Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:09 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:02 pm Posts: 6405 Location: DC Gender: Male
pearljamfan80 wrote:
Clemson.
Yes. And to make matters worse, I like the Redskins. I'm in a perpetual mediocre state. The Skins will fall somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Clemson, actually has no expectations this year, and with Bowden gone, no hype, a lot of returning starters (7 on O; 8 on D), Kevin Steele (from Alabama) as D Coordinator, I think the Tigers may surprise this year. Not to mention CJ Spiller could be huge for them. QB unfortunately is an unproven position where a Sophomore and Freshman are going at it for the starting job. I have a feeling having an inexperienced QB will cost the team a few games. They'll be tougher than under Bowden, but probably finish out 8-4 or 9-3; good but not great (as usual).
Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:13 pm
Stone's Bitch
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:33 am Posts: 35357 Location: Los Angeles, CA Gender: Male
darth_vedder wrote:
pearljamfan80 wrote:
Clemson.
Yes. And to make matters worse, I like the Redskins. I'm in a perpetual mediocre state. The Skins will fall somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Clemson, actually has no expectations this year, and with Bowden gone, no hype, a lot of returning starters (7 on O; 8 on D), Kevin Steele (from Alabama) as D Coordinator, I think the Tigers may surprise this year. Not to mention CJ Spiller could be huge for them. QB unfortunately is an unproven position where a Sophomore and Freshman are going at it for the starting job. I have a feeling having an inexperienced QB will cost the team a few games. They'll be tougher than under Bowden, but probably finish out 8-4 or 9-3; good but not great (as usual).
Clemson and Washington are definitely a recipe for mediocrity.
_________________ Winner, RM all-time NBA tourney.
Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:32 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm Posts: 9282 Location: Atlanta Gender: Male
darth_vedder wrote:
pearljamfan80 wrote:
Clemson.
Yes. And to make matters worse, I like the Redskins. I'm in a perpetual mediocre state. The Skins will fall somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Clemson, actually has no expectations this year, and with Bowden gone, no hype, a lot of returning starters (7 on O; 8 on D), Kevin Steele (from Alabama) as D Coordinator, I think the Tigers may surprise this year. Not to mention CJ Spiller could be huge for them. QB unfortunately is an unproven position where a Sophomore and Freshman are going at it for the starting job. I have a feeling having an inexperienced QB will cost the team a few games. They'll be tougher than under Bowden, but probably finish out 8-4 or 9-3; good but not great (as usual).
At least you have Chris Cooley... he's been hilariously entertaining.
Maybe you get lucky and everything finally clicks and Clemson finally plays to their level of talent. They certainly have plenty of it. Daquan Bowers is a year older. Spiller gets the spotlight, Jacoby Ford should be as fast as any WR or DB in the ACC. Not starting against Bama is a plus.
It's too bad James Lattimore seems bound and determined to leave the state.... Byrnes is so close to Clemson and he is an absolute stud.
Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:48 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:02 pm Posts: 6405 Location: DC Gender: Male
pearljamfan80 wrote:
darth_vedder wrote:
pearljamfan80 wrote:
Clemson.
Yes. And to make matters worse, I like the Redskins. I'm in a perpetual mediocre state. The Skins will fall somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Clemson, actually has no expectations this year, and with Bowden gone, no hype, a lot of returning starters (7 on O; 8 on D), Kevin Steele (from Alabama) as D Coordinator, I think the Tigers may surprise this year. Not to mention CJ Spiller could be huge for them. QB unfortunately is an unproven position where a Sophomore and Freshman are going at it for the starting job. I have a feeling having an inexperienced QB will cost the team a few games. They'll be tougher than under Bowden, but probably finish out 8-4 or 9-3; good but not great (as usual).
Clemson and Washington are definitely a recipe for mediocrity.
Ha, yeah, it's actually quite sad. Thing is, both teams are pretty similar...good talent, huge fan base, play tough against equal or better opponents (Clemson will beat Miami or FSU, or Tennessee; Redskins will beat Dallas, Philly, NYG), but both seem to play down to the level of competition (Clemson loses to Duke or Maryland; Redskins lose to St. Louis, or Cincinnati).
