March 17, 201412 yr I still can't find those posts. I think I said Duke should be a 4 seed and was laughed at by you Duke fans. Haven't seen the Duke fans posts saying Duke should be a 4. What I've seen are Duke fans saying Duke should be a 2 seed. 3 at worst. You were laughed at by Duke fans when you said the ACC was the 5th best conference. Duke fans were saying where they thought Duke's actual seeding would be, not where they specifically felt Duke should be seeded. Guessing where a team will be seeded is not saying where they THINK they should be seeded. Hell, I figured Duke would be a 2 or 3 seed but that isn't where I THOUGHT they should be seeded. Go check my Facebook page and just so we are clear but let me be more specific for you..... (ahem) I don't care about seeds or any of that crap. If your team is good enough to win the title they will but because people get caught up in seeds and where first round games are played at let me make this proclamation as Duke fan regarding this year's seeding for the 2014 NCAA Tournament. UL got hosed big time. No way are they are a 4 seed in this year's tournament let alone a 4 seed in a bracket where 3 of the top 4 seeds went to the Final Four last year including their opponent in the National Championship. No way should Duke be a 3 seed and UL be a 4 seed. Not only have I and other Duke faans been saying that Duke sucks all year but I expect them to lose in their first round game because they suck. While they have played in a tougher conference than UL the way UL is playing right now should have them no lower than a 2 seed. Michigan should have been the 3 seed and Duke the 4 seed IF we are going to keep them all in the bracket. In fact, I wouldn't be opposed to UL being the 1 seed in that bracket and moving Witchita State to the 2 seed. Either way you slice it Duke should not be a 3 seed in any bracket and are easily a 4 seed in my eyes based on their body of work this season. I wouldn't have a problem with Duke being a 4 seed at all. That would make them one of the top 12-16 teams in the tournament and I think that is where they realistically fall when you look at all of the teams in the tournament. Is that good enough for you when it comes to my thoughts as a Duke fan?
March 17, 201412 yr Right, but they were not in the same bracket/region. The last time they played in the tournament was the Dream Game in '83. Nope. Played in '84 sweet sixteen.
March 17, 201412 yr You were laughed at by Duke fans when you said the ACC was the 5th best conference. Duke fans were saying where they thought Duke's actual seeding would be, not where they specifically felt Duke should be seeded. Guessing where a team will be seeded is not saying where they THINK they should be seeded. Hell, I figured Duke would be a 2 or 3 seed but that isn't where I THOUGHT they should be seeded. Go check my Facebook page and just so we are clear but let me be more specific for you..... (ahem) I don't care about seeds or any of that crap. If your team is good enough to win the title they will but because people get caught up in seeds and where first round games are played at let me make this proclamation as Duke fan regarding this year's seeding for the 2014 NCAA Tournament. UL got hosed big time. No way are they are a 4 seed in this year's tournament let alone a 4 seed in a bracket where 3 of the top 4 seeds went to the Final Four last year including their opponent in the National Championship. No way should Duke be a 3 seed and UL be a 4 seed. Not only have I and other Duke faans been saying that Duke sucks all year but I expect them to lose in their first round because they suck. While they have played in a tougher conference than UL the way UL is playing right now should have them no lower than a 2 seed. Michigan should have been the 3 seed and Duke the 4 seed IF we are going to keep them all in the bracket. In fact, I wouldn't be opposed to UL being the 1 seed in that bracket and moving Witchita State to the 2 seed. Either way you slice it Duke should not be a 3 seed in any bracket and are easily a 4 seed in my eyes based on their body of work this season. I wouldn't have a problem with Duke being a 4 seed at all. That would make them one of the top 12-16 teams in the tournament and I think that is where they realistically fall when you look at all of the teams in the tournament. Is that good enough for you when it comes to my thoughts as a Duke fan? Here is where we agree. UL got hosed. Duke is seeded too high. Yet when I said those same things, you seemed to have a problem with that. No worries though, I am used to that type of response when I debate things. Just like in the Bengals threads where I debated FC about the Bengals not being the most talented team int eh NFL last year and he said they were, as soon as I supplied facts to the argument he dissapeared and I still haven't heard a peep out of him or his backers since then and it's been months. Same thing here, I supllied facts to back my stance on the ACC and haven't heard a peep out of anyone since I added that to the debate except for a post here and there saying I was being laughed at by Duke fans...yet nothing from them to prove me wrong. Where we disagree is where Duke getting seeded doesn't matter. Of course it matters because the higher seeds usually have an easier path to the final 4. So of course being a 3 seed is better than a 4 or 5 seed. Where we also disagree is that teh ACC conference thing. I supplied facts to back up where I claimed the conference was in rankings, Duke fans supplied nothing but just "claimed" they were among the nations best conference this year. So at least for my side of the debate, I brought facts to back my belief and that was the RPI rankings of conferences. Still waiting for anything of substance to back your and the other Duke fans stance on why the ACC is among the best this year. So you saying Duke fans were laughing at me for saying ACC was 5th best this year must translate to "We don't have anything to go against what you claimed so we will just laugh and hope you give in to us" lol
