Cugalabanza Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Ok, I'll ask the obvious question: Why are their girlfriends so fat? They're hot shot football players. They should be able to do much better. Maybe the team should have looked at that before. Bunch of underachievers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted October 28, 2009 Author Share Posted October 28, 2009 Ok, I'll ask the obvious question: Why are their girlfriends so fat? They're hot shot football players. They should be able to do much better. Maybe the team should have looked at that before. Bunch of underachievers. Apparently you have never been to Lubbock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Apparently you have never been to Lubbock? Nope, unfortunately, as a vegetarian, I am not allowed entry into the state of Texas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I hear what you are saying about tradition/location & such where USC has the advantage but before Carroll took over this program was a mess. I remember going to a game at South Bend, might of been 95/96 where ND beat them like 50-10. I remember thinking, man the Southern Cal cheerleaders are so much better looking then the ND cheerleaders, where do they find these girls, I mean everyone was drop dead gorgeus. There football team stunk though. You always equate USC to doing good because of the tradition & how that program has been humming now, but that is probably 80% Carroll. Before he got there, for years USC's program actually mirrored what their cross town rival is today - UCLA, a PAC 10 program that has great history, great weather, beautiful girls that will be lucky to get invited to the Las Vegas Bowl most years. And I won't argue that Carroll is a great coach and has done a great job rebuilding that program - but I'll still maintain that the $$$$ and rich football tradition of USC (10 national championships before he arrived, and alums are also a big help in the recruiting process - just just look at the names on those lists above) give him a huge edge over a guy in Leach's situation, who has always had to settle for 2nd and 3rd tier players. And Leach - being the entertaining fellow he is, but also somewhat of a 'loose cannon' - didn't make his job any easier now that his potential recruits have a vision of "fat little ol' girlfriends" in Lubbock, while USC has these... Again with the Song Birds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 When did Vince Gill Become the coach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Keep making excuses loser. Carroll has a team in the top 4 every single year. I don't see coaches at Michigan, Notre Dame or anywhere else doing that despite good traditions. But it sure is funny watching you embarrass yourself by trying to compare USC coaching success with your podunk school. Now, go fondle yourself while gazing at your Mike Leach poster (see, I can look like an unoriginal moron by typing the same thing over and over too!) btw...here is what some fans who don't have gay-crushes on him think about Coach Leech. Thanks for the article, self-proclaimed unoriginal moron Didn't really seem too scathing though, at least not as bad as this one... USC Ya Later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloaggie Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Thanks for helping me out by re-posting the original quote in its entirety. Well-taken? Please explain the "The guy is basically Pete Carroll..." part. How is Leach 'basically Pete Carroll'? I'd really like to know. He's basically Pete Carroll - except that he's not at all like Pete Carroll, and couldn't carry Pete Carroll's jock strap????? Apparently you, like Chef and the apoplectic KD, also seem to be missing my point that Carroll has had far greater resources at USC in terms of $$$ and recruiting power, and to say that Leach hasn't enjoyed the same success as Carroll somewhat reinforces that point, so thanks for helping me there as well. USC has always been 'on the map', whereas Leach has single-handedly put TT in the national spotlight... Texas Tech: The Mike Leach Era Leach does seem to get particular enjoyment at 'tweaking' the Aggies, though - I think you're just steamed over things like... As his team raced onto the field, he gazed into the stands filled with screaming fans and wondered about the several thousand “cadets” from Texas A&M clustered in one end zone. They wear military uniforms and buzz cuts, holler in unison and stand at attention the entire game. “How come they get to pretend they are soldiers?” he asked. “The thing is, they aren’t actually in the military. I ought to have Mike’s Pirate School. The freshmen, all they get is the bandanna. When you’re a senior, you get the sword and skull and crossbones. For homework, we’ll work pirate maneuvers and stuff like that.” Or, after the wife of an Aggies coach made a disparaging remark about Lubbock... “First of all, we just beat them, 56-17,” Leach says when told of the incident. “By rights she should now be a Red Raider slave.” I really could care less what Mike Leach says. They're just words. Do you think that he knows outside of the military academies, A&M provides more commissioned officers than any other school. No, because he knows nothing besides football. When he makes a comment about anything else, he sounds like a complete idiot. I could care less what this mental midget says. His program has peaked and now it's going back down, and all he can do is cry. Pete Carroll is a head football coach, Mike Leach is a head football coach, when you introduce the concepts of success and class, that is where Leach falls short. What part of that comparison do you not understand, Senator? Texas Tech WAS in the national spotlight. Now they're 5-3 about to go 5-4 after losing to Oklahoma State this week. His pirate ship is taking on water fast. In their two great seasons under Leach they got totally exposed by SEC schools, Bama shutting them down and then Ole Miss "upsetting" them last year by outgaining their vaunted offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCal Aaron Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I really could care less what Mike Leach says. They're just words. Do you think that he knows outside of the military academies, A&M provides more commissioned officers than any other school. No, because he knows nothing besides football. When he makes a comment about anything else, he sounds like a complete idiot. I could care less what this mental midget says. His program has peaked and now it's going back down, and all he can do is cry. Pete Carroll is a head football coach, Mike Leach is a head football coach, when you introduce the concepts of success and class, that is where Leach falls short. What part of that comparison do you not understand, Senator? Texas Tech WAS in the national spotlight. Now they're 5-3 about to go 5-4 after losing to Oklahoma State this week. His pirate ship is taking on water fast. In their two great seasons under Leach they got totally exposed by SEC schools, Bama shutting them down and then Ole Miss "upsetting" them last year by outgaining their vaunted offense. hook em! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 And I won't argue that Carroll is a great coach and has done a great job rebuilding that program - but I'll still maintain that the $$$$ and rich football tradition of USC (10 national championships before he arrived, and alums are also a big help in the recruiting process - just just look at the names on those lists above) give him a huge edge over a guy in Leach's situation, who has always had to settle for 2nd and 3rd tier players. And Leach - being the entertaining fellow he is, but also somewhat of a 'loose cannon' - didn't make his job any easier now that his potential recruits have a vision of "fat little ol' girlfriends" in Lubbock, while USC has these... Again with the Song Birds From Wiki: However, the winless streaks of 13 years (1983–1995, including the 1993 17–17 tie) to intersectional rival Notre Dame and 8 years (1991–1998) to crosstown rival UCLA were unacceptable to many USC supporters. In 1998, head coach Paul Hackett took over the team, but posted an even more disappointing 19–18 record in three seasons. By 2000, some observers surmised that USC football's days of national dominance were fading; the football team's record of 37–35 from 1996 to 2001 was their second-worst over any five-year span in history (only the mark of 29–29–2 from 1956–1961 was worse), and the period marked the first and only time USC had been out of the final top 20 teams for four straight years. If USC football is so blessed regardless of who the coach is how do you explain those years of mediocrity? Oh and guess what happened in 2001? They hired Pete Carroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I really could care less what Mike Leach says. They're just words. Do you think that he knows outside of the military academies, A&M provides more commissioned officers than any other school. No, because he knows nothing besides football. When he makes a comment about anything else, he sounds like a complete idiot. I could care less what this mental midget says. His program has peaked and now it's going back down, and all he can do is cry. Pete Carroll is a head football coach, Mike Leach is a head football coach, when you introduce the concepts of success and class, that is where Leach falls short. What part of that comparison do you not understand, Senator? Texas Tech WAS in the national spotlight. Now they're 5-3 about to go 5-4 after losing to Oklahoma State this week. His pirate ship is taking on water fast. In their two great seasons under Leach they got totally exposed by SEC schools, Bama shutting them down and then Ole Miss "upsetting" them last year by outgaining their vaunted offense. Golly gosh - even I didn't know that! All I knew about Aggies is what your own Jackie Sherrill once said - and which you just proved - namely, "You know, you Aggies are like bullfrogs: most of you is belly and what isn't, is mouth!" Leach knows nothing outside of football? Really??? Sure sounds like sour grapes from one really pissed-off Aggie to me, 'cause the guy graduated with honors from BYU, has a Juris Doctor from Pepperdine Law School where he graduated in the top third of this class, and is generally regarded to be one of the most intellectually curious football coaches on the planet. Oh well...a least now I understand how there came to be so many great Aggie jokes... First Man: "Did you hear about the Texas A&M Aggie who could count to 10?" Second Man: "No." First Man: "How about five?" Have you geniuses figured out how to build a bonfire without killing anyone yet? (BTW - Texas Tech plays Kansas this week, not Oklahoma State ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 If USC football is so blessed regardless of who the coach is how do you explain those years of mediocrity? Oh and guess what happened in 2001? They hired Pete Carroll. Yeah you seem to keep missing my point over and over again I'm simply stating that the rich tradition, deep $$$pockets$$$, and illustrious alumni make it easier for Carroll to recruit top talent, whereas Leach has always had to settle for tier 2 and 3 players that no one else 'scholarshipped' Four years ago, Hodges was a high-school senior with just one other offer to be a college quarterback, from the University of Wyoming. A lot of the players in the locker room had similar stories of rejection and redemption. In this part of the country, the University of Texas and Oklahoma University are the old-money football schools, with Texas A&M right behind. Those schools fish first in the local-talent pool. Tonight there would be very few players on the field for Texas A&M - for Oklahoma or Texas there wouldn't be a single player - to whom Texas Tech would not have offered a football scholarship. Conversely, the Texas Tech locker room was filled with players rejected by the old-money schools. And yet - look around! Hodges led all of college football in passing. Now, two-thirds of the way through the 2005 N.C.A.A. football season, and with a throwing arm so dead that he required a cortisone shot to move it, Hodges was the nation's leader in yards passed, total offense and touchdowns. The team's tailback, Taurean Henderson, had broken the N.C.A.A. career record for most passes caught by a running back. The top four receivers on the team were the four leading pass receivers in Texas Tech's league, the formidable Big 12. Most would concede that is a reflection on Leach's coaching ability. Link - NY TIMES: Coach Leach Goes Deep Other