Still though, new coaches with both team, new attitude, maybe different results. Zorn and the players seem very comfy with each other this year, and Dabo (Clemson's coach) has great rapport with his team (he was considered one of the best recruiters under Tommy Bowden). Things are just getting started so that new wave of optimism is hitting me. I'll revisit this in November and see how I feel.
Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:53 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:02 pm Posts: 6405 Location: DC Gender: Male
Electromatic wrote:
darth_vedder wrote:
pearljamfan80 wrote:
Clemson.
Yes. And to make matters worse, I like the Redskins. I'm in a perpetual mediocre state. The Skins will fall somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Clemson, actually has no expectations this year, and with Bowden gone, no hype, a lot of returning starters (7 on O; 8 on D), Kevin Steele (from Alabama) as D Coordinator, I think the Tigers may surprise this year. Not to mention CJ Spiller could be huge for them. QB unfortunately is an unproven position where a Sophomore and Freshman are going at it for the starting job. I have a feeling having an inexperienced QB will cost the team a few games. They'll be tougher than under Bowden, but probably finish out 8-4 or 9-3; good but not great (as usual).
At least you have Chris Cooley... he's been hilariously entertaining.
Maybe you get lucky and everything finally clicks and Clemson finally plays to their level of talent. They certainly have plenty of it. Daquan Bowers is a year older. Spiller gets the spotlight, Jacoby Ford should be as fast as any WR or DB in the ACC. Not starting against Bama is a plus.
It's too bad James Lattimore seems bound and determined to leave the state.... Byrnes is so close to Clemson and he is an absolute stud.
Cooley is definitely a fan favorite. Hopefully he'll be with the Skins for awhile...he has the potential to get up there with other fan favorites like Sonny Jurgensen, John Riggins, Sean Taylor, Art Monk, and Darrel Green.
Clemson has no doubt had some great recruiting under Tommy Bowden. He signed some big name guys, but it always seems to be skewed. Like we recruit great receivers, running backs, and d-line, but not so much with O-line, and linebackers. The pieces never seem to fit quite right.
Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 7:25 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm Posts: 9282 Location: Atlanta Gender: Male
darth_vedder wrote:
Electromatic wrote:
darth_vedder wrote:
pearljamfan80 wrote:
Clemson.
Yes. And to make matters worse, I like the Redskins. I'm in a perpetual mediocre state. The Skins will fall somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Clemson, actually has no expectations this year, and with Bowden gone, no hype, a lot of returning starters (7 on O; 8 on D), Kevin Steele (from Alabama) as D Coordinator, I think the Tigers may surprise this year. Not to mention CJ Spiller could be huge for them. QB unfortunately is an unproven position where a Sophomore and Freshman are going at it for the starting job. I have a feeling having an inexperienced QB will cost the team a few games. They'll be tougher than under Bowden, but probably finish out 8-4 or 9-3; good but not great (as usual).
At least you have Chris Cooley... he's been hilariously entertaining.
Maybe you get lucky and everything finally clicks and Clemson finally plays to their level of talent. They certainly have plenty of it. Daquan Bowers is a year older. Spiller gets the spotlight, Jacoby Ford should be as fast as any WR or DB in the ACC. Not starting against Bama is a plus.
It's too bad James Lattimore seems bound and determined to leave the state.... Byrnes is so close to Clemson and he is an absolute stud.
Cooley is definitely a fan favorite. Hopefully he'll be with the Skins for awhile...he has the potential to get up there with other fan favorites like Sonny Jurgensen, John Riggins, Sean Taylor, Art Monk, and Darrel Green.
Clemson has no doubt had some great recruiting under Tommy Bowden. He signed some big name guys, but it always seems to be skewed. Like we recruit great receivers, running backs, and d-line, but not so much with O-line, and linebackers. The pieces never seem to fit quite right.
So are who's your team(s)?
Atlanta Falcons Braves Hawks Thrashers UGA, UNC I typically pull for Georgia Tech too most of the time too because they are local and I watch them a lot. I know that's all blasphemous and all but I don't really care. I have friends and family at both schools.
