all hail ULTRA!!! the sole and only ultimate definer of who has struggled
our king has noted finishing 4th in the SWC (robs 1st season) is WORSE than finishing 5th (season before rob)… and has decided becuase we played a far worse non conference schedule in 5th place year it was a better team…
who also can change how math works
You:
Me:
You:
So…are you just trying to save face here…or are you really as stupid as the above seems to indicate?
I offered an estimate (i.e. “we PROBABLY averaged 15 wins…”)…you used your Google skills to confirm it was actually 17…which CONFIRMS the relative accuracy of my estimate, and completely disproves your original (20 win) assertion.
And, since we’re Googling to fact check… I just checked, it was actually 16.6 wins on average in the 5 years before Sampson. I guessed 15. You ASSERTED 20.
Even Google can’t help you. You lose again.
You have a problem admitting your mistakes and errors. You need to fix that.
Again…just take the ass-whippin’ and move on. Some of us don’t need to be “Coog-splained” to be someone who wasn’t there and only knows what he watched on a 30-30 documentary.
You got caught pretending to know it all…again…and this is what you do when you get exposed.
Silly young fella.
I never gave a time frame… when did i say 20 in 5 years…
i often referenced the penders years obviously indicating im adding them
also i didnt google… some of us are good at math… we went sub 15 once in that 5 years…to average 15 wouldnt have made sense mathematically
you are right king of new math
It’s easy to be right when you don’t attached your ego to everything that comes out of your mouth (or off of your keyboard).
This is a UH-centered place, my friend. Be careful who you try to “Coog-splain” to, particularly when talking about times and events that others may have experienced, but you have not.
I simply corrected one part of your previous remarks…because they were inaccurate AND relevant to further discussion. You let your ego prevent you from taking the correction in good faith, and started all this nonsense.
No need, man. No need.
and for people who dont feel like googling
a noted point of Ultra is stating that robs first season was the only year we struggled (not the season before him)… im guessing he just looked at the overall record… and thought he had a gotcha
note: we finished higher in the standings robs first year, than the year before… but what about the overall record?.. yes lets look at the nonconference schedule of both years
season before rob:
rob’s 1st season
even with the context of the times (ie arizona then isnt arizona now) the non conference schedule was drastically harder robs 1st year
so explain how we struggled in robs 1st year, but not the year before again
from the start… i said the term “struggled” is subjective … bama football, 8-5 and makign a bowl is struggling to their fans (would be a dream to others)
i simple asked how would you define our program’s success before Sampson, if you said " i dont think we struggled that much before sampson" id have simple stated, how we defined struggle is different but you are being consistent…
you arguing why you get to be the decider of what is “struggle” is a pointless debate… and despite your belief their is no “right or wrong” answer…as their is no defintive definition and its opinion based
but the clutching of the hypocrisy is prevalent
You just can’t stop lying, can you?
In REALITY (as opposed to Pesik’s fantasy land) I said that your characterization that we “struggled badly” before Rob arrived was “hardly accurate”…and that, if anything:
…and that
Lol, young fella, I didn’t have to “look” at anything to remember that the Coogs bball program was still highly competitive in the mid-to-late 70’s. I was living it in real time, while you were probably still in floating around in your daddy’s nutsack.
So to be clear…Every single word of the above is accurate (excepting, possibly, your exact location at the time in question). On the other hand, YOUR quote is:
That is (at best) an inaccurate statement from someone whose opinion is formed by whatever he sees, reads or watches about that era, since he’s too young to speak on it personally.
At worst, it’s a lie.
Either way, you got it wrong. Period.
Everything else you my have to say about this is either DEFLECTION or DISSEMBLY on your part.
explain this… the “most” is not a subjective term… it means we struggled worse than the previous year… how is finishing higher in the standings than the previous year… “the most” we struggled
a cardinal sin was done… pesik said a team that had 1 ncaa tournament invite in 6 years, which was a 1st round loss is “Struggling badly”
Sure.
Notice the parentheses. What do you think they mean in the CONTEXT of my remarks, my young friend?
Consider this your “freebie”. Nothing else need to explain about this.
You were wrong.
You were corrected by me and several others.
Your ego (as usual) got in your way and you began to deflect and dissemble (as you are want to do)
And…here we are.
You’re done. I’m done with you.
Ego is helluva drug
So where does everyone think we will finish in the conference standings this year? Haha
1st!
Honestly, top 3. If Dedan is who I think he is and Mercy takes the leap I’m expecting, the team should compete for another championship.
*I didn’t note other players, because I trust the roles they will play. I believe Dedan steers the ship, but Mercy elevates it
I just hope we don’t end up “struggling” 
This is my biggest concern. Mercy has enough potential that I won’t be surprised to see him thrive. But, can he be the type of 2 guard that leads a team to a B12 conference ship this year?
Seams like a big jump.
Dont worry it’ll still be a “great” season if we only make the NIT
© 1999-2025 CoogFans.com