News:

OK A-holes.  It's fixed.  Enjoy the orange links, because I have no fucking idea how to change them.  I basically learned scripting in four days to fix this damned thing. - Andy

Main Menu

Author Topic: 2009 College Football Thread  ( 120,405 )

BC

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 2,576
    • bricrozier@hotmail.com
  • Location: Central Illinois
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #15 on: September 05, 2009, 04:57:18 PM »
The Bears better make the playoffs, or I am just going to start running over people. This is fucking ridiculous, yet another shitastic sports year is circling down the drain...
Desipio is a free-flowing website that occasionally touches on the immaturity, foolishness and outright stupidity of its readership.

Saul Goodman

  • Not NOT Sterling
  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 6,511
  • Location: California
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #16 on: September 05, 2009, 05:39:55 PM »
Go Cats!  After toppling mighty Towson, anything is possible.
You two wanna go stick your wangs in a hornet's nest, it's a free country.  But how come I always gotta get sloppy seconds, huh?

CT III

  • Administrator
  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 3,828
  • Location: NonDescript
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #17 on: September 05, 2009, 05:49:23 PM »
Quote from: Waco Kid on September 05, 2009, 04:56:49 PM
Quote from: Slak on September 05, 2009, 04:48:40 PM
So what did you guys think of that Illini season? Wasn't very long or exciting.

At least we found out early that they are shitty.

I like that you guys still had enough faith in the team to be disappointed.

TDubbs

  • TJG's 5th best writer
  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,894
  • Location: Chicago
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #18 on: September 06, 2009, 07:10:48 AM »
Quote from: CT III on September 05, 2009, 05:49:23 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on September 05, 2009, 04:56:49 PM
Quote from: Slak on September 05, 2009, 04:48:40 PM
So what did you guys think of that Illini season? Wasn't very long or exciting.

At least we found out early that they are shitty.

I like that you guys still had enough faith in the team to be disappointed.

I blacked out last night, so I don't remember just how shitty they actually were. 
But if Weebs doesn't care about them, I don't either. 
Sincerely,
TDubbs
THERE ARE TOO MANY MEN ON THE FIELD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CBStew

  • Most people my age are dead.
  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 4,000
  • Location: Berkeley, California
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2009, 10:59:56 AM »
I would like to put in a word for the Cal Bears.     That word is "Best".
If I had known that I was going to live this long I would have taken better care of myself.   (Plagerized from numerous other folks)

BC

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 2,576
    • bricrozier@hotmail.com
  • Location: Central Illinois
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #20 on: September 06, 2009, 01:24:03 PM »
Quote from: CBStew on September 06, 2009, 10:59:56 AM
I would like to put in a word for the Cal Bears.     That word is "Best".

Cal looked "Capable of beating USC" dangerous last night. Good stuff from those guys.
Desipio is a free-flowing website that occasionally touches on the immaturity, foolishness and outright stupidity of its readership.

Ghost of Dave Rosello

  • Pollyellon Fan Club
  • Posts: 165
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #21 on: September 07, 2009, 05:36:05 PM »
Holy hell is Rutgers getting its ass kicked by Cincinnati.

thehawk

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 2,626
  • Location: Chicago
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #22 on: September 07, 2009, 11:12:53 PM »

Can the best game of the year be in the first week?  Univ of Miami 38, FSU 34.  Game ended on a FSU dropped ball in the end zone with no time left.  Six lead changes. Miami QB sets the record for passing yardage in a UM-FSU game (and there have been more than a few decent quarterbacks in that series).  Neither defense was very good, but still a really entertaining game with loads of huge plays.  And Bowden lost.
Andre Dawson paid his $1,000 fine for the Joe West incident with style. Dawson wrote ``Donation for the blind`` in the memo section of his personal check.

Gil Gunderson

  • I do justice-y things.
  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Location: Oakland, CA
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2009, 01:52:09 AM »
Why couldn't the Illini tackle anyone? Also, how can you miss a fucking extra point?  What the fuck?

Tinker to Evers to Chance

  • F@#$in' New Guy
  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,569
  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2009, 02:50:23 AM »
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on September 08, 2009, 01:52:09 AM
Why couldn't the Illini New Mexico State tackle anyone? Also, how can you miss a fucking extra point?  What the fuck?

TEC'd.
Validated by Thrillho - Vicinity WG543441 on or about 102345AUG08

I don't get this KurtEvans photoshop at all.

PenFoe

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 4,739
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2009, 11:02:32 AM »
And the National Champions continue their reign...
I can't believe I even know these people. I'm ashamed of my internet life.

Chuck to Chuck

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 4,831
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2009, 11:09:11 AM »
Yes, Iowa got lucky.  But can anyone explain the logic of why a blocked kick that doesn't cross the line of scrimmage that is recovered by the kicking team results in a clock stoppage?  Why is that any different from a fumble recovery or a recovery of a dropped lateral?

The clock should have run out after the first block.

SKO

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 8,694
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2009, 11:11:28 AM »
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 08, 2009, 11:09:11 AM
Yes, Iowa got lucky.  But can anyone explain the logic of why a blocked kick that doesn't cross the line of scrimmage that is recovered by the kicking team results in a clock stoppage?  Why is that any different from a fumble recovery or a recovery of a dropped lateral?

The clock should have run out after the first block.

Iowa State will beat them. Their inability to stop Northern Iowa when it went 5 wide is concerning, considering Iowa State runs a spread with a pretty decent quarterback in Austin Arnaud.
I will vow, for the sake of peace, not to complain about David Ross between now and his first start next year- 10/26/2015

MAD

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,920
  • Location: Chicago
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #28 on: September 08, 2009, 11:15:11 AM »
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 08, 2009, 11:09:11 AM
Yes, Iowa got lucky.  But can anyone explain the logic of why a blocked kick that doesn't cross the line of scrimmage that is recovered by the kicking team results in a clock stoppage?  Why is that any different from a fumble recovery or a recovery of a dropped lateral?

Considering that he is not only our Resident Desipio Rules Expert but an Iowa grad, I would expect a Dave B. post in 3...2...1...
I think he's more of the appendix of Desipio.  Yeah, it's here and you're vaguely aware of it, but only if reminded.  The only time anyone notices it is when it ruptures (on Weebs in the video game thread).  Beyond that, though, it's basically useless and offers no redeeming value.
Eli G. (6-22-10)

Chuck to Chuck

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 4,831
Re: 2009 College Football Thread
« Reply #29 on: September 08, 2009, 11:21:10 AM »
Quote from: MAD on September 08, 2009, 11:15:11 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 08, 2009, 11:09:11 AM
Yes, Iowa got lucky.  But can anyone explain the logic of why a blocked kick that doesn't cross the line of scrimmage that is recovered by the kicking team results in a clock stoppage?  Why is that any different from a fumble recovery or a recovery of a dropped lateral?

Considering that he is not only our Resident Desipio Rules Expert but an Iowa grad, I would expect a Dave B. post in 3...2...1...
If the answer is, "Because the rule is written that way," then it's a fucking dumb rule.  One hopes it's not because a blocked FG takes longer to untangle the bodies than any other type of play does.

There is some logic here.  Right?