I probably care the most about the Falcons and the Braves.
I was at Death Valley with some Clemson friends the year Kelly Campbell caught that ridiculous pass in the back of the end zone when Tech won it in the closing seconds.... depressing night. Must have been 2000.
My grandfather graduated from Clemson so I've always had a soft spot for the Tigers.
SALT LAKE CITY - The University of Utah will play a home-and-away series with Big East power Pitt, the two schools announced today.
The first game is scheduled for Sept. 11, 2010 in Salt Lake City. The Utes and Panthers will play in Pittsburgh on Oct. 15, 2011.
Utah's non-conference schedule for 2010 is now complete and figures to be one of the best in school history with three BCS opponents. Along with Pitt, the Utes will play at Iowa State and Notre Dame. San Jose State is the other non-league foe.
"We are excited about being able to put together a series with Pittsburgh," Utah Director of Athletics Dr. Chris Hill said. "It gives our players a chance to compete against a Big East school and play in that part of the country."
"Pitt-Utah is one of those rarely played intersectional matchups that should be very appealing for our fans and national television," Pittsburgh athletic director Steve Pederson said. "Utah has been one of college football's biggest winners over the past several years, giving us a challenging and compelling opponent."
Utah and Pittsburgh have never met in the regular season. The Utes won the 2005 Fiesta Bowl in the only meeting between the two teams, 35-7, completing a 12-0 season behind future No. 1 draft pick Alex Smith.
Utah is coming off a 13-0 season and Sugar Bowl win over Alabama. The Utes finished with a No. 2 national ranking--the best in school history. Pittsburgh was 9-4 in 2008, playing Oregon State in the Brut Sun Bowl.
STORRS — - UConn and Michigan have reached an agreement on a home-and-home series that will see the Huskies open the 2010 season at Michigan Stadium and the Wolverines play UConn at Rentschler Field in 2013, a source has confirmed.
The individual, who requested anonymity because of the ongoing nature of the negotiations, said UConn will travel to Ann Arbor, Mich., for the opening of the renovated Michigan Stadium on Sept. 4, 2010. Michigan is then aiming to fulfill its end of the deal with a game at Rentschler Field on Sept. 21, 2013.
UConn officials could not confirm the report Thursday afternoon.
"We don't comment on anything until the contracts are signed," said UConn spokesman Mike Enright.
Michigan coach Rich Rodriguez told reporters gathered at Big Ten Media Day in Chicago earlier this week that the Wolverines were looking for a Bowl Championship Series conference opponent that would be open to not having their return game for a couple of years.
The Huskies were open to that deal as long as Michigan was willing to travel to East Hartford and not play the UConn home game at another site. UConn's as-yet-unconfirmed series with Notre Dame had the Huskies playing their home games at either Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass., or the new Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, N.J. They will play Notre Dame in South Bend, Ind., on Nov. 21.
Part of the reason why the contract has not been signed is because UConn is currently scheduled to open the 2010 season against Northeastern at Rentschler Field. Officials at Northeastern could not confirm the game has been moved or canceled, though there is a chance the two teams could meet in 2011.
Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:30 pm
Resident Frat Dick
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 7:50 pm Posts: 10229 Location: WA (aka Waaaaaaaahhhh!!) Gender: Male
BeldingX2 wrote:
As much as I hate SC, I have to admit...I always do at least a triple-take with the song girls. It's the outfits man...something about those outfits. They look damn good and you can't turn away.
BUT...take a close look at this crops' faces. Seriously. Only about half of them are what I would describe as at least pretty. The other half...dress 'em up in anything but this outfit, and they're not getting your attention.
Post subject: Re: COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2009-2010, bitches
Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:36 am
Administrator
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
Bammer wrote:
As much as I hate SC, I have to admit...I always do at least a triple-take with the song girls. It's the outfits man...something about those outfits. They look damn good and you can't turn away.
BUT...take a close look at this crops' faces. Seriously. Only about half of them are what I would describe as at least pretty. The other half...dress 'em up in anything but this outfit, and they're not getting your attention.
I think it's at about this moment where someone like Ellis would request pictures of UW cheerleaders for comparison.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum