I bet all your co workers at McDonald's love that joke.
See, I can be as lame as you. Wanna move onto yo momma jokes next?
As a hawk troll on CF, you and your posts are a joke.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I bet all your co workers at McDonald's love that joke.
See, I can be as lame as you. Wanna move onto yo momma jokes next?
I mean a loss is a loss, but you can't actually sit there and think you'd have the same exact feeling after a loss to 5-7 Purdue, compared to a loss against a 2-10 Rutgers. Both are losses that realistically shouldn't happen, but only one is flat-out embarrassing.No not really. Sure you might beat LMU 72-20, and WVU 38-10. So yeah the degree of victory might be different, but you shouldn't lose to a non bowl eligible team.
You seriously don't know that there were 5 computer metrics that were used in the computer rankings? None was weighted greater than the other, they were all used. I wonder why they didn't just rely on Sagarin if it is so super duper awesome and correct?
Great rebuttal, straw man.LOL, Sagarin ratings again. Does Sagarin own this site or something?
Iowa played 16 bowl eligible teams over the last 2 years, while ISU has played 15. Any team that can't get bowl eligible is a cupcake pure and simple.
LOL, Sagarin ratings again. Does Sagarin own this site or something?
Iowa played 16 bowl eligible teams over the last 2 years, while ISU has played 15. Any team that can't get bowl eligible is a cupcake pure and simple.
There are different levels to cupcake status because there is a huge difference between a 5-7 team and a 2-10 team.
I mean a loss is a loss, but you can't actually sit there and think you'd have the same exact feeling after a loss to 5-7 Purdue, compared to a loss against a 2-10 Rutgers. Both are losses that realistically shouldn't happen, but only one is flat-out embarrassing.
You keep mentioning these 7 SOS metrics but won't tell anyone but they are. That's all I need to know
Which is why we had a much harder strength of schedule
I have linked it like 4 or 5 times.
You mean a weaker SOS according to 5 out of 7 reputable SOS metrics.
This is a lie. You made them up otherwise you'd link them
Wanna make a bet on if I have linked them before? Name the terms. If you aren't willing to bet, it just proves you already know I have linked them multiple times. Put up or shut up Twins.
I don't bet on an internet message board but yes if I did I would because you're lying. No way there are 7 reputable SOS metrics out there and 5 of them have Iowa's schedule harder. The only two I know of are Sagarin which is the best and Massey which I don't use and both say Iowa State had a much harder schedule
Nicely done, already hedging your bet. You accused me of making up the metrics, and you so every deftly hedged that portion out now. Kuddos sir. If only @cycloner29 had 1/2 your savvy he might be worth engaging.
Iowa had a tougher SOS in a 5 out of 7 reputable SOS metrics.
Just link them dude JFC.I have linked it like 4 or 5 times. Just because you aren't that bright and can't remember it (or at least for some reason feel like you need to pretend you don't remember every time) isn't my problem.
Just link them dude JFC.
I don't bet on an internet message board but yes if I did I would because you're lying. No way there are 7 reputable SOS metrics out there and 5 of them have Iowa's schedule harder. The only two I know of are Sagarin which is the best and Massey which I don't use and both say Iowa State had a much harder schedule
I love how you only "know" the two that rated ISU SOS tougher as well. The other 5 had the following:
Iowa 19, ISU 26
Iowa 23, ISU 37
Iowa 21, ISU 22
Iowa 12, ISU 21
Iowa 9, ISU 36
I think I'll also cherry pick and say that Iowa's final SOS was #9 and ISU was 36.