LOL @ Minnesota Here

[fredsdeadfriend]

No Wisconsin road trip? Fun game day experience.

I road tripped to the Horseshoe in Columbus, very fun time (even though Badgers lost).

Yeah, how do you miss out on the game day experience at Wisconsin? lol

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

Oh dammit. Yes I did make it to Madison and left them off the list. Had a great time. My goal was to make it to all the BigTen stadiums. Then I got outta NE Ohio more than 15 years ago and those plans are now on hold.

So you lied? lol

 

[Tainthappening]

Yeah, how do you miss out on the game day experience at Wisconsin? lol

Probably a bit over your head being a Gopher fan to understand concept of game day experience.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

Probably a bit over your head being a Gopher fan to understand concept of game day experience.

We're back to having an outdoor Stadium. Now all you Badger fans have to figure out is the concept of having ever won a Natl Title

Closest you came was with a former Gopher as your coach, maybe you should try that again?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

More likely 11 years of “community“ service which you actually accomplished by attending 6 “community“ colleges. Just curious, any degrees from those six community colleges?

Reading comprehension problem? I've said multiple times, TWO Community Colleges.

What do they have you reading and speaking only in Latin at Notre Dame? Why do you insist on doing sh1t in Latin so much, it's not like it was the language any of scripture was written in? What's the deal? I mean, I know the real deal, but I want to know what you cultists claim it is?

 

[wazzu31]

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

What are you talking about. You are the one who conflates the State and the University. And I pointed out the fact that without the state or the university our country still wins WWII. Without Minnesota the Civil Rights Act gets passed. It isn’t that their wasn’t contributions from the State or the University, you just has a distorted sense of reality and are trying to change history because for reason you get proven wrong over and over but have chosen to die on the hill of Minnesota rules. I mean, I will 100% agree with you without Minnesota the #metoo movement doesn’t become a national story though.

Since you must put my school in every conservation, you are arguing there is no Rose Bowl without Washington State University because we have been a member of the conference that represented it for a century.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

What are you talking about. You are the one who conflates the State and the University. And I pointed out the fact that without the state or the university our country still wins WWII. Without Minnesota the Civil Rights Act gets passed. It isn’t that their wasn’t contributions from the State or the University, you just has a distorted sense of reality and are trying to change history because for reason you get proven wrong over and over but have chosen to die on the hill of Minnesota rules. I mean, I will 100% agree with you without Minnesota the #metoo movement doesn’t become a national story though.

I'm not conflating anything. And your dumb example below proves you are clueless regarding this topic.

You are seemingly too naive or simple minded to understand just how much the State of Minnesota, and it's Flagship University contributed to the Allied war effort. And ok, you claim our country still wins WWII(thought it was the allies? But whatever) without the contributions of UMn and the state of Minnesota, so let me ask you this, WHEN? 1945? 1946? 1950? 1954? What is your best guess?

And explain to me how without Minnesota the Civil Rights Act gets passed? You do know that the Democrats were overwhelmingly against it, right? And that Hubert H Humphrey was one of the few Democrats advocating for it, right? Dirksen might not have been as vital as Humphrey, as he was a Republican and a larger percentage of Republicans supported it, but not all of them, so who knows? President Johnson seemed to believe that it was vitally important for Humphrey to get Dirksen on board, and he did get him on board, so you are saying without Humphrey, or Dirksen or any other Minnesotans to replace them, that the Anti-Civil Rights Democrats would have pushed for the Civil Rights Act to pass, or that any other Republican being the leader of the party would have been willing to work with a Democrat or the Democrats to pass it? Is that what you believe? Not to mention that the President of the NAACP would never have existed. Are you sure his replacement would have been as successful as he was? Maybe, I mean, sure, it's possible, but it's also possible that his replacement wouldn't have been as successful, and that without the progressive Pro-Civil Rights Democratic-Farmer Labor Party folks from Minnesota being a part of the political process, the Democratic Party may not have been swayed to consider the Civil Rights legislation. Or if they were, it may have taken another year or two or several more years? Same with the Executive Director of the Urban League, and all the other Minnesotans who worked hard for Civil Rights? Taking them out of the picture deprives the movement of some of the strongest and most vocal and most successful contributors to the movement. Have you heard of the Big 6 of the Civil Rights Movement? 2 of those 6 were UMners. Take away 1/3rd of any movement's leadership and a movement can be stopped or minimized. What happened to the BLM movement when it came out that one of it's founders owned or was buying several million dollar homes? That hurt that movement hard.