March 17, 201412 yr Here is where we agree. UL got hosed. Duke is seeded too high. Yet when I said those same things, you seemed to have a problem with that. No worries though, I am used to that type of response when I debate things. Just like in the Bengals threads where I debated FC about the Bengals not being the most talented team int eh NFL last year and he said they were, as soon as I supplied facts to the argument he dissapeared and I still haven't heard a peep out of him or his backers since then and it's been months. Same thing here, I supllied facts to back my stance on the ACC and haven't heard a peep out of anyone since I added that to the debate except for a post here and there saying I was being laughed at by Duke fans...yet nothing from them to prove me wrong. Where we disagree is where Duke getting seeded doesn't matter. Of course it matters because the higher seeds usually have an easier path to the final 4. So of course being a 3 seed is better than a 4 or 5 seed. Where we also disagree is that teh ACC conference thing. I supplied facts to back up where I claimed the conference was in rankings, Duke fans supplied nothing but just "claimed" they were among the nations best conference this year. So at least for my side of the debate, I brought facts to back my belief and that was the RPI rankings of conferences. Still waiting for anything of substance to back your and the other Duke fans stance on why the ACC is among the best this year. So you saying Duke fans were laughing at me for saying ACC was 5th best this year must translate to "We don't have anything to go against what you claimed so we will just laugh and hope you give in to us" lol Show me a post where I said anything about where I feel like Duke should be seeded. I don't care about seedings. At all. I can't recall anytime where I said anything specifically about where I feel Duke should be seeded and the other times I saw Duke fans talk about DUke seedings they were guessing where they thought Duke would be seeded. You said the ACC was worse than the PAC-12 and some other conference. I disagreed. You said because the RPI said so. The RPI isn't used dominantly by anyone. Even the people that do the seedings don't depend on the RPI so why should I? The rankings that are dependable are the Coaches Poll and the AP Poll. Nobody uses the RPI for ranking teams. Why should I? I could go into a nice long reasonable post about why the ACC is the third best conference but you already have it made up in your mind about where the ACC stands. I have a tournament pool at work I need to run and I also have a local issue I am trying to get straightened out. I simply don't have the time and energy to put forth an argument defending the ACC that you already have your mind made up about.
March 17, 201412 yr Show me a post where I said anything about where I feel like Duke should be seeded. I don't care about seedings. At all. I can't recall anytime where I said anything specifically about where I feel Duke should be seeded and the other times I saw Duke fans talk about DUke seedings they were guessing where they thought Duke would be seeded. You said the ACC was worse than the PAC-12 and some other conference. I disagreed. You said because the RPI said so. The RPI isn't used dominantly by anyone. Even the people that do the seedings don't depend on the RPI so why should I? The rankings that are dependable are the Coaches Poll and the AP Poll. Nobody uses the RPI for ranking teams. Why should I? I could go into a nice long reasonable post about why the ACC is the third best conference but you already have it made up in your mind about where the ACC stands. I have a tournament pool at work I need to run and I also have a local issue I am trying to get straightened out. I simply don't have the time and energy to put forth an argument defending the ACC that you already have your mind made up about. But you said Duke fans said they should be a 4 seed. Whether you said they should be a 4 seed or not isn't what I was responding to, I was responding to you saying Duke fans said they should be a 4 seed. I haven't seen one post saying that yet. Now you talk about the RPI and how the committee members don't even use the RPI as a deciding factor, yet after the selection show they interviewed the committee member and he was asked why SMU was left out and he said because of their RPI SOS ranking. So you can't have it both ways. It's either RPI or not RPI, you can't pick and choose and that is exactly what the commitee did. Now what is even funnier however is your response here saying that the comittee uses coaches poll and AP poll over the RPI yet in the AP SMU was ranked in the top 25 in the AP and 23 in the Coaches, yet NC State and Pitt was not...yet NC State and Pitt both got in and SMU didn't. Try and explain that one if the RPI isn't used or even given less credibility than the AP and Coaches rankings. In the conference debate, I simply asked you and the others who didn't agree with me and the RPI is to simply present something of substance to back your side of the debate. Nothing was ever and still hasn't been presented to show the ACC as better than what I believed they were. Edited March 17, 201412 yr by Hellbird
