LOL @ Minnesota Here

[fredsdeadfriend]

And what exactly would I learn from you?

You'd learn a lot. If you even tried to listen/comprehend, but you refuse to. You made up your mind from the start and are just making sh1t up for the most part to fit your pre-chosen narrative.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

And what exactly would I learn from you?


That Minnesota Gophers hockey in the best in the country even though they don't have the most titles and haven't won one since '03?

So let me get this straight? Teams with more Natl Titles are better than other teams without as many, cept when it's Minnesota football that has more than other programs like FSU and Miami, right? And that's because of "when" UMn's titles were won? Yet it doesn't matter that Michigan's Hockey titles were all mostly won over 50 years ago? Because? Because you are wanting to one up a Gopher fan so the rules can change depending on how they will give you an advantage in each different scenario? lol

And it matters that OSU has produced the most NFL players, that DOES HELP make the argument that OSU is #1 in the 21st Century in cfb, BUT the same does NOT apply to the sport of hockey, then ONLY the # of Natl Titles matter, and it doesn't matter when they were won, when it comes to hockey, right?


How much more of a double speaking POS Hypocrite can you be?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

And what exactly would I learn from you?


That Minnesota Gophers hockey in the best in the country even though they don't have the most titles and haven't won one since '03?

That Minnesota football is on par with N.D. football?

That you mistakenly think Minnesota Gophers > ever other school in the country?

That PJ Fleck will never leave Minnesota because they have the best stadium and facilities in the country?


Fucking with you and pointing out how stupidly homeristic you are all the time is some funny entertainment.

See, you objected to me posting an All-Time Ranking that had UMn #11, yet if # of Natl Titles is all that matters, then that would put UMn squarely and securely into the Top 11 All-Time.

Or can you name more than 10 cfb programs with MORE THAN SIX Recognized Natl Titles?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

And to pop your bubble some more, I've looked at the hockey stats if you only took into account the last 50 years, and UMn comes out #1 in almost every category, Most Natl Titles, most Frozen Four Appearances, most NCAA tourney appearances, most NCAA tourney wins, most 2nd place finishes.

So you need to stop trying to use different rules for different sports all in an effort to manipulate things against Minnesota in each sport, and just come out with one consistent measuring stick for all sports and stick to that and be consistent bro.

Isn't it hard keeping all of the different standards and measures and criteria straight? lol

 

[Wamu]

See, you objected to me posting an All-Time Ranking that had UMn #11, yet if # of Natl Titles is all that matters, then that would put UMn squarely and securely into the Top 11 All-Time.

Or can you name more than 10 cfb programs with MORE THAN SIX Recognized Natl Titles?

247sports, espn and collegefootballnews don't have your team ranked # 11 all time, and you got some major issues with that. I'll go with what those sites say before your homeristic opinions. And remember you've already said those sites I mentioned have a biased agenda. But the one site you mentioned (tiptop-25.-com) that has them ranked closer to the top 10 is legit right?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

Nothing false about an opinion you duffus, it's an opinion and we all have the right to our opinions. Everyone has an opinion and they are like assholes, you know the rest.

Thing is, my opinion is based on LOTS of evidence and data, yours is based on one simple minded narrow minded far too specific criteria.



10 Reasons why I KNOW that UMn is the #1 college hockey program in the nation, vs your ONE and only 1.

#1 - UMn produces the most NHLers.
#2 - UMn produces the most NHL points scored.
#3 - UMn produces the most NHL Hall of Famers.

I'll only do 3 or 4 at a time since I know you struggle to read anything longer than a tweet, lol.

#4 - UMn produces the most US Olympic hockey players.
#5 - UMn produces the most US Olympic hockey medal winners.
#6 - UMn produces the most US Olympic hockey GOLD MENAL winners, and its not even close. UMn has 3 times as many as the 2nd best team.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

247sports, espn and collegefootballnews don't have your team ranked # 11 all time, and you got some major issues with that. I'll go with what those sites say before your homeristic opinions. And remember you've already said those sites I mentioned have a biased agenda. But the one site you mentioned (tiptop-25.-com) that has them ranked closer to the top 10 is legit right?

Yes and yes, but not for the reasons you claim.

