(02-24-2017 10:26 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 10:31 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 06:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  1 top 3 recruiting class there-ok, new coach, good sell. Its possible. But 2 in 3 years? Getting 4 of the top 100 in Texas including 2 of the top 3? Not at Ole Miss.

Yep. Reminds me of Baylor and Louisville recruiting classes in the past. This year was like MAryland??? UA bag man?

Maryland finished 17th this year (Rivals) coming off a 6-7 season.

Louisville finished 29th this season. The Cards have had several years where they were ranked in the 25-30 range. Despite having winning records all but three years this century, I don't believe they have ever had a recruiting class ranked in the top 20.

What year are you referring to in regards to your unfounded implication?

When programs like Baylor, Louisville, and Maryland start landing top recruits and Baylor and Louisville win a heisman. LOL.

You Louisville guys do the same old act over and over. It's lame and predictable. Anyone who says something that is true about Louisville immediately gets attacked. All you do is make yourselves look bad.

You guys are easily the most insecure fanbase in the p-5 and the most obnoxious since joining. Keep up the fine work.

(02-23-2017 06:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  To me, fake classes are the ultimate violation.

I would say one worse would be actual cheating, in the game.

Players might not be eligible, and therefore shouldn't have played in games, but a player is just a player ... if he played by the rules of the game, during the game, then all you can say is that team was better with those players.


But cheating the actual rules of the game?? That's the worst you could ever do ... within the realm of what the NCAA actually has a say over.

As I assumed. Absolutely nothing of even remote substance or fact. No response at all to the fact they Louisville hasn't been landing top recruiting classes. Lamar Jackson wasn't a five star recruit either, so that argument makes no sense at all.

In two months you've posted nearly 600 times and what, maybe 50-100 of those mention Louisville. From a supposed OU fan. No real OU fan would have anywhere near that level of interest.

Insecure? No. Simply calling out your repeated blatant lies.

(02-24-2017 10:49 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  As I assumed. Absolutely nothing of even remote substance or fact. No response at all to the fact they Louisville hasn't been landing top recruiting classes. Lamar Jackson wasn't a five star recruit either, so that argument makes no sense at all.

In two months you've posted nearly 600 times and what, maybe 50-100 of those mention Louisville. From a supposed OU fan. No real OU fan would have anywhere near that level of interest.

Insecure? No. Simply calling out your repeated blatant lies.

LOL. Thanks for proving my point for me. I'm hardly the only one who noticed the surge in recruiting at Louisville, much of which was due to thug players kicked off other programs by slimeballs like Strong and Petrino. Ole Miss was doing similar things. We already know what the Louisville BB program was doing so it's safe to assume there was likely similar things going on in the FB program. C-USA schools don't rise to fame so quickly by playing by the rules much like Ole Miss just randomly jumping from pretender to contender.
Schools like Baylor don't jump into winning heismans. And Ole Miss doesn't' just jump into Sugar Bowls without some help.

You insecure Louisville fans claimed I was wrong about the YUM center. Then I posted the link.

You do the same thing every time someone posts somethign that is true about Louisville. You attack the person and claim nothing happened. It's so lame and predictable but you don't seem to realize that all it does is indicate how insecure you are.


You are also paranoid if you think I am the reason Louisville is brought up so much here. You guys are the reason for it, you bring it on yourselves becasue you are so insecure, always trying so hard.

Thanks for the entertainment and keeping count. It's clear that I have gotten to you with my facts and truth. I have plenty more.

Now run along and whine to the mods. PS, Thanks for the neg rep aka the butthurt o meter. Screaming "lies" doesn't' make the truth change. #truthdontlie lol.

I personally can't wait to see the juicy details of Ole Miss bagmen and other tales of hookers and blow.

No one was discussing Louisville in the thread until you brought them up. Not only do you not have any real evidence, you don't even have circumstantial evidence, because there is not some big rise in recruiting rankings for Louisville. You simply are making that up out of thin air. An ACC team that has had multiple top 25 finishes on the field ending up with the #29 recruiting ranking? Ob boy, that sounds like a scandal! UofL has never pulled in a class even remotely as highly ranked as what Ole Miss brought in.

Once again, all lies and no facts from the fake OU fan.

P.S.- Didn't say a word to any Mods. The rep is because you're a clown.

(02-24-2017 11:07 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  No one was discussing Louisville in the thread until you brought them up. Not only do you not have any real evidence, you don't even have circumstantial evidence, because there is not some big rise in recruiting rankings for Louisville. You simply are making that up out of thin air. An ACC team that has had multiple top 25 finishes on the field ending up with the #29 recruiting ranking? Ob boy, that sounds like a scandal! UofL has never pulled in a class even remotely as highly ranked as what Ole Miss brought in.

Once again, all lies and no facts from the fake OU fan.

P.S.- Didn't say a word to any Mods. The rep is because you're a clown.

I mentioned Louisville and Baylor as schools who also had eye raising changes in recruiting in a short period along with players of questionable character much like Ole Miss.

Then you started whining and throwing a fit and ran with it. The reason you are so mad is becasue what I say is true. If it was just random made up stuff it wouldn't bother you.

clearly I've Gotten to you judging as you are almost singlehandedly responsible for my negative rep number. For you to have gotten that upset and wasted that much time is hilarious and sad. Just let it go man. YOu've already lost. .

This is about Ole Miss. Try to stay focused and get your emotions under control.

Ole Hugh had it going on and we all knew it would end at some point and it wouldn't be pretty, well here we are.

It's always tough when the bag men get shut down, look at ORegon.

I already lost? In what world? I'm not the one making up allegations out of thin air with no basis whatsoever. Repeating your lies doesn't make them true.

(02-24-2017 10:36 AM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-24-2017 10:26 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 10:31 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 06:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  1 top 3 recruiting class there-ok, new coach, good sell. Its possible. But 2 in 3 years? Getting 4 of the top 100 in Texas including 2 of the top 3? Not at Ole Miss.

Yep. Reminds me of Baylor and Louisville recruiting classes in the past. This year was like MAryland??? UA bag man?

Maryland finished 17th this year (Rivals) coming off a 6-7 season.

Louisville finished 29th this season. The Cards have had several years where they were ranked in the 25-30 range. Despite having winning records all but three years this century, I don't believe they have ever had a recruiting class ranked in the top 20.

What year are you referring to in regards to your unfounded implication?

When programs like Baylor, Louisville, and Maryland start landing top recruits and Baylor and Louisville win a heisman. LOL.

You Louisville guys do the same old act over and over. It's lame and predictable. Anyone who says something that is true about Louisville immediately gets attacked. All you do is make yourselves look bad.

You guys are easily the most insecure fanbase in the p-5 and the most obnoxious since joining. Keep up the fine work.

Baylor has historically taken a lot of academic risks. Clearly they have taken some character risks as well. But as far as QBs and receivers, they were an attractive location with Briles.

(02-24-2017 11:32 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-24-2017 10:36 AM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-24-2017 10:26 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 10:31 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 06:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  1 top 3 recruiting class there-ok, new coach, good sell. Its possible. But 2 in 3 years? Getting 4 of the top 100 in Texas including 2 of the top 3? Not at Ole Miss.

Yep. Reminds me of Baylor and Louisville recruiting classes in the past. This year was like MAryland??? UA bag man?

Maryland finished 17th this year (Rivals) coming off a 6-7 season.

Louisville finished 29th this season. The Cards have had several years where they were ranked in the 25-30 range. Despite having winning records all but three years this century, I don't believe they have ever had a recruiting class ranked in the top 20.

What year are you referring to in regards to your unfounded implication?

When programs like Baylor, Louisville, and Maryland start landing top recruits and Baylor and Louisville win a heisman. LOL.

You Louisville guys do the same old act over and over. It's lame and predictable. Anyone who says something that is true about Louisville immediately gets attacked. All you do is make yourselves look bad.

You guys are easily the most insecure fanbase in the p-5 and the most obnoxious since joining. Keep up the fine work.

Baylor has historically taken a lot of academic risks. Clearly they have taken some character risks as well. But as far as QBs and receivers, they were an attractive location with Briles.

I think it's a risk worth taking in most cases as Ole Miss was able to rise up and be relevant due to the risks they were willing to take.

Like all these stories I will enjoy watching the truth come out in a few years once guys aren't trying to hide it all.

I hear Ole Miss was into buying escalades for recruits family members.

(02-24-2017 11:20 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  I already lost? In what world? I'm not the one making up allegations out of thin air with no basis whatsoever. Repeating your lies doesn't make them true.

Ever hear the term "never let em see you sweat"?

You are sweating.

Just relax. It's not worth getting all lathered up about.

Did you have anything to add about Ole Miss?

(02-23-2017 10:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So 58-56 what do you suggest as a mode of attack. The culture is rife with this hypocrisy. It's wealthy business men who pay them. It's academics who tolerate, coddle and pass them for the publicity and cash. It's the social justice people who make excuses for them. And it's the NCAA that calls them amateurs while bankrolling millions off of their basketball tourney. And all too frequently it is the court system that handles them years on down the road.

The failure is complete and extant, and will remain so. Why? We no longer live in an age of personal accountability. Deny responsibility and assign blame is the modern mantra. It is uniformly destructive to both the individual and society. One cannot change, or improve without first admitting error. And we dare not speak of morality because to do so now is no longer considered constructive instruction, but rather hate speech against the immoral.

Sine Die.

This thread went off the rails before I could respond, but I will anyway.

You raise a very broad philosophical point deserving of far more than an ephemeral message board post: we have become not only a people without honor, but a people even unable to recognize honor. We are even less capable of acknowledging honorable conduct in one with whom we disagree.

A mode of attack? We have to learn to clean up our own messes. And that starts with fans deciding that the honor conferred by that piece of parchment on the office wall means more than the thugs wearing your colors winning a football game.

How to get there? I do not know. But I know that you are right when you say it starts with accepting personal responsibility. You can't call them "my team" when they win a game and "the coach's thugs" when they rape/rob/cheat.

(02-24-2017 09:01 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 10:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So 58-56 what do you suggest as a mode of attack. The culture is rife with this hypocrisy. It's wealthy business men who pay them. It's academics who tolerate, coddle and pass them for the publicity and cash. It's the social justice people who make excuses for them. And it's the NCAA that calls them amateurs while bankrolling millions off of their basketball tourney. And all too frequently it is the court system that handles them years on down the road.

The failure is complete and extant, and will remain so. Why? We no longer live in an age of personal accountability. Deny responsibility and assign blame is the modern mantra. It is uniformly destructive to both the individual and society. One cannot change, or improve without first admitting error. And we dare not speak of morality because to do so now is no longer considered constructive instruction, but rather hate speech against the immoral.

Sine Die.

This thread went off the rails before I could respond, but I will anyway.

You raise a very broad philosophical point deserving of far more than an ephemeral message board post: we have become not only a people without honor, but a people even unable to recognize honor. We are even less capable of acknowledging honorable conduct in one with whom we disagree.

A mode of attack? We have to learn to clean up our own messes. And that starts with fans deciding that the honor conferred by that piece of parchment on the office wall means more than the thugs wearing your colors winning a football game.

How to get there? I do not know. But I know that you are right when you say it starts with accepting personal responsibility. You can't call them "my team" when they win a game and "the coach's thugs" when they rape/rob/cheat.

There are plenty of honorable people in America. Even (gasp!) in positions of power. In fact in my experience the most honorable people are the ones who ascend to positions of power.

Of course we'd be a better society if more people were honorable. But that's always been the case. And it's folly to argue that we're a less honorable society than at some random halcyon time in the past (which probably never existed). When you start saying doom and gloom stuff like JR is saying, it's just a sign that you're getting old (no offense meant, JR - like I said I agree with your premise that more morals would be good).

(02-25-2017 02:19 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(02-24-2017 09:01 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 10:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So 58-56 what do you suggest as a mode of attack. The culture is rife with this hypocrisy. It's wealthy business men who pay them. It's academics who tolerate, coddle and pass them for the publicity and cash. It's the social justice people who make excuses for them. And it's the NCAA that calls them amateurs while bankrolling millions off of their basketball tourney. And all too frequently it is the court system that handles them years on down the road.

The failure is complete and extant, and will remain so. Why? We no longer live in an age of personal accountability. Deny responsibility and assign blame is the modern mantra. It is uniformly destructive to both the individual and society. One cannot change, or improve without first admitting error. And we dare not speak of morality because to do so now is no longer considered constructive instruction, but rather hate speech against the immoral.

Sine Die.

This thread went off the rails before I could respond, but I will anyway.

You raise a very broad philosophical point deserving of far more than an ephemeral message board post: we have become not only a people without honor, but a people even unable to recognize honor. We are even less capable of acknowledging honorable conduct in one with whom we disagree.

A mode of attack? We have to learn to clean up our own messes. And that starts with fans deciding that the honor conferred by that piece of parchment on the office wall means more than the thugs wearing your colors winning a football game.

How to get there? I do not know. But I know that you are right when you say it starts with accepting personal responsibility. You can't call them "my team" when they win a game and "the coach's thugs" when they rape/rob/cheat.

There are plenty of honorable people in America. Even (gasp!) in positions of power. In fact in my experience the most honorable people are the ones who ascend to positions of power.

Of course we'd be a better society if more people were honorable. But that's always been the case. And it's folly to argue that we're a less honorable society than at some random halcyon time in the past (which probably never existed). When you start saying doom and gloom stuff like JR is saying, it's just a sign that you're getting old (no offense meant, JR - like I said I agree with your premise that more morals would be good).

There's a reason old people say those things. We've lived long enough to know.