March 17, 201412 yr But you said Duke fans said they should be a 4 seed. Whether you said they should be a 4 seed or not isn't what I was responding to, I was responding to you saying Duke fans said they should be a 4 seed. I haven't seen one post saying that yet. Now you talk about the RPI and how the committee members don't even use the RPI as a deciding factor, yet after the selection show they interviewed the committee member and he was asked why SMU was left out and he said because of their RPI SOS ranking. So you can't have it both ways. It's either RPI or not RPI, you can't pick and choose and that is exactly what the commitee did. In the conference debate, I simply asked you and the others who didn't agree with me and the RPI is to simply present something of substance to back your side of the debate. Nothing was ever and still hasn't been presented to show the ACC as better than what I believed they were. You are absolutely right. I should be using the RPI. I have seen the error of my ways. Duke should be a 2 seed. I was wrong. [TABLE] [TR] [TD=align: left]Men's Basketball - Team RPIs (2013-2014) [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 2, align: left]Last updated - Sun Mar 16 17:56:55 PST 2014 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 2, align: right]View Power Ratings View Real Time RPIsvip [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [TABLE] [TR=bgcolor: #f0f0f0] [TD=colspan: 2]Rk [/TD] [TD]School [/TD] [TD]W-L [/TD] [TD]RPI [/TD] [TD]SOS Rk [/TD] [TD]SOS [/TD] [TD]Conf [/TD] [TD]Conf W-L [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right] [/TD] [TD=align: right]1 [/TD] [TD]Florida [/TD] [TD=align: right]32-2 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6768 [/TD] [TD=align: right]10 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5823 [/TD] [TD]Sec [/TD] [TD=align: right]21-0 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right] [/TD] [TD=align: right]2 [/TD] [TD]Arizona [/TD] [TD=align: right]30-4 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6728 [/TD] [TD=align: right]4 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5961 [/TD] [TD]Pac12 [/TD] [TD=align: right]17-4 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]3 [/TD] [TD]Kansas [/TD] [TD=align: right]24-9 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6623 [/TD] [TD=align: right]1 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6361 [/TD] [TD]Big12 [/TD] [TD=align: right]15-5 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right] [/TD] [TD=align: right]4 [/TD] [TD]Wichita St. [/TD] [TD=align: right]33-0 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6529 [/TD] [TD=align: right]98 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5373 [/TD] [TD]Mvc [/TD] [TD=align: right]21-0 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right] [/TD] [TD=align: right]5 [/TD] [TD]Villanova [/TD] [TD=align: right]28-4 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6467 [/TD] [TD=align: right]31 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5695 [/TD] [TD]Bige [/TD] [TD=align: right]16-3 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]6 [/TD] [TD]Wisconsin [/TD] [TD=align: right]26-7 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6419 [/TD] [TD=align: right]2 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5988 [/TD] [TD]Big10 [/TD] [TD=align: right]13-7 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right] [/TD] [TD=align: right]7 [/TD] [TD]Iowa St. [/TD] [TD=align: right]26-7 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6396 [/TD] [TD=align: right]11 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5821 [/TD] [TD]Big12 [/TD] [TD=align: right]14-7 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]8 [/TD] [TD]Duke [/TD] [TD=align: right]26-8 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6378 [/TD] [TD=align: right]6 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5917 [/TD] [TD]Acc [/TD] [TD=align: right]15-6 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right] [/TD] [TD=align: right]9 [/TD] [TD]Virginia [/TD] [TD=align: right]28-6 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6376 [/TD] [TD=align: right]23 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5746 [/TD] [TD]Acc [/TD] [TD=align: right]19-2 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right] [/TD] [TD=align: right]10 [/TD] [TD]Creighton [/TD] [TD=align: right]26-7 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6343 [/TD] [TD=align: right]17 [/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5772 [/TD] [TD]Bige [/TD] [TD=align: right]16-5 [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 9] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 3]2012-2013 RPI ratings [/TD] [TD=colspan: 4][/TD] [TD=colspan: 2]more rankings => [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 9]Top RPI moves this week Top 25 RPI Pops Top 25 RPI Drops RealTimeRPI GAMER - a comprehensive sports analysis and prediction system developed by RealTimeRPI.com, check out predictions for today's games by GAMER: Men's Basketball Predictions Women's Basketball Predictions [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]
