HEISMANPUNDIT, HUFFING GAS

I think he confuses “self-loathing” with “idiot with domain name-loathing.”

Hey, it’s like wrestling. Everyone loves a heel.

Summary of this argument from HP:

The SEC is overrated because 1)They schedule shitty teams. 2)They proceed to beat the shit out of shitty teams. 3)They have more bowl / ranked teams because of inflated win totals due to #2. & 4)Media types put way too much emphasis on rankings and number of bowl teams.

Summary of rebuttal from rest of blogosphere:

1)Yeah, so? 2)That’s what they are supposed to do. 3)Maybe, but doesn’t every conference have teams that feast off shitty teams? Texas Tech comes to mind, but they beat up on the PAC’s #2, so what does that say about the relevance of non-conference scheduling & rankings? 4)Media types put way too much emphasis on rankings and number of bowl teams.

Summary of rebuttal from HP:

1)Ahhahahaha….I’m right, you’re wrong no matter what you say…USC is great. 2)repeat #1 for the rest of eternity.

Go back to message boards dude. Clearly, that must be where you learned your reading skills.

Yes, every conference feeds off shitty teams. But some do it more than others, namely the SEC and Big 12 (thanks for the TTU reference to match my point).

I don’t know yet whether I’m right or wrong. That’s why I wiped the slate clean and said let’s see who knows his shit from here on out. If I end up knowing more than the mainstream media, then kudos to me. If not, then kudos to them. Will anyone be 100% right? No. But some may be right more often than others. That’s my goal.

Oh, and of course USC is great. They are No. 1 aren’t they? Do you disagree? Just because UGA can’t compete with them, don’t take it out on me and claim I’m a homer. You’re the one who is running an SEC-UGA blog.

I hope you come back to my site once you learn to read.

Ebony, and ivoreee…

Ouch….did I hit a nerve? I was merely trying to summarize what I’ve observed in conversations (albeit, written through comments) over the past month or so. Am I way off here? Is this not an adequate synopsis of what has been going on? If not, I’ll apologize, never to be heard from again, but I really don’t think I am too far off base.

1) I think USC is the best team in college football, and I have USC ranked #1 in my blogpoll. 2) You are a PAC homer. Admitting that fact does not take away from your opinions or quality of writing; it is just admitting the obvious. 3) I’ll get Hooked on Phonics to try to learn how to scramble a few letters together to make words. Maybe I’ll be able to read stuff that rivals your depth one day, but I’m afraid it won’t happen any time soon. It’s not my fault: the University failed me miserably.

Maybe I’ll be able to read stuff that rivals your depth one day

???

goddamn img tag stripping.

?

I try to read Highlights, but I keep getting distracted by the “What’s Different?” cover game. It’s a mixture of ADD and that damned extra chromosome that makes me looke like Sammy Sosa, a gorilla, a retard.

Umm HP -

Disagreeing with you as to what should be considered a “new-wave” offense is still considered “talking about new-wave offense”. You seem to be laboring under the impression that everything you do is unique and everyone else is stealing your brilliance. Your paranoia and delusions of grandeur remind me of L. Ron Hubbard.

The Heismandments are just a reiteration of convential wisdom.

Xenu will forgive your comments, Scott.

I hope so. Xenu’s got the H-bomb!

Added my overwordy two cents here.

dude, another dawg blogger, and quality. I think they’re running neck and neck with the UM and ND blogs now.

If it weren’t for USC the last 2-3 years, pac 10 homers would have nothing to talk about. The rest of the teams in that conference are average at best. You need only to look at their head to head with every other BCS conference, nothing else matters, not even OOC scheduling. Year in and year out the pac 10 may have one good team. Other BCS conferences routinely contain 2,3,4 quality teams.