you wouldI think it's directly related to your suggestion that ties are acceptable
you wouldI think it's directly related to your suggestion that ties are acceptable
Can you please explain how it's notyou would
I see a world of difference between "how the rules are setup" vs "what strategy a team / coach employs within a given set of rules".Can you please explain how it's not
Ties are stupid. Figure out a way to find a winner of the football game that gets played one time a week. That was my point.I see a world of difference between "how the rules are setup" vs "what strategy a team / coach employs within a given set of rules".
you gif was addressing the latter, mine the former. get rid of OT, but by all means, coaches and players should "play to win", not "play for the tie".
TV. They want to get to the next game. Or Sportscenter.I’m struggling with coming up with a reason the current system needs to be changed. They got it right.
This isn't the old days, there should be no ties. I'm remember back in the 80s and early 90s where it wasn't real uncommon to see them.
No I didn't, 19-19, if I recall. I get what you're saying though. That could've been another year, not sure.You surely loved that 1991 game against the ****ers.
No I didn't, 19-19, if I recall. I get what you're saying though. That could've been another year, not sure.
Very comfortable playing conditions too.It was that 1991 Nubs game that resulted in the 19-19 tie. Woody Paige likened that to kissing your own sister.
Very comfortable playing conditions too.
Nothing better than drinking a bunch of beer and then needing 20 minutes to strip down enough to get rid of it.Yep nice weather that day.
Nothing better than drinking a bunch of beer and then needing 20 minutes to strip down enough to get rid of it.
This tweet isn’t on SportsCenter’s official Twitter feed.
Yeah. . . I suspect "fooling" because it's ESPN "retweeting" SportsCenterThis tweet isn’t on SportsCenter’s official Twitter feed.
its not an April fools if nobody cares
Where’s Colorado?Rutgers currently has the 6th ranked recruiting class nationally for 2022.
5th in the Pac, 31st Nationally, with a .8557 rating. Tuckers one full class was 36th nationally and a .8563.Where’s Colorado?
Yes, that is impressive, but keep in mind that is 77 of 1200 over a 4 year span. Not 25% of the Top 300 in a single year.ESPN has an article posted today that Alabama is expected to win the National title again, despite losing weapons all over the field from this years National Championship team. How, the article asked: "The Tide have signed 77 ESPN 300 players in their past four recruiting classes"
WOW! 77 top 300 players in a four year span
I would take 77 over the 10 from CU in that same time period. The Buffs 10 include Grant Polley and Jason Harris who never played, 4 JC transfers and Moretti, leaving only 3 players who were signed out of HS who have actually played. That 77 number is enormous from both a talent and depth perspective.Yes, that is impressive, but keep in mind that is 77 of 1200 over a 4 year span. Not 25% of the Top 300 in a single year.
Even Alabama couldn't over-sign a class to 77. Sure, 50 is possible, but never 77.Yes, that is impressive, but keep in mind that is 77 of 1200 over a 4 year span. Not 25% of the Top 300 in a single year.