Minnesota rules the world of football

[michaeljordan_fan]

You're the moron who thinks UConn fb is more relevant than Minnesota football, lol.

They're equally irrelevant. Neither is sniffing a major bowl.

 

[Boglodyte]

I'm more intelligent than you.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

View attachment 310264

No, actually I am not. #1, I am not a liar, I am a very honest person, in fact some people I know tell me that I am sometimes too honest. And being honest, #2, every source that I can think of supports my claim that I am very intelligent. Dozens of independent sources over several decades all back up the idea that I am very intelligent, and a gaggle of idiot sports fans, including you, won't ever convince me otherwise.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

They're equally irrelevant. Neither is sniffing a major bowl.

You don't know that. You predicted the Gophers would totally suck after the Bowling Green loss, but they went 7-2 going forward, without their best player. This year they'll have that best player, at least until he gets injured again, going forward after a much less embarrassing loss.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

You don't know that. You predicted the Gophers would totally suck after the Bowling Green loss, but they went 7-2 going forward, without their best player. This year they'll have that best player, at least until he gets injured again, going forward after a much less embarrassing loss.

You think the "Guaranteed Rate Bowl" was "sniffing a major bowl" last year?

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

They're equally irrelevant. Neither is sniffing a major bowl.

"equally"? You do realize that your Ducks haven't won any more games than the Gophers have for the past several years, since 2016, right?!

Their playing in a CCG was only because they played in a weaker Division. YES, weaker than the B1G West.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

You think the "Guaranteed Rate Bowl" was "sniffing a major bowl" last year?

I thought we were talking about THIS year? Bowls haven't been determined yet, moron.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

"equally"? You do realize that your Ducks haven't won any more games than the Gophers have for the past several years, since 2016, right?!

Their playing in a CCG was only because they played in a weaker Division. YES, weaker than the B1G West.

Oregon's been in (and won) several major bowls within the past 10 years.

When was the last NY6 bowl Minnesota won?
When was the last BCS bowl Minnesota won?

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I thought we were talking about THIS year? Bowls haven't been determined yet, moron.

You lost to Purdue. You won't be sniffing a major bowl.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

You lost to Purdue. You won't be sniffing a major bowl.

That's your biased ignorance based opinion

 

[RobBase]

OP needs a second hobby.

 

[Boglodyte]

OP needs a second hobby and to occasionally get laid

FUFY

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

OP needs a second hobby.

Ok, finally something I can agree with, lol.

 

[Wamu]

No, actually I am not. #1, I am not a liar, I am a very honest person, in fact some people I know tell me that I am sometimes too honest. And being honest, #2, every source that I can think of supports my claim that I am very intelligent. Dozens of independent sources over several decades all back up the idea that I am very intelligent, and a gaggle of idiot sports fans, including you, won't ever convince me otherwise.

If you an honest person, which you're not, you wouldn't have said the Gophers get credit for the national titles Bud Wilkinson won at OU because he played at Minnesota.

If you were an honest person, which you're not, you'd acknowledge that Minnesota hasn't won a hockey national title in nearly 20 years instead of saying they're currently one of the elite hockey programs in the country.

And anyone that has to go outta their way to tell others they're smart in fact isn't smart at all.

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

If you an honest person, which you're not, you wouldn't have said the Gophers get credit for the national titles Bud Wilkinson won at OU because he played at Minnesota.

It's called a coaching tree you moron. I've tried to explain this to you in the past, but you are too simple minded to understand simple concepts, even after I posted other sources that clearly recognized such a thing. I mean, you contradict yourself all of those times you acknowledged Miami of Ohio as "The Cradle of Coaches". Miami of Ohio does EXACTLY the same thing that I did, it claims those who played at Miami of Ohio and went off into the world and coached elsewhere. DUH. Man you are dumb.

If you were an honest person, which you're not, you'd acknowledge that Minnesota hasn't won a hockey national title in nearly 20 years instead of saying they're currently one of the elite hockey programs in the country.

When have I NOT acknowledged that Minnesota hasn't won a hockey national title in nearly 20 years??? Unlike you, and I have every right to do this, I do NOT look only at Natl Titles as a barometer for whether or not a program is nationally elite or not. And this drought UMn is going through, of not winning a Natl Title? Your favorite, solely because they've won the most titles, Michigan, has won a Natl Title in almost 25 years and only has TWO in the last 50 years.

UMn IS #1 in NCAA tourney appearances.
UMn IS #1 in NCAA tourney wins.
UMn IS tied for 1st in the production of Hobey Baker Award winners.
UMn IS the #1 producer of NHL players.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic hockey players.
UMn IS the #1 producer of Hockey Hall of Famers.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Hockey Hall of Famers.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic Hall of Famers.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic Medal winners and I don't think it's close.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic Gold Medal winners and it's definitely not even close!!!
UMn IS ranked #1/#2 right now.
UMn has finished Top 3 at least once in every single decade that NCAA hockey has existed, being named Natl Champs several times in the 20s, at least once in the 30s, and had a rare undefeated season in 1940, got to the Frozen for twice in the 50s, once in the 60s, won 3 titles in the 70s, made 4 straight Frozen Fours in the 80s, made a couple in the 90s, won back to back titles in 2002 & 2003, got to the title game in 2014, and got to the Frozen Four just last year. That's TEN STRAIGHT DECADES of being relevant and elite.

