article said so’. Bit of a mouthful but you can use both sides.
Get that Missouri stuff outta here. Wisconsin is finally getting some juice but it always has the asterisk * weak- schedule crap with it. Including 2010-2017 8 years 6 division titles, 3 conference titles and an overall record of 84-25
What asterisk? You get your ass beat every time you play a good team, no asterisk is needed.
What asterisk? You get your ass beat every time you play a good team, no asterisk is needed.
Well they beat Miami last year, and they seem like they would fit that category based on your definition in the other thread.What asterisk? You get your ass beat every time you play a good team, no asterisk is needed.
I am sure that in those 84 wins, we beat at least one good team
Well they beat Miami last year, and they seem like they would fit that category based on your definition in the other thread.
They haven’t had a top 10 finish since 2009 and have finished outside the top 25 more than in.I'm talking about what a program is capable of more than anything.
But if we are going that route, VT has beat a national championship team in the past 4 years.
Dude your avatar pic looks like Hank from Breaking Bad and Jonah Hill had a kid.
They haven’t had a top 10 finish since 2009 and have finished outside the top 25 more than in.
Should we add Pitt since they did the same thing more recently?
Those are called upsets.
Yes, so why should we have a team who hasn’t been good in nearly a decade over a team who was less than a minute from making the playoffs? Both played in shit divisions. I’d rather say neither of them belong. You want to include one because they were good back when Bush was president.That was kind of my point.
Yes, so why should we have a team who hasn’t been good in nearly a decade over a team who was less than a minute from making the playoffs? Both played in shit divisions. I’d rather say neither of them belong. You want to include one because they were good back when Bush was president.
Of course they are upsets if Wisconsin is underrated and wins.
But it's hard to make that argument when you are constantly overrated and then lose.
Based on what? Not actually what happens on the field, obviously. Should we add Oregon and Baylor to the list of good teams because they were good a decade ago?VT has a higher ceiling.
When has Wisconsin been overrated?
Based on what? Not actually what happens on the field, obviously. Should we add Oregon and Baylor to the list of good teams because they were good a decade ago?
They consistently fall through the floor.
When has Wisconsin been overrated?