than that, I never said Carroll wasn't a great coach or didn't do a great job rebuilding the program - he is, and he did. Although not everyone is quite as enamored with Carroll as you and the apoplectic KD in CT... Link - USC Ya Later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Yeah you seem to keep missing my point over and over again I'm simply stating that the rich tradition, deep $$$pockets$$$, and illustrious alumni make it easier for Carroll to recruit top talent, whereas Leach has always had to settle for tier 2 and 3 players that no one else 'scholarshipped' Four years ago, Hodges was a high-school senior with just one other offer to be a college quarterback, from the University of Wyoming. A lot of the players in the locker room had similar stories of rejection and redemption. In this part of the country, the University of Texas and Oklahoma University are the old-money football schools, with Texas A&M right behind. Those schools fish first in the local-talent pool. Tonight there would be very few players on the field for Texas A&M - for Oklahoma or Texas there wouldn't be a single player - to whom Texas Tech would not have offered a football scholarship. Conversely, the Texas Tech locker room was filled with players rejected by the old-money schools. And yet - look around! Hodges led all of college football in passing. Now, two-thirds of the way through the 2005 N.C.A.A. football season, and with a throwing arm so dead that he required a cortisone shot to move it, Hodges was the nation's leader in yards passed, total offense and touchdowns. The team's tailback, Taurean Henderson, had broken the N.C.A.A. career record for most passes caught by a running back. The top four receivers on the team were the four leading pass receivers in Texas Tech's league, the formidable Big 12. Most would concede that is a reflection on Leach's coaching ability. Link - NY TIMES: Coach Leach Goes Deep Other than that, I never said Carroll wasn't a great coach or didn't do a great job rebuilding the program - he is, and he did. Although not everyone is quite as enamored with Carroll as you and the apoplectic KD in CT... Link - USC Ya Later I agree with what you're saying that money and location help with recruiting but the the most important variable that will sway the talent to where they go is the coach. Why do you think college coaches are so involved in recruiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I agree with what you're saying that money and location help with recruiting but the the most important variable that will sway the talent to where they go is the coach. Why do you think college coaches are so involved in recruiting. So what does this mean? It means more BCS bowl games, more Pac-10 titles, but very few - if any - National Titles - for the USC Trojans. At least, not while Pete Carroll is at the helm.... Link - WooHoo...we're PAC 10 Champions again!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 So what does this mean? It means more BCS bowl games, more Pac-10 titles, but very few - if any - National Titles - for the USC Trojans. At least, not while Pete Carroll is at the helm.... Link - WooHoo...we're PAC 10 Champions again!!!!! Like I said in my original post you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 but very few - if any - National Titles - for the USC Trojans. At least, not while Pete Carroll is at the helm.... I guess 2004 and the other ten times slipped your feeble mind. Or were you still in junior high school back then and not paying attention? So, to sum up his argument, a coach with mediocre players that produces mediocre results is somehow superior to a coach who is able to recruit much better talent that his predecessors and produces the country's most dominant team of the decade. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I guess 2004 and the other ten times slipped your feeble mind. Or were you still in junior high school back then and not paying attention? Slipped my mind? I think you're losing yours, because I mentioned the 11 National titles in my third post of this thread... The Trojans have been a football powerhouse throughout NCAA history, making claim to 11 national championships. link I just wasn't aware that Carroll had been their head coach since 1928! So, to sum up his argument, a coach with mediocre players that produces mediocre results is somehow superior to a coach who is able to recruit much better talent that his predecessors and produces the country's most dominant team of the decade. Urban Meyer might argue that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Like I said in my original post you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Yeah, sorry, but I really do - one nat'l title 5 years ago and one disputed/split title 6 years ago is pretty much like the Patriettes* fans insisting that they're still champions because they won a Superbowl in '04. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Best. Thread. EVER. No, really. EVER. I'm LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Slipped my mind? I think you're losing yours, because I mentioned the 11 National titles in my third post of this thread... And then contradicted yourself by posting this: but very few - if any - National Titles - for the USC Trojans. At least, not while Pete Carroll is at the helm.... I just wasn't aware that Carroll had been their head coach since 1928! And apparently you weren't even aware that he's been their coach since 2004! You keep nitpicking and trying to dodge anywhere you can to avoid the point that Carroll is head and shoulders better than your man crush who has zero top ten finishes ever. How many posts and have you made in this thread? How often do you slobber all over this guy? Talk about unhinged! Scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 And then contradicted yourself by posting this: but very few - if any - National Titles - for the USC Trojans. At least, not while Pete Carroll is at the helm.... (Left to right, KD - try to read the entire sentence. I know, it's hard to read in the NFL...) And apparently you weren't even aware that he's been their coach since 2004! Er...um...2000, but who's counting - certainly not you. Not counting OR reading today, KD - what gives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts