Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by cbisbig on May 8, 2017 11:21:55 GMT -5
well no wonder his throwin arm ain't worth a shit...........  I've always thought Tebow is gay. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But to see the list of women who he has dated and then they all left him cause he wouldn't touch them I don't give a damn what God you worship. No straight man on the planet would've said no to one of them let alone all. Since you are an atheist it makes sense that you don't understand Tim has made a commitment to God and that's much stronger than anything you can understand |
|
|
ROLL TIDE!
29 SEC Championships
18 National Championships
2015-16 Bowl Champion Douche
2020 Pandemic Bowl Champ
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 11:23:57 GMT -5
A perfect example of the way your mind works. I said good, not great, but you see bad. I wish you'd quit doing that. The 68 national championship doesn't make a good decade great. However, I'm sure you can find a cherry picked way to argue for greatness that doesn't exist in the 60s based on the decade wins evidence. in the 60s, tosu was very good at the beginning, good in the middle, and even better at the end. that was still 5th best in all d1 cfb in terms of overall record in the 60s, so that's a pretty slim definition of great. more importantly, the end of the '67 season then '68, began a stretch that continues to this day. 22 straight wins from '67 thru '69, which included a national title. 78%+ win rate since woody's super sophs came on the scene, that's the best in cfb over that time period. just 2 losing seasons, + 1 .500 season, in those 49 years. every program has its dips, and osu's had a few. but not many. 46 winning seasons in 49 years is pretty consistent. now, remind me again how miami's era of dominance started in '77. Cherry picked facts to support whole 1960s decade greatness that doesn't exist, incorrect attribution of what I said about UF and Miami, and tOSU blinders in full force is quite the triology. cwg, this is how it's done when you don't want to hold yourself to the standards you place on others. It's a textbook I'm sure can be found right next to Rules for Radicals. Notice the subtle shift from wins to winning percentage when cherry picking suits your debate. Notice the use of an inflated winning percentage based on Woody's great sophomores. Notice the mixing of apples and oranges, different time periods for consideration all in the same paragraph, to cloud the issues. Yes sir, this is exactly how it's done when you want to continue to berate others while holding yourself out to be better than you are. With this stated, I don't think you should use Mark for an example as he is lousy with the truth. He'll change the narrative and say anything to attempt to win a debate. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by mscott59 on May 8, 2017 11:27:35 GMT -5
in the 60s, tosu was very good at the beginning, good in the middle, and even better at the end. that was still 5th best in all d1 cfb in terms of overall record in the 60s, so that's a pretty slim definition of great. more importantly, the end of the '67 season then '68, began a stretch that continues to this day. 22 straight wins from '67 thru '69, which included a national title. 78%+ win rate since woody's super sophs came on the scene, that's the best in cfb over that time period. just 2 losing seasons, + 1 .500 season, in those 49 years. every program has its dips, and osu's had a few. but not many. 46 winning seasons in 49 years is pretty consistent. now, remind me again how miami's era of dominance started in '77. Cherry picked facts to support whole 1960s decade greatness that doesn't exist, incorrect attribution of what I said about UF and Miami, and tOSU blinders in full force is quite the triology. cwg, this is how it's done when you don't want to hold yourself to the standards you place on others. It's a textbook I'm sure can be found right next to Rules for Radicals. Notice the subtle shift from wins to winning percentage when cherry picking suits your debate. Notice the use of an inflated winning percentage based on Woody's great sophomores. Notice the mixing of apples and oranges, different time periods for consideration all in the same paragraph, to cloud the issues. Yes sir, this is exactly how it's done when you want to continue to berate others while holding yourself out to be better than you are. With this stated, I don't think you should use Mark for an example as he is lousy with the truth. He'll change the narrative and say anything to attempt to win a debate. what the hell is wrong w/you? |
|
|
mark scott
tosu 81
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 11:42:07 GMT -5
I've always thought Tebow is gay. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But to see the list of women who he has dated and then they all left him cause he wouldn't touch them I don't give a damn what God you worship. No straight man on the planet would've said no to one of them let alone all. Since you are an atheist it makes sense that you don't understand Tim has made a commitment to God and that's much stronger than anything you can understand I'd start believing in God in a second if one of his ex girlfriends came to me offering themselves. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on May 8, 2017 11:44:43 GMT -5
Since you are an atheist it makes sense that you don't understand Tim has made a commitment to God and that's much stronger than anything you can understand I'd start believing in God in a second if one of his ex girlfriends came to me offering themselves. I take it, that your wife wasn't looking over your shoulder while you typed that?........  |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 11:47:24 GMT -5
I'd start believing in God in a second if one of his ex girlfriends came to me offering themselves. I take it, that your wife wasn't looking over your shoulder while you typed that?........ She's at work. 😎 |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 11:50:34 GMT -5
Cherry picked facts to support whole 1960s decade greatness that doesn't exist, incorrect attribution of what I said about UF and Miami, and tOSU blinders in full force is quite the triology. cwg, this is how it's done when you don't want to hold yourself to the standards you place on others. It's a textbook I'm sure can be found right next to Rules for Radicals. Notice the subtle shift from wins to winning percentage when cherry picking suits your debate. Notice the use of an inflated winning percentage based on Woody's great sophomores. Notice the mixing of apples and oranges, different time periods for consideration all in the same paragraph, to cloud the issues. Yes sir, this is exactly how it's done when you want to continue to berate others while holding yourself out to be better than you are. With this stated, I don't think you should use Mark for an example as he is lousy with the truth. He'll change the narrative and say anything to attempt to win a debate. what the hell is wrong w/you? That depends on ones perspective. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by Buckeye Dale on May 8, 2017 12:00:43 GMT -5
Cherry picked facts to support whole 1960s decade greatness that doesn't exist, incorrect attribution of what I said about UF and Miami, and tOSU blinders in full force is quite the triology. cwg, this is how it's done when you don't want to hold yourself to the standards you place on others. It's a textbook I'm sure can be found right next to Rules for Radicals. Notice the subtle shift from wins to winning percentage when cherry picking suits your debate. Notice the use of an inflated winning percentage based on Woody's great sophomores. Notice the mixing of apples and oranges, different time periods for consideration all in the same paragraph, to cloud the issues. Yes sir, this is exactly how it's done when you want to continue to berate others while holding yourself out to be better than you are. With this stated, I don't think you should use Mark for an example as he is lousy with the truth. He'll change the narrative and say anything to attempt to win a debate. what the hell is wrong w/you? I wondered that myself, then just shook my head & exited... |
|
|
Never grow a wishbone where a backbone ought to be.
We can disagree without being disagreeable.
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by Mickey34jb on May 8, 2017 12:45:14 GMT -5
in the 60s, tosu was very good at the beginning, good in the middle, and even better at the end. that was still 5th best in all d1 cfb in terms of overall record in the 60s, so that's a pretty slim definition of great. more importantly, the end of the '67 season then '68, began a stretch that continues to this day. 22 straight wins from '67 thru '69, which included a national title. 78%+ win rate since woody's super sophs came on the scene, that's the best in cfb over that time period. just 2 losing seasons, + 1 .500 season, in those 49 years. every program has its dips, and osu's had a few. but not many. 46 winning seasons in 49 years is pretty consistent. now, remind me again how miami's era of dominance started in '77. Cherry picked facts to support whole 1960s decade greatness that doesn't exist, incorrect attribution of what I said about UF and Miami, and tOSU blinders in full force is quite the triology. cwg, this is how it's done when you don't want to hold yourself to the standards you place on others. It's a textbook I'm sure can be found right next to Rules for Radicals. Notice the subtle shift from wins to winning percentage when cherry picking suits your debate. Notice the use of an inflated winning percentage based on Woody's great sophomores. Notice the mixing of apples and oranges, different time periods for consideration all in the same paragraph, to cloud the issues. Yes sir, this is exactly how it's done when you want to continue to berate others while holding yourself out to be better than you are. With this stated, I don't think you should use Mark for an example as he is lousy with the truth. He'll change the narrative and say anything to attempt to win a debate. And now introducing stand up Gator at the Laugh Factory... |
|