Any ranking system of best cfb programs of the 21st Century that doesn't have Alabama #1 is not legit.

And any ranking system that has Boise St #3 for the 21st Century is also NOT legit.


Also, any ranking system that is constructed quickly in order to be ready for publication in a for profit sports magazine or site, will never be legit.

That simple.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

247sports, espn and collegefootballnews don't have your team ranked # 11 all time, and you got some major issues with that. I'll go with what those sites say before your homeristic opinions. And remember you've already said those sites I mentioned have a biased agenda. But the one site you mentioned (tiptop-25.-com) that has them ranked closer to the top 10 is legit right?

And you are avoiding the question, lol. Nice attempt at diversion though. You are realizing that I have you cornered, aren't you? lol

loser.



So what is it? Does # of Natl Titles determine strength of a program, or is that not the end all and be all of factors?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

#4 - UMn produces the most US Olympic hockey players.
#5 - UMn produces the most US Olympic hockey medal winners.
#6 - UMn produces the most US Olympic hockey GOLD MENAL winners, and its not even close. UMn has 3 times as many as the 2nd best team.

#7 - UMn produces the most US Hockey Hall of Famers.
#8 - UMn has the most NCAA tourney wins.
#9 - UMn has the most cHk POY/Hobey Baker Award winners.

 

[wazzu31]

So you think that those 3 people were the most important factors in the Allies winning WW2? Wow!!!

You would be that simple minded. lol

Umm, literally yes. Those are the three characters that allowed the allies to win. Churchill would come in at number 4 but no one would confused him with a Gopher.

 

[wazzu31]

So FDR invented SPAM to feed the troops and Eisenhower produced a 1/4 of a million helmets for the troops, and Einstein created artificial rubber?

And they were all from the same state? Which state was that? Einstein wasn't even an American. lol

You do know that without Einstein’s letter there is no funding for the Manhattan project right? I never said Americans.

 

[wazzu31]

FDR was a leftist who did lots to HURT America leading up to WW2. Far from him contributing to the winning of the war, his leftist meddling held America back and probably extended the war a good percentage?

What does being a leftist have to do with FDR was critical into winning the war? This topic involved Minnesota so suddenly you want to hate on “leftists”? You are so over the map with your non sense and bragging about a sport that literally no one but white people who can’t play a real sport care about.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

What does being a leftist have to do with FDR was critical into winning the war? This topic involved Minnesota so suddenly you want to hate on “leftists”? You are so over the map with your non sense and bragging about a sport that literally no one but white people who can’t play a real sport care about.

You must be a leftist, lol. You are dumb enough to be one. Not knowing how FDR's being a leftist harmed America and hence hurt our readiness when the time came to go to war, indicates to me that you are probably a leftist, OR, maybe not, maybe you are just THAT dumb that you don't understand anything about anything?


But forget that, I don't want to get hung up on that kind of stuff. I'm much more interested in how you think FDR and Eisenhower and Einstein won the war for the Allies?

I mean, seriously, explain it to me. How did 3 individuals win an entire world war?


Because I'm telling you, without the State of Minnesota's contributions, more than any other state, and the University of Minnesota's contributions more than any other school, the Allies would have lost the war. Nothing FDR or Eisenhower or Einstein could have done to stop it, without all of the many many contributions from the Univ of Mn and the state of Minnesota.

 

[wazzu31]

You must be a leftist, lol. You are dumb enough to be one. Not knowing how FDR's being a leftist harmed America and hence hurt our readiness when the time came to go to war, indicates to me that you are probably a leftist, OR, maybe not, maybe you are just THAT dumb that you don't understand anything about anything?


But forget that, I don't want to get hung up on that kind of stuff. I'm much more interested in how you think FDR and Eisenhower and Einstein won the war for the Allies?

I mean, seriously, explain it to me. How did 3 individuals win an entire world war?


Because I'm telling you, without the State of Minnesota's contributions, more than any other state, and the University of Minnesota's contributions more than any other school, the Allies would have lost the war. Nothing FDR or Eisenhower or Einstein could have done to stop it, without all of the many many contributions from the Univ of Mn and the state of Minnesota.

Yes, you can ask @michaeljordan_fan about how I am the boards biggest leftist.

Without FDR, there isnt an allied forces, just all Germans by 1940. Eisenhower was the general who mapped out how to finally win A battle against the Nazi’s, and third Einstein put his reputation on the line when he penned the letter to Congress allowing for funding for the Manhattan project. Take out Minnesota and we still win the war, take out either of those three and zero chance we win because Hitler doesn’t make the same blunder he made attacking Russia while we were stockpiling arms and reinforcing the British until we officially entered the war.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

Yes, you can ask @michaeljordan_fan about how I am the boards biggest leftist.

Without FDR, there isnt an allied forces, just all Germans by 1940. Eisenhower was the general who mapped out how to finally win A battle against the Nazi’s, and third Einstein put his reputation on the line when he penned the letter to Congress allowing for funding for the Manhattan project. Take out Minnesota and we still win the war, take out either of those three and zero chance we win because Hitler doesn’t make the same blunder he made attacking Russia while we were stockpiling arms and reinforcing the British until we officially entered the war.

You just qualified yourself as the least intelligent person I've ever met online.



Most of what you wrote above is not even close to being accurate, Eisenhower's skills as a general were very helpful, but without Minnesota, his skills wouldn't have mattered. Without Minnesota the Axis forces would have defeated the British forces, and without a couple British peeps we'd have never broken Enigma. That extends the war a couple of years at least, and this hurts the Russians who were fed information by the Brits, so the Axis forces may have done better on the Russian front, especially with not having to bother with the British anymore. Without Minnesota, the Japanese may not have felt the US enough of a threat to worry about, so they may have chosen not to bomb Pearl Harbor which was what brought the US into the war? Regardless, without Minnesota, had the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, it wouldn't have mattered, we would have been much less capable of fighting back. Without having to worry about fighting the US, the Japanese may have concentrated more on their Russian and Chinese fronts? Could Russia have fallen? I don't know about that, but they would have had a tougher time and China was nothing like the China we know today, so they may have fallen, too? Without Minnesota, even if there was a Manhattan Project, the Allies may not have beat the Axis powers in development of nuclear bombs. I understand that without UMn and the UMners who worked on the Manhatten Project, other people from other states were smart enough that they would have eventually developed the things the UMners/UMn did, but when? How much longer would it have taken? Earnest Lawrence wasn't born in Minnesota, and could have gone to college somewhere else, sure, but how much did UMn Professors influence his work/research? Now he may not have been from Minnesota, but Alfred O C Nier WAS born in Minnesota, and without his Mass Spectrographs, well, the Manhattan Project depended greatly on Nier's spectrographs. The majority of the Spectrographs used by The Manhattan Project were spectrographs designed by Nier. And Edward P Ney, who helped Nier with his work, and whose experience and equipment contributed significantly to Jesse Beam's wartime project to develop gas centrifuges for separation of uranium isotopes, was also born in Minnesota. Otto Schmidt's influence on the war may not have been changed had he not gone to UMn, but do we know that? No, we don't. Jesse Hawley's quarter of a million helmets may have been made by someone else, eventually? But when? And this is just a fraction of the people whose work/research/discoveries/inventions/innovations influenced the war effort favorably for the Allies. You honestly think all of those contributions mean nothing but FDR was the one and only person who could have done the things he did, not all of which were even good? Einstein's theories and this letter you speak of as if it was the end all and be all of what won the war, would have been worthless without the tools the MP used to turn his theories into practical working projects. And it's not even as if the US needed the A-Bomb to win the war, we only used it to save American lives that would have been lost in an invasion of Japan. The war was already won, the A-Bomb just shortened it. I'll give you Eisenhower, but like I said, without Minnesota, Eisenhower may as well have been fighting the Germans with rocks and slingshots.

 

[megalodon30]

“Don’t punch down,” is always good advice.

 

[wazzu31]

You just qualified yourself as the least intelligent person I've ever met online.