And the above references to US Olympic accomplishments, if you do a deep dive into NCAA hockey tourney history, there IS a correlation to who won titles in olympic years and who didn't. Minnesota almost never did well in olympic years, in large part because many players who otherwise would be playing for the Gophers were instead playing for and representing the country. So almost 25% of the titles won were won by teams who didn't have to go without players who were instead playing for their country. It's not a perfect 100% correlation, but there is enough evidence to show that there is a general pattern and that the olympics DID have a significant impact on who won and who didn't win Natl Titles in those olympic years. Because unlike many sports, the winter olympics went on during the college hockey season and directly inferred. Players had to skip entire collegiate seasons if they wanted to play on the olympic team.

And also, doing a deep dive into the correlation to the increase of American collegiate hockey players going into the NHL, mostly being taken out of blue blood programs before their eligibility was used up, DID have a negative effect on how well those blue blood programs performed at the NCAA tourney, with only one or two exceptions. And on the other side of the coin, teams mostly untouched by the NHL and hence full of mature older rosters of players who had played together for years, took turns doing well in the NCAA tourney, a phenomenon that hadn't ever happened before about 2008-2010 or so? The decade prior saw an significant increase in the # of non-blue blood programs getting to the Frozen Four, but the next decade, about 2008-2019 give or take a year or two, saw not only an increase in the # of non-blue blood programs getting into the Frozen Four, but also found them taking turns at winning a Title and as a group, far more often than the blue bloods did.


So you can try to tell Michigan and North Dakota and Wisconsin and MSU and Boston U fans that their teams are NOT nationally relevant or elite anymore simply because the non-blue bloods who didn't get picked on by the NHL draft were winning most of the titles with rosters full of experienced older players, you can tell them that all you want, but you won't find one single legit college hockey fan out there who will agree with you. Boston College was the one exception, they won 3 titles in the last 10-15 years, but they still only have like 4 in the last 50 years and 5 total. Denver has recently become a 2nd exception, but they also went at least 10, if not 15 years without even making the Frozen Four after their 2005 title. Minnesota could become the 3rd exception if they remain ranked #1/#2 the rest of the way through the season?




UMn ALSO has the #1 women's hockey program of ALL-TIME.

And anyone that has to go outta their way to tell others they're smart in fact isn't smart at all.

Then all of those hundreds of REAL people in REAL life who told me they thought that I was intelligent, or acted like I was intelligent, and all of those tests were ALL wrong, and you, some jackoff loser on a sports forum who has to make sh1t up in order to try to give me a hard time is the one who is right? lol See, people like you are why I keep coming back to this place, you crack me the fuck up, LMMFGDAO@Wamu!!!

 

[Wamu]

It's called a coaching tree you moron. I've tried to explain this to you in the past, but you are too simple minded to understand simple concepts, even after I posted other sources that clearly recognized such a thing. I mean, you contradict yourself all of those times you acknowledged Miami of Ohio as "The Cradle of Coaches". Miami of Ohio does EXACTLY the same thing that I did, it claims those who played at Miami of Ohio and went off into the world and coached elsewhere. DUH. Man you are dumb.

When have I NOT acknowledged that Minnesota hasn't won a hockey national title in nearly 20 years??? Unlike you, and I have every right to do this, I do NOT look only at Natl Titles as a barometer for whether or not a program is nationally elite or not. And this drought UMn is going through, of not winning a Natl Title? Your favorite, solely because they've won the most titles, Michigan, has won a Natl Title in almost 25 years and only has TWO in the last 50 years.

UMn IS #1 in NCAA tourney appearances.
UMn IS #1 in NCAA tourney wins.
UMn IS tied for 1st in the production of Hobey Baker Award winners.
UMn IS the #1 producer of NHL players.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic hockey players.
UMn IS the #1 producer of Hockey Hall of Famers.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Hockey Hall of Famers.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic Hall of Famers.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic Medal winners and I don't think it's close.
UMn IS the #1 producer of US Olympic Gold Medal winners and it's definitely not even close!!!
UMn IS ranked #1/#2 right now.
UMn has finished Top 3 at least once in every single decade that NCAA hockey has existed, being named Natl Champs several times in the 20s, at least once in the 30s, and had a rare undefeated season in 1940, got to the Frozen for twice in the 50s, once in the 60s, won 3 titles in the 70s, made 4 straight Frozen Fours in the 80s, made a couple in the 90s, won back to back titles in 2002 & 2003, got to the title game in 2014, and got to the Frozen Four just last year. That's TEN STRAIGHT DECADES of being relevant and elite.

And the above references to US Olympic accomplishments, if you do a deep dive into NCAA hockey tourney history, there IS a correlation to who won titles in olympic years and who didn't. Minnesota almost never did well in olympic years, in large part because many players who otherwise would be playing for the Gophers were instead playing for and representing the country. So almost 25% of the titles won were won by teams who didn't have to go without players who were instead playing for their country. It's not a perfect 100% correlation, but there is enough evidence to show that there is a general pattern and that the olympics DID have a significant impact on who won and who didn't win Natl Titles in those olympic years. Because unlike many sports, the winter olympics went on during the college hockey season and directly inferred. Players had to skip entire collegiate seasons if they wanted to play on the olympic team.

And also, doing a deep dive into the correlation to the increase of American collegiate hockey players going into the NHL, mostly being taken out of blue blood programs before their eligibility was used up, DID have a negative effect on how well those blue blood programs performed at the NCAA tourney, with only one or two exceptions. And on the other side of the coin, teams mostly untouched by the NHL and hence full of mature older rosters of players who had played together for years, took turns doing well in the NCAA tourney, a phenomenon that hadn't ever happened before about 2008-2010 or so? The decade prior saw an significant increase in the # of non-blue blood programs getting to the Frozen Four, but the next decade, about 2008-2019 give or take a year or two, saw not only an increase in the # of non-blue blood programs getting into the Frozen Four, but also found them taking turns at winning a Title and as a group, far more often than the blue bloods did.


So you can try to tell Michigan and North Dakota and Wisconsin and MSU and Boston U fans that their teams are NOT nationally relevant or elite anymore simply because the non-blue bloods who didn't get picked on by the NHL draft were winning most of the titles with rosters full of experienced older players, you can tell them that all you want, but you won't find one single legit college hockey fan out there who will agree with you. Boston College was the one exception, they won 3 titles in the last 10-15 years, but they still only have like 4 in the last 50 years and 5 total. Denver has recently become a 2nd exception, but they also went at least 10, if not 15 years without even making the Frozen Four after their 2005 title. Minnesota could become the 3rd exception if they remain ranked #1/#2 the rest of the way through the season?




UMn ALSO has the #1 women's hockey program of ALL-TIME.



Then all of those hundreds of REAL people in REAL life who told me they thought that I was intelligent, or acted like I was intelligent, and all of those tests were ALL wrong, and you, some jackoff loser on a sports forum who has to make sh1t up in order to try to give me a hard time is the one who is right? lol See, people like you are why I keep coming back to this place, you crack me the fuck up, LMMFGDAO@Wamu!!!

You really need to stop with these stupid mini essay's.

"It's called the coaching tree you moron."


If that's true then tiny Kent State can take credit for all of Saban's national titles. It doesn't work that way.

If what you said is true, which it isn't, then Army can take credit for Coach K's national titles.



A couple college hockey questions that you probably won't have a legit answer for.

1. Has it been nearly 20 years since Minnesota won a national title? It's a very simple yes or no answer.

2. Does Minnesota have the most hockey national titles?

3. Has Minnesota only won 3 national titles the last 43 years?


Why can't you be a rational Minnesota fan like every other Gophers fan on this site?

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

That's your biased ignorance based opinion

Stakes for Minnesota not making a NY6 bowl?

 

[VikingFan2k2]

This went really well for you Fred.

3 weeks of your shit talking has the whole damn board rooting against us mainly just to see you knocked off your high horse.

"When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." -Paul Brown

Advice you should follow.

 

[Black Adam]

You really need to stop with these stupid mini essay's.

"It's called the coaching tree you moron."


If that's true then tiny Kent State can take credit for all of Saban's national titles. It doesn't work that way.

If what you said is true, which it isn't, then Army can take credit for Coach K's national titles.



A couple college hockey questions that you probably won't have a legit answer for.

1. Has it been nearly 20 years since Minnesota won a national title? It's a very simple yes or no answer.

2. Does Minnesota have the most hockey national titles?

3. Has Minnesota only won 3 national titles the last 43 years?


Why can't you be a rational Minnesota fan like every other Gophers fan on this site?

DeadHeadFred sure knows how to liven up a party...

 

[fredsdeadfriend]

You really need to stop with these stupid mini essay's.

"It's called the coaching tree you moron."

Trouble reading big words?

If that's true then tiny Kent State can take credit for all of Saban's national titles. It doesn't work that way.

Who was Saban's coach while he was at Kent St? What other great coaches has Kent St as a program or that particular coach produced/mentored/taught/coached?

If what you said is true, which it isn't, then Army can take credit for Coach K's national titles.

To a point, they do, I'm sure.

Miami of Ohio takes credit for every coach that ever played there, coached there, was an asst coach there, and/or was a graduate asst there.