Goatnapper/ER's theory of great teams under fire

[SeattleUte]

Goatnapper and ER hold that you judge an undefeated team's place in history not by the best or most impressive games or game it played, but by the struggles. Do you agree? Is the measure of 2009 Alabama's strength its 12-10 win at home over Tennesee? Or its 32-13 neutral field win over Florida? Honestly, which game defines this Alabama team in your mind? I think ER and Goatnapper are on their own planet. This isn't how the pundits, coaches or public remember and evaluate undefeated teams. ER/Goatnapper's judgment is warped by pure, unadulterated hate.

[SCcoug]

Goatnapper and ER hold that you judge an undefeated team's place in history not by the best or most impressive game or game it played, but by the struggles. Do you agree? Is the measure of 2009 Alabama's strength its 12-10 win at home over Tennesee? Or its 32-13 neutral field win over Florida? Honestly, which game defines this Alabama team in your mind? I think ER and Goatnapper are on their own planet. This isn't how the pundits, coaches or public remember and evaluate undefeated teams. ER/Goatnapper's judgment is warped by pure, unadulterated hate.

Why do they hate Alabama?

[SeattleUte]

Why do they hate Alabama?

They hate Utah. So they say 2009 TCU is better than 2008 Utah while the W-L records and who the teams beat and how they finished up (including Utah annihilating BYU) don't support this. They just pull the opinion out of their asses because they hate Utah.

[FN Phat]

Because I value 'Napper's and ER's opinion more than your own, I will go on record as saying that I agree with them.

As a side note, I am sure that you are twisting what they said.

[Blueintheface]

They hate Utah. So they say 2009 TCU is better than 2008 Utah while the W-L records and who the teams beat and how they finished up (including Utah annihilating BYU) don't support this. They just pull the opinion out of their asses because they hate Utah.

LOL! You are so dumb it's funny.

[SeattleUte]

LOL! You are so dumb it's funny.

What a wit you are.

From now on, why don't you BYU fans just keep your conclusory opinions to yourselves. They're biased, and they're worthless. I'm happy to have a discussion comparing W-L and schedules in deciding which is the all-time best WAC/MWC team 1984 BYU, 1996 BYU, 2004 Utah, 2008 Utah or 2009 TCU.

I think we can quickly elimiate the BYU teams as having beating nobody of note. Your advocacy for 2009 TCU over 2008 Utah is a damning admission that a ranking in and of itself doesn't answer the question.

You're an idiot. Most of your posts are about how much you loath your own coach and team.

[TripletDaddy]

What a wit you are.

...

You're an idiot.

lol

[Blueintheface]

What a wit you are.

From now on, why don't you BYU fans just keep your conclusory opinions to yourselves. They're biased, and they're worthless. I'm happy to have a discussion comparing W-L and schedules in deciding which is the all-time best WAC/MWC team 1984 BYU, 1996 BYU, 2004 Utah, 2008 Utah or 2009 TCU.

I think we can quickly elimiate the BYU teams as having beating nobody of note. Your advocacy for 2009 TCU over 2008 Utah is a damning admission that a ranking in and of itself doesn't answer the question.

You're an idiot. Most of your posts are about how much you loath your own coach and team.

I think I hurt its feelings. The irony of every post you make is pure comedy gold. It's time to confess, SU. Someone else took the LSAT for you didn't they?

[Maximus]

What a wit you are.

From now on, why don't you BYU fans just keep your conclusory opinions to yourselves. They're biased, and they're worthless. I'm happy to have a discussion comparing W-L and schedules in deciding which is the all-time best WAC/MWC team 1984 BYU, 1996 BYU, 2004 Utah, 2008 Utah or 2009 TCU.

I think we can quickly elimiate the BYU teams as having beating nobody of note. Your advocacy for 2009 TCU over 2008 Utah is a damning admission that a ranking in and of itself doesn't answer the question.

You're an idiot. Most of your posts are about how much you loath your own coach and team.

You cant say one team is better than the other based on schedules alone. We dont know how good of team 1996 BYu could have beaten, the best team they had the chance to beat was A&M and Kansas State. Could they have beaten #1, #2 or #3? We don't know. Could 2006 BYU have beaten a top 10 team at the end of the year? We dont know. Could 2004 Utah have beaten USC? We dont know. We do know 2008 Utah barely beat every team on its scheldule up until BYU and Bama. We also know TCU rocked everyone minus Air Force and Clemson. Including a BYU that is better than last year, at home, and a ranked Utah. That is what we know.

[Non Sequitur]

What a wit you are.

From now on, why don't you BYU fans just keep your conclusory opinions to yourselves. They're biased, and they're worthless. I'm happy to have a discussion comparing W-L and schedules in deciding which is the all-time best WAC/MWC team 1984 BYU, 1996 BYU, 2004 Utah, 2008 Utah or 2009 TCU.

I think we can quickly elimiate the BYU teams as having beating nobody of note. Your advocacy for 2009 TCU over 2008 Utah is a damning admission that a ranking in and of itself doesn't answer the question.

You're an idiot. Most of your posts are about how much you loath your own coach and team.

I don't think just because you give the edge to 2009 TCU doesn't mean you're biased. If I were to rank the above teams, I do it like this:

1 - 2004 Utah
2 - 2009 TCU
3 - 2008 Utah
4 - 1996 BYU

I don't include 1984 BYU, because it was just too long ago and the level of competition was so different -- like comparing Bart Starr to Peyton Manning.

BTW, it is kind of funny that you're calling out BYU fans for being non-objective. Not that its not often true, just ironic that the accusation comes from you.

[SeattleUte]

I don't think just because you give the edge to 2009 TCU doesn't mean you're biased. If I were to rank the above teams, I do it like this:

1 - 2004 Utah
2 - 2009 TCU
3 - 2008 Utah
4 - 1996 BYU

I don't include 1984 BYU, because it was just too long ago and the level of competition was so different -- like comparing Bart Starr to Peyton Manning.

BTW, it is kind of funny that you're calling out BYU fans for being non-objective. Not that its not often true, just ironic that the accusation comes from you.

All I'm asking is that we look at the best wins, etc. To take a neutral example, anyone picking 2004 Utah over 2008 Utah, it's just an opinion, because 2004 Utah didn't beat a single top 10 team.

How can people focus on 2008 Utah's struggles (and heroic wins) in a couple of regular season games and have that trump the last two games of the season? Teams mature and develop. In NCAA basketball you see teams roll to the title that had early struggles all the time. The current no. 1 football team Alabama beat a so so Tennessee team 12-10 at home this year.

If Texas beats Alabama in the BCS bowl how much will its cliffhanger against Nebraska matter? The public cares about wins; they mainly care about how those wins look in the really big, championship level games against great teams.

2008 Utah had its Tyus Edney dash. That's not uncommon when a championship caliber team plays quality teams several times.

[Blueintheface]

All I'm asking is that we look at the best wins, etc. To take a neutral example, anyone picking 2004 Utah over 2008 Utah, it's just an opinion, because 2004 Utah didn't beat a single top 10 team.

How can people focus on 2008 Utah's struggles (and heroic wins) in a couple of regular season games and have that trump the last two games of the season? Teams mature and develop. In NCAA basketball you see teams roll to the title that had early struggles all the time. The current no. 1 football team Alabama beat a so so Tennessee team 12-10 at home this year.

If Texas beats Alabama in the BCS bowl how much will its cliffhanger against Nebraska matter? The public cares about wins; they mainly care about how those wins look in the really big, championship level games against great teams.

2008 Utah had its Tyus Edney dash. That's not uncommon when a championship caliber team plays quality teams several times.

Why don't you ask your fanbase which team was better...oh wait, someone already did on Ican'ttalkaboutanythingelsebutmax.net and it was overwhelmingly in favor of 2004 Utah. Didn't beat a top 10 team? What has that got to do with the way the 2004 Utes destroyed every opponent and left no doubt? They couldn't help being matched up with Pitt, they were going up against the establishment of the BCS and they never got tested. Truth is, Utah played one incredible game in 2008 with a month to prepare while 2004 left no doubt in nearly any game. The ending of 2008 made it appear to be a better team but it just wasn't, it was a great game against a deflated team expecting to be playing for a championship. The fact that so many teams finished undefeated in 2004 vs 2008 also has your thinking a bit askew.

[SeattleUte]

The ending of 2008 made it appear to be a better team but it just wasn't

LOL! Classic: "but it just wasn't..." I'm done with you.

[Non Sequitur]

All I'm asking is that we look at the best wins, etc. To take a neutral example, anyone picking 2004 Utah over 2008 Utah, it's just an opinion, because 2004 Utah didn't beat a single top 10 team.

How can people focus on 2008 Utah's struggles (and heroic wins) in a couple of regular season games and have that trump the last two games of the season? Teams mature and develop. In NCAA basketball you see teams roll to the title that had early struggles all the time. The current no. 1 football team Alabama beat a so so Tennessee team 12-10 at home this year.

If Texas beats Alabama in the BCS bowl how much will its cliffhanger against Nebraska matter? The public cares about wins; they mainly care about how those wins look in the really big, championship level games against great teams.

2008 Utah had its Tyus Edney dash. That's not uncommon when a championship caliber team plays quality teams several times.

Even though the 2004 Utah team didn't play the same schedule, the way they won their games gives them the edge. They didn't just dominate teams, they annihilated teams. Plus, it was better coached with better personnel. Nothing against Brian Johnson, but he's no Alex Smith. That 2004 team was a special team. I don't even think it's even close between that team and the 2008 team.

[Mormon Red Death]

LOL! Classic: "but it just wasn't..." I'm done with you.

where's the pizazzz!! Where's the "F@&! you we're done!"?