Most of what you wrote above is not even close to being accurate, Eisenhower's skills as a general were very helpful, but without Minnesota, his skills wouldn't have mattered. Without Minnesota the Axis forces would have defeated the British forces, and without a couple British peeps we'd have never broken Enigma. That extends the war a couple of years at least, and this hurts the Russians who were fed information by the Brits, so the Axis forces may have done better on the Russian front, especially with not having to bother with the British anymore. Without Minnesota, the Japanese may not have felt the US enough of a threat to worry about, so they may have chosen not to bomb Pearl Harbor which was what brought the US into the war? Regardless, without Minnesota, had the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, it wouldn't have mattered, we would have been much less capable of fighting back. Without having to worry about fighting the US, the Japanese may have concentrated more on their Russian and Chinese fronts? Could Russia have fallen? I don't know about that, but they would have had a tougher time and China was nothing like the China we know today, so they may have fallen, too? Without Minnesota, even if there was a Manhattan Project, the Allies may not have beat the Axis powers in development of nuclear bombs. I understand that without UMn and the UMners who worked on the Manhatten Project, other people from other states were smart enough that they would have eventually developed the things the UMners/UMn did, but when? How much longer would it have taken? Earnest Lawrence wasn't born in Minnesota, and could have gone to college somewhere else, sure, but how much did UMn Professors influence his work/research? Now he may not have been from Minnesota, but Alfred O C Nier WAS born in Minnesota, and without his Mass Spectrographs, well, the Manhattan Project depended greatly on Nier's spectrographs. The majority of the Spectrographs used by The Manhattan Project were spectrographs designed by Nier. And Edward P Ney, who helped Nier with his work, and whose experience and equipment contributed significantly to Jesse Beam's wartime project to develop gas centrifuges for separation of uranium isotopes, was also born in Minnesota. Otto Schmidt's influence on the war may not have been changed had he not gone to UMn, but do we know that? No, we don't. Jesse Hawley's quarter of a million helmets may have been made by someone else, eventually? But when? And this is just a fraction of the people whose work/research/discoveries/inventions/innovations influenced the war effort favorably for the Allies. You honestly think all of those contributions mean nothing but FDR was the one and only person who could have done the things he did, not all of which were even good? Einstein's theories and this letter you speak of as if it was the end all and be all of what won the war, would have been worthless without the tools the MP used to turn his theories into practical working projects. And it's not even as if the US needed the A-Bomb to win the war, we only used it to save American lives that would have been lost in an invasion of Japan. The war was already won, the A-Bomb just shortened it. I'll give you Eisenhower, but like I said, without Minnesota, Eisenhower may as well have been fighting the Germans with rocks and slingshots.

Wow, just wow. So much wrong with everything you say here. I get it, you have an inflated view of Minnesota but rewriting history is a pretty dumb way. Let’s just forget Einstein being the sole reason money was appropriated, but it is really hard to fathom someone with any real sense of history thinks the entire state of Minnesota combined was anywhere near as responsible for the victory over FDR and Eisenhower.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

Wow, just wow. So much wrong with everything you say here. I get it, you have an inflated view of Minnesota but rewriting history is a pretty dumb way. Let’s just forget Einstein being the sole reason money was appropriated, but it is really hard to fathom someone with any real sense of history thinks the entire state of Minnesota combined was anywhere near as responsible for the victory over FDR and Eisenhower.

Omg, you are a simple minded Neanderthal, aren't you? Do your knuckles drag on the ground when you walk? lol

I mean, the way you wrote that, I'm almost wondering if you aren't being sarcastic or something? You have to be just fucking with me, right?

Comparing TWO individual people's contributions, to the contributions of an entire state and it's flagship University? But your previous posts all point to your actually being THAT stupid, and you are a fan of frigging Washington St, so....




But continue, fill me in on what FDR did, that was so unique, so FDRish that NO OTHER person in America, as President, could have done the same thing? Was it how he kept America out of the war until Japan and the anger of the American people forced his hand? Was that one of the brilliant things he did that helped the Allies win? Was that an example of his genius? Was it how his leftist policies drug the Great Depression out much longer than it otherwise would have lasted that so helped the Allied war effort?

already said Eisenhower had an impact, but you can only work with what you got, and one thing Eisenhower got was the entire state of Minnesota to help him and the rest of the Allies out. And Eisenhower wouldn't have done as well as he did without the help of the Code breakers that broke Enigma, and those people might not have lived through the defeat of the British that surely would have come about without Minnesota helping out the Allies.







And no, my view of Minnesota is NOT inflated, it's factual and INFORMED. And I'm withholding the kick to your nuts and the knockout punch as long as I can to maximize the entertainment value for myself, lol

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

And what exactly would I learn from you?


That Minnesota Gophers hockey in the best in the country even though they don't have the most titles and haven't won one since '03?

Last 50 years of Men's Div 1 College Hockey

# of Frozen Four Appearances?

#1 - UMn with 18.

#2 - UND & BC with 16.

#4 - BU with 14.

#5 - Mich with 11.

#6 - Wisc with 9.

#7 - UMD & DU with 8.

So UMn with 2 more Frozen Four Appearances than anyone else, but all that matters to you is their all-time NCAA tourney Title count, or when their last title was won? Michigan, the team with the most Titles, their last title was in 1998. and they've only won 2 Titles in the last 55 NCAA tournaments.

Wisconsin may have more NCAA Titles, 6, than UMn, but UMn has TWICE AS MANY Frozen Four Appearances compared to Wisconsin. And half of UW's titles were won with a Gopher coaching them.

BC and BU have the same # of Titles as UMn, but only 4 & 3 compared to UMn's 5 in the last 50 years, and 2 of BU's are 49 & 50 tournaments old, so after this year and next year, their 50 year # will go down.

DU doesn't even have HALF as many Frozen Four Appearances as Minnesota the last 50 years and just like Michigan, DU had to resort to recruiting older Canadians to win titles back in the day.


That leaves only UND, with 2 fewer Frozen Four Appearances but 1 more title in the last 50 years. Helped em that they were smart enough to, like Wisconsin, hire a former Gopher who helped them to 2 Natl Titles. Not sure if they resorted/relied on Canadians like DU and Michigan did, but it would make more sense if UND did as they were closer to Canada than most. I know they relied a ton on Minnesota players, too, which is fine, why wouldn't they? But Minnesota put AT LEAST twice as many players onto US Olympic Hockey teams compared to UND. Maybe you are a Commie loving Leftie, but I'm not and teams helping out Canada instead of America is shameful.

 

[Wamu]

Last 50 years of Men's Div 1 College Hockey

# of Frozen Four Appearances?

#1 - UMn with 18.

#2 - UND & BC with 16.

#4 - BU with 14.

#5 - Mich with 11.

#6 - Wisc with 9.

#7 - UMD & DU with 8.

So UMn with 2 more Frozen Four Appearances than anyone else, but all that matters to you is their all-time NCAA tourney Title count, or when their last title was won? Michigan, the team with the most Titles, their last title was in 1998. and they've only won 2 Titles in the last 55 NCAA tournaments.

Wisconsin may have more NCAA Titles, 6, than UMn, but UMn has TWICE AS MANY Frozen Four Appearances compared to Wisconsin. And half of UW's titles were won with a Gopher coaching them.

BC and BU have the same # of Titles as UMn, but only 4 & 3 compared to UMn's 5 in the last 50 years, and 2 of BU's are 49 & 50 tournaments old, so after this year and next year, their 50 year # will go down.

DU doesn't even have HALF as many Frozen Four Appearances as Minnesota the last 50 years and just like Michigan, DU had to resort to recruiting older Canadians to win titles back in the day.


That leaves only UND, with 2 fewer Frozen Four Appearances but 1 more title in the last 50 years. Helped em that they were smart enough to, like Wisconsin, hire a former Gopher who helped them to 2 Natl Titles. Not sure if they resorted/relied on Canadians like DU and Michigan did, but it would make more sense if UND did as they were closer to Canada than most. I know they relied a ton on Minnesota players, too, which is fine, why wouldn't they? But Minnesota put AT LEAST twice as many players onto US Olympic Hockey teams compared to UND. Maybe you are a Commie loving Leftie, but I'm not and teams helping out Canada instead of America is shameful.

Stop being such a homer. Wait, you can't do that. You only wanna take the last 50 years of college hockey into consideration because it makes your team look better. Your team isn't the best hockey program all time.

Does Minnesota hockey have the most Frozen Four appearances and titles all time (not just the last 50 years)? Of course not.

So by your nonstop homeristic standards (going back 50 years) the Packers only have two Super Bowl wins. The Lakers only have 12 titles & not 17. And that also means any titles that Bama won before '71 don't count in your bizarro world.