Ashandarei 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 I figured since every thread in the forums turns into talk about 'Bama, I'd just go ahead and start one. Here are a few things to get it started... -You managed to go undefeated and still didn't play for the title. -6 in a row is the only comeback that you have whenever 'Bama is mentioned. -You cheerleaders dress like Freddy Krueger. -No matter how good you are, a bad 'Bama team gets more media attention than you. -Jetgate. Now that over, let's hear some raggin on 'Bama. So bust out your '6' and 'one tooth' macro's. Let's make this fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shire5k 19 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Are you drunk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
townhallsavoy 2 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Jump off a bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashandarei 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 Are you drunk? Naw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sogaaufan 27 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Do you think this guy could be bammerperry's spawn? On second thought, forget it, no woman in her right mind would allow that to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Live the stereotype...BE the stereotype. Go. Away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FootballFanatic 4 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It seems like you are comparing Bama to another school, not talking about it. Its okay, having a team that hasn't had any relevance in 20 years or more must get old when your rival is having fun watching their team play football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shire5k 19 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It seems like you are comparing Bama to another school, not talking about it. Its okay, having a team that hasn't had any relevance in 20 years or more must get old when your rival is having fun watching their team play football. To be fair, we have won an NC in the past 20. Better to say around 15 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebdawg 5 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It seems like you are comparing Bama to another school, not talking about it. Its okay, having a team that hasn't had any relevance in 20 years or more must get old when your rival is having fun watching their team play football. To be fair, we have won an NC in the past 20. Better to say around 15 years. Sorry, that MNC has an asterisk by it. You got cheating remember? The NCAA didn't take the title back (as it should have) because they try not to do that, but it is obvious that the '92 team was the recipient of creative accounting. Championships earned soley by breaking the rules are not real championships. If you really have to claim that one then you have to give us credit for winning one in '04 from the Eufala Times. Being named the national champion by a small paper in eastern Alabama is just as valid as stealing one from AP after breaking every rule in the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUChizad 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 I figured since every thread in the forums turns into talk about 'Bama, I'd just go ahead and start one. Here are a few things to get it started... -You managed to go undefeated and still didn't play for the title. -6 in a row is the only comeback that you have whenever 'Bama is mentioned. -You cheerleaders dress like Freddy Krueger. -No matter how good you are, a bad 'Bama team gets more media attention than you. -Jetgate. Now that over, let's hear some raggin on 'Bama. So bust out your '6' and 'one tooth' macro's. Let's make this fun. Ironic that you start a thread called let's talk about Alabama Football, then all you talk about is Auburn. I won't even go and pick apart each stupid bullet point, because it's been done a billion times over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shire5k 19 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It seems like you are comparing Bama to another school, not talking about it. Its okay, having a team that hasn't had any relevance in 20 years or more must get old when your rival is having fun watching their team play football. To be fair, we have won an NC in the past 20. Better to say around 15 years. Sorry, that MNC has an asterisk by it. You got cheating remember? The NCAA didn't take the title back (as it should have) because they try not to do that, but it is obvious that the '92 team was the recipient of creative accounting. Championships earned soley by breaking the rules are not real championships. If you really have to claim that one then you have to give us credit for winning one in '04 from the Eufala Times. Being named the national champion by a small paper in eastern Alabama is just as valid as stealing one from AP after breaking every rule in the book. But, we were still the best that year and won it all, cheating or not. So, to call us irrelevent is going a tad far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashandarei 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 My idea was to get you good and angry... like shaving a cats a** with sand paper, slapping aftershave on it to get it really pissed, then stuff it in someone's mailbox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 My idea was to get you good and angry... like shaving a cats a** with sand paper, slapping aftershave on it to get it really pissed, then stuff it in someone's mailbox. In spite of what you may think, you're no pioneer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashandarei 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 You mean I'm not Rosa Parks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 I mean chances are, you're an a** wipe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shire5k 19 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 I mean chances are, you're an a** wipe. You have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashandarei 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 Nah, take off the wipe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
townhallsavoy 2 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It seems like you are comparing Bama to another school, not talking about it. Its okay, having a team that hasn't had any relevance in 20 years or more must get old when your rival is having fun watching their team play football. To be fair, we have won an NC in the past 20. Better to say around 15 years. Sorry, that MNC has an asterisk by it. You got cheating remember? The NCAA didn't take the title back (as it should have) because they try not to do that, but it is obvious that the '92 team was the recipient of creative accounting. Championships earned soley by breaking the rules are not real championships. If you really have to claim that one then you have to give us credit for winning one in '04 from the Eufala Times. Being named the national champion by a small paper in eastern Alabama is just as valid as stealing one from AP after breaking every rule in the book. But, we were still the best that year and won it all, cheating or not. So, to call us irrelevent is going a tad far. "cheating or not" WOW. You know, most Bammers try to avoid admitting to cheating or skew it so that the cheating wasn't vital to the victory. You just flat out said, "We were the best, cheating or not." Wow. Maybe you meant best at cheating. Is that what you meant? Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashandarei 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 What do you mean we cheated in 92? What did we do? I know the Langham thing happened after that year, but what happened in 1992? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shire5k 19 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It seems like you are comparing Bama to another school, not talking about it. Its okay, having a team that hasn't had any relevance in 20 years or more must get old when your rival is having fun watching their team play football. To be fair, we have won an NC in the past 20. Better to say around 15 years. Sorry, that MNC has an asterisk by it. You got cheating remember? The NCAA didn't take the title back (as it should have) because they try not to do that, but it is obvious that the '92 team was the recipient of creative accounting. Championships earned soley by breaking the rules are not real championships. If you really have to claim that one then you have to give us credit for winning one in '04 from the Eufala Times. Being named the national champion by a small paper in eastern Alabama is just as valid as stealing one from AP after breaking every rule in the book. But, we were still the best that year and won it all, cheating or not. So, to call us irrelevent is going a tad far. "cheating or not" WOW. You know, most Bammers try to avoid admitting to cheating or skew it so that the cheating wasn't vital to the victory. You just flat out said, "We were the best, cheating or not." Wow. Maybe you meant best at cheating. Is that what you meant? Wow. No, I mean that whether we were cheating or we weren't, which I didn't say either, we still won a championship. So, calling us irrelevent is just silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeduke 8 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 What do you mean we cheated in 92? What did we do? I know the Langham thing happened after that year, but what happened in 1992? Were you even alive in 92? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
townhallsavoy 2 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It seems like you are comparing Bama to another school, not talking about it. Its okay, having a team that hasn't had any relevance in 20 years or more must get old when your rival is having fun watching their team play football. To be fair, we have won an NC in the past 20. Better to say around 15 years. Sorry, that MNC has an asterisk by it. You got cheating remember? The NCAA didn't take the title back (as it should have) because they try not to do that, but it is obvious that the '92 team was the recipient of creative accounting. Championships earned soley by breaking the rules are not real championships. If you really have to claim that one then you have to give us credit for winning one in '04 from the Eufala Times. Being named the national champion by a small paper in eastern Alabama is just as valid as stealing one from AP after breaking every rule in the book. But, we were still the best that year and won it all, cheating or not. So, to call us irrelevent is going a tad far. "cheating or not" WOW. You know, most Bammers try to avoid admitting to cheating or skew it so that the cheating wasn't vital to the victory. You just flat out said, "We were the best, cheating or not." Wow. Maybe you meant best at cheating. Is that what you meant? Wow. No, I mean that whether we were cheating or we weren't, which I didn't say either, we still won a championship. So, calling us irrelevent is just silly. So you were relevant to NCAA investigators? You were relevant to exposing a team that was cheating? You were relevant to newspaper articles? I'm confused. If you won a championship THROUGH cheating, then technically you didn't win a championship. So SMU should be remembered as a good program in the 80s? I mean, cheating or not, they still won ball games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bama My Heart 5 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 What do you mean we cheated in 92? What did we do? I know the Langham thing happened after that year, but what happened in 1992? Didn't the think with Langham happen after the championship game? Where he signed some cocktail napkin with some agent. That is why it did not effect the 1992 championship, but we had to forfeit the games for 1993. I am just asking, because that is what I understood, but I do not guarantee that my facts are carved in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shire5k 19 Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 So you were relevant to NCAA investigators? You were relevant to exposing a team that was cheating? You were relevant to newspaper articles? I'm confused. If you won a championship THROUGH cheating, then technically you didn't win a championship. So SMU should be remembered as a good program in the 80s? I mean, cheating or not, they still won ball games. I'm not really understanding the whole "relevant" thing either. I thought it just meant that we were some podunk team that didn't do anything of consequence whatsoever in the 90s, which isn't the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashandarei 0 Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 I'm just confused as to how we cheated that year since the only thing I can think of, Langham, happened after we won the title. And yes, I was alive in 92, by a decent amount of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.