And what is this crack about the metoo movement?

Since you must put my school in every conservation, you are arguing there is no Rose Bowl without Washington State University because we have been a member of the conference that represented it for a century.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I'm not conflating anything. And your dumb example below proves you are clueless regarding this topic.

You are seemingly too naive or simple minded to understand just how much the State of Minnesota, and it's Flagship University contributed to the Allied war effort. And ok, you claim our country still wins WWII(thought it was the allies? But whatever) without the contributions of UMn and the state of Minnesota, so let me ask you this, WHEN? 1945? 1946? 1950? 1954? What is your best guess?

And explain to me how without Minnesota the Civil Rights Act gets passed? You do know that the Democrats were overwhelmingly against it, right? And that Hubert H Humphrey was one of the few Democrats advocating for it, right? Dirksen might not have been as vital as Humphrey, as he was a Republican and a larger percentage of Republicans supported it, but not all of them, so who knows? President Johnson seemed to believe that it was vitally important for Humphrey to get Dirksen on board, and he did get him on board, so you are saying without Humphrey, or Dirksen or any other Minnesotans to replace them, that the Anti-Civil Rights Democrats would have pushed for the Civil Rights Act to pass, or that any other Republican being the leader of the party would have been willing to work with a Democrat or the Democrats to pass it? Is that what you believe? Not to mention that the President of the NAACP would never have existed. Are you sure his replacement would have been as successful as he was? Maybe, I mean, sure, it's possible, but it's also possible that his replacement wouldn't have been as successful, and that without the progressive Pro-Civil Rights Democratic-Farmer Labor Party folks from Minnesota being a part of the political process, the Democratic Party may not have been swayed to consider the Civil Rights legislation. Or if they were, it may have taken another year or two or several more years? Same with the Executive Director of the Urban League, and all the other Minnesotans who worked hard for Civil Rights? Taking them out of the picture deprives the movement of some of the strongest and most vocal and most successful contributors to the movement. Have you heard of the Big 6 of the Civil Rights Movement? 2 of those 6 were UMners. Take away 1/3rd of any movement's leadership and a movement can be stopped or minimized. What happened to the BLM movement when it came out that one of it's founders owned or was buying several million dollar homes? That hurt that movement hard.

And what is this crack about the metoo movement?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

That post wasn't written to you, but hey, whatever floats your ignorant boat dude. Kind of weird that you'd post a meme of a Naz1? Who does that?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

And it's simple, I just stated that Minnesota, more than any other, and UMn, contributed to the Allies winning WW2, and that UMners led the Civil Rights Movement.

 

[Irish7478]

Reading comprehension problem? I've said multiple times, TWO Community Colleges.

What do they have you reading and speaking only in Latin at Notre Dame? Why do you insist on doing sh1t in Latin so much, it's not like it was the language any of scripture was written in? What's the deal? I mean, I know the real deal, but I want to know what you cultists claim it is?

there actually were Latin classes at Notre Dame. I’m guessing that none of your community colleges had anything comparable to Latin. Or English, or simple arithmetic, or spelling. Probably shoelace tying was about as difficult as any of your classes got. And you probably got a C in that class. It must be embarrassing to know that you maxed out at one of six community colleges. But the best thing is that you probably believe that you actually received an education at one or more of these Institutions of mediocre learning.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

The team from Long Island never played outside on NYC. All the dead people you claim thought they were better than the NCAA Champ that went through Texas, Oklahoma & tOSU, would be locals. No one outside of NYC area saw them play. There is no way any intelligent person can say that a much smaller sized team that never played a road game was better than a much bigger and stronger team that traveled throughout the country. Oregon only lost one home game that year when their best player was sick. You are way out of your dot discrediting the NCAA & Oregon.

New Mexico, Bradley and Loyola are just as national as Texas, Oklahoma & OSU.

All 3 of those teams had fewer losses than Oregon, Loyola only had 1 loss. Texas ended the season with 6 losses, and only left the state of Texas for one 4 game road trip to Oklahoma. Oklahoma had EIGHT losses going into the tourney, OSU had 6 losses. Compare that to Loyola's 1 loss, Bradley's 3, and NMSU's 4 losses, LIU defeated 3 far superior cbb teams.

That supposedly undersized team beat Bradley, something Oregon couldn't come even close to doing. Bradley pounded the Webfoots by double digits, 51-38, and then LIU beat Bradley. Bradley, in case you were wondering, was the FIRST PICK to go to the NCAA tourney, but they turned down the invitation. This led the committee to inviting Ohio St, who didn't really want to go, either, because of the low reputation of the NCAA tourney at that time. And Bradley wouldn't be the first time to turn down an invite to the NCAA tourney in favor of the NIT.

The NCAA tourney only took Conf Champs, so often times 2, 3, maybe 4 of the teams in the tourney weren't even ranked in the Top 20.

The NIT, on the other hand, played in Madison Square Garden, didn't restrict their invitations to Conf Champs, so they could invite highly ranked teams that didn't win their conf. This meant that all the way into the 1950s, there were people who felt the NIT was the tougher tournament and the more legit Natl Title Tourney.

And Oregon also lost to CCNY. Now LIU never played CCNY, but they obviously were better than CCNY, as CCNY didn't make it to the NIT but LIU did.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

there actually were Latin classes at Notre Dame. I’m guessing that none of your community colleges had anything comparable to Latin. Or English, or simple arithmetic, or spelling. Probably shoelace tying was about as difficult as any of your classes got. And you probably got a C in that class. It must be embarrassing to know that you maxed out at one of six community colleges. But the best thing is that you probably believe that you actually received an education at one or more of these Institutions of mediocre learning.

No, just Greek and Hebrew, languages actually relevant to reading/interpreting the Bible. Catholics don't care what the Bible says, that's why they are into Latin, because they don't want their congregants to know what they are saying. That way they can continue to fill their heads with their lies and keep them ignorant and faithful to the cult.

Btw, looked up some of Notre Dame's illustrious alums, the list includes

a felon,
a mobster,
leader of the Contras,
an arrested former President of Panama,
a fire dancer,
a chairman of McDonalds,
Pres of Miller Brewing,
a Nun,
a Bishop,
an ArchBishop,
a Cardinal,
members of a band called Umphreys McGee? lol

And Norm from Cheers.


And several made up fictional people.


So Notre Dame gets us fat and drunk, tortures us with crappy music, rips us off, robs/murders us, and bores us with sermons spoken in latin and tries to impress us with made up people who went to Notre Dame in fantasy land???

 

[TheLonestarDUCK]

New Mexico, Bradley and Loyola are just as national as Texas, Oklahoma & OSU.

All 3 of those teams had fewer losses than Oregon, Loyola only had 1 loss. Texas ended the season with 6 losses, and only left the state of Texas for one 4 game road trip to Oklahoma. Oklahoma had EIGHT losses going into the tourney, OSU had 6 losses. Compare that to Loyola's 1 loss, Bradley's 3, and NMSU's 4 losses, LIU defeated 3 far superior cbb teams.

That supposedly undersized team beat Bradley, something Oregon couldn't come even close to doing. Bradley pounded the Webfoots by double digits, 51-38, and then LIU beat Bradley. Bradley, in case you were wondering, was the FIRST PICK to go to the NCAA tourney, but they turned down the invitation. This led the committee to inviting Ohio St, who didn't really want to go, either, because of the low reputation of the NCAA tourney at that time. And Bradley wouldn't be the first time to turn down an invite to the NCAA tourney in favor of the NIT.

The NCAA tourney only took Conf Champs, so often times 2, 3, maybe 4 of the teams in the tourney weren't even ranked in the Top 20.

The NIT, on the other hand, played in Madison Square Garden, didn't restrict their invitations to Conf Champs, so they could invite highly ranked teams that didn't win their conf. This meant that all the way into the 1950s, there were people who felt the NIT was the tougher tournament and the more legit Natl Title Tourney.

And Oregon also lost to CCNY. Now LIU never played CCNY, but they obviously were better than CCNY, as CCNY didn't make it to the NIT but LIU did.

Once again Long Island played all home games!!!!! Oregon traveled by train to Chicago to play Bradley.
Too bad for Bradley they turned down a bid to potentially be the legitimate champion.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

Once again Long Island played all home games!!!!! Oregon traveled by train to Chicago to play Bradley.
Too bad for Bradley they turned down a bid to potentially be the legitimate champion.

So what if they played all home games? If Oregon was truly the best team, deserving to be called Natl Champs, they should have been able to handle a train ride. Instead they lost by a HUGE margin for those days, as team were only scoring from 30-60 points a game, so losing 51-38 was a thumping. And that was just one of FIVE losses on the season, and Oregon's NCAA tourney foes had 8, 6 & 5 losses. LIU's opponents had just 4, 3 and 1 loss. 24 losses combined when you add Oregon's vs just 8 for LIU & it's 3 opponents.

24 > 8. A LOT more!!!


And how is it you are so naive and ignorant that you have this concept that the NCAA descended down unto earth from the heavens or something, like some fully functional organization created by The Almighty Himself, that upon setting down on earth instantly was the Reigning Entity over all things involving College sports?

The NIT started before the NCAA, played in a very popular venue and didn't restrict who they invited and so invited the best teams, and even as late as 1970 a Top Ten ranked team declined an invitation to the NCAA tourney. The NCAA, in order to force the issue changed the rules. They got sued over the issue and had to pay the NIT people off, by buying the NIT, otherwise there was a chance they'd lose in court.

The NCAA NEVER had the authority to just be in charge. They only are because OVER TIME colleges came to want an organization to organize tournaments, and it took TIME for the NCAA to grow to the point where all the other smaller organizations that existed that did organize tournaments were no longer needed.

So in 1939, NO, they were not the end all and be all authority over all of college sports. They were merely one of multiple competitors who had to work hard over time to earn the respect they eventually got. Took until the 1950s to win over all of the cbb fans who, until then, looked to the NIT as the Premier Cbb Natl Title tournament in the nation.



And not just one, but TWO Natl Title granting entities named LIU the champs that year, the Helms Athletic Foundation and the Poretta-Primo Poll. So 3 well established entities had UNDEFEATED LIU as the Natl Champs, and only 1 fledgling brand new just created organization, who out of nothing but their own self interests declared the Champion of their tournament made up of LOSERS, the Natl Champ.

And now chumps like you, totally oblivious to history, who think as if the NCAA was always in charge from time eternal, point to anything the NCAA says and bows down to it as if the NCAA was a higher authority than The Almighty? In fact most of you chumps give the NCAA more respect than you do The Almighty. Shocking?! NOT!!!

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

Once again Long Island played all home games!!!!! Oregon traveled by train to Chicago to play Bradley.
Too bad for Bradley they turned down a bid to potentially be the legitimate champion.

I know of a Gopher sports team that recently won 48 ROAD games in a row, and of course they ended up the Natl Champs twice over the period of that ROAD winning streak. And when playing against the best teams in the nation, home team advantage should never be enough to tilt a game in the home team's favor, unless that home team also has a ton of talent.

And no, they didn't go on a long road trip, but you were wrong, they DID play road games. one out in Pennsylvania, and the 8 games they played in Madison Square Garden were NOT home games. NY had lots of teams, so not everyone who went to MSG to see a cbb game was an LIU fan. In fact, I bet a lot of people going to MSG would have been adversarial towards LIU, even in the NIT tourney, as MSG games were a very popular event in the biggest city in America?! Are you kidding me? lol

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I know of a Gopher sports team that recently won 48 ROAD games in a row, and of course they ended up the Natl Champs twice over the period of that ROAD winning streak. And when playing against the best teams in the nation, home team advantage should never be enough to tilt a game in the home team's favor, unless that home team also has a ton of talent.

And no, they didn't go on a long road trip, but you were wrong, they DID play road games. one out in Pennsylvania, and the 8 games they played in Madison Square Garden were NOT home games. NY had lots of teams, so not everyone who went to MSG to see a cbb game was an LIU fan. In fact, I bet a lot of people going to MSG would have been adversarial towards LIU, even in the NIT tourney, as MSG games were a very popular event in the biggest city in America?! Are you kidding me? lol

I know of a Gopher sports team that recently got depantsed by BOWLING GREEN

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

I know of a Gopher sports team that recently got depantsed by BOWLING GREEN

Yeah, I know Oregon is still undefeated, right?

Oh wait, they lost to an unranked team who then got pummeled by ASU, right? lol

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Yeah, I know Oregon is still undefeated, right?

Oh wait, they lost to an unranked team who then got pummeled by ASU, right? lol

You're trying to compare Stanford with BOWLING GREEN?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

You're trying to compare Stanford with BOWLING GREEN?

Wasn't Oregon ranked like #3 or #4 in the country at the time they lost to UNRANKED Stanford? Stanford would be 2-4 right now if not for Oregon's not being able to beat their unranked team, lol.