March 17, 201412 yr You are absolutely right. I should be using the RPI. I have seen the error of my ways. Duke should be a 2 seed. I was wrong. [TABLE] [TR] [TD=align: left]Men's Basketball - Team RPIs (2013-2014)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 2, align: left]Last updated - Sun Mar 16 17:56:55 PST 2014[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 2, align: right]View Power Ratings View Real Time RPIsvip[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [TABLE] [TR=bgcolor: #f0f0f0] [TD=colspan: 2]Rk[/TD] [TD]School[/TD] [TD]W-L[/TD] [TD]RPI[/TD] [TD]SOS Rk[/TD] [TD]SOS[/TD] [TD]Conf[/TD] [TD]Conf W-L[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]1[/TD] [TD]Florida[/TD] [TD=align: right]32-2[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6768[/TD] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5823[/TD] [TD]Sec[/TD] [TD=align: right]21-0[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]2[/TD] [TD]Arizona[/TD] [TD=align: right]30-4[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6728[/TD] [TD=align: right]4[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5961[/TD] [TD]Pac12[/TD] [TD=align: right]17-4[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]3[/TD] [TD]Kansas[/TD] [TD=align: right]24-9[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6623[/TD] [TD=align: right]1[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6361[/TD] [TD]Big12[/TD] [TD=align: right]15-5[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]4[/TD] [TD]Wichita St.[/TD] [TD=align: right]33-0[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6529[/TD] [TD=align: right]98[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5373[/TD] [TD]Mvc[/TD] [TD=align: right]21-0[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]5[/TD] [TD]Villanova[/TD] [TD=align: right]28-4[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6467[/TD] [TD=align: right]31[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5695[/TD] [TD]Bige[/TD] [TD=align: right]16-3[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]6[/TD] [TD]Wisconsin[/TD] [TD=align: right]26-7[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6419[/TD] [TD=align: right]2[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5988[/TD] [TD]Big10[/TD] [TD=align: right]13-7[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]7[/TD] [TD]Iowa St.[/TD] [TD=align: right]26-7[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6396[/TD] [TD=align: right]11[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5821[/TD] [TD]Big12[/TD] [TD=align: right]14-7[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]8[/TD] [TD]Duke[/TD] [TD=align: right]26-8[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6378[/TD] [TD=align: right]6[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5917[/TD] [TD]Acc[/TD] [TD=align: right]15-6[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]9[/TD] [TD]Virginia[/TD] [TD=align: right]28-6[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6376[/TD] [TD=align: right]23[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5746[/TD] [TD]Acc[/TD] [TD=align: right]19-2[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right][/TD] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [TD]Creighton[/TD] [TD=align: right]26-7[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.6343[/TD] [TD=align: right]17[/TD] [TD=align: right]0.5772[/TD] [TD]Bige[/TD] [TD=align: right]16-5[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 9] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 3]2012-2013 RPI ratings[/TD] [TD=colspan: 4][/TD] [TD=colspan: 2]more rankings => [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=colspan: 9]Top RPI moves this week Top 25 RPI Pops Top 25 RPI Drops RealTimeRPI GAMER - a comprehensive sports analysis and prediction system developed by RealTimeRPI.com, check out predictions for today's games by GAMER: Men's Basketball Predictions Women's Basketball Predictions[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Here is what I got from the RPI Men's Basketball RPI Team RPI 1. Florida 2. Arizona 3. Kansas 4. Wichita State 5. Villanova 6. Wisconsin 7. Iowa State 8. Virginia 9. Duke 10. Creighton Conference RPI 1. Big 12 2. Big Ten 3. Pac 12 4. Big East 5. ACC 6. Atlantic 10 7. SEC 8. American Athletic 9. West Coast 10. Mountain West NCAA Mens College Basketball RPI, Teams, Scores, Stats, Rankings - WarrenNolan.com There is the link. So yours and mine show different RPI rankings. I tried clicking on your links and they went to Bluegrasspreps pages. By the way, look at the link I showed for the RPI, they even had SMU ranked higher than NC State...just sayin. What is interesting however is you could see where RPI apparently did play into some of the committee selections and seeding but not all of them. It seems they just used the RPI when it would benefit their argument and ignored it when it went against their argument (same as some on here about the conference rankings lol) RPI would have UL 4 seed and Duke a 3 seed, yet Va shouldn't be a 1 seed and SMU should be in the tourney. Hmmmmm Bottomline, according to RPI, AP and Coaches poll's SMU should be in the tournament ahead of NC State. So even with your argument that the committee uses coaches and AP over RPI, they still screwed up when they left SMU out. BTW, Coaches poll has UL 3rd.
March 17, 201412 yr Things the committee nailed... 1) The tournament field. Can't really complain about any of the teams that got in vs. the teams that missed out. First time I can ever remember the committee getting the field correct. 2) The #1 seeds. Was absolutely sure they were going to screw it up and give Nova or Michigan the last #1, regardless of the outcomes of the games yesterday. The Cavaliers deserved it. 3) I was afraid Duke was going to be over-seeded as a 2, due to how late the ACC tournament ended. Glad to see the committee nailed their seed at the 3 line. That's all I got. They royally screwed up everything else.
March 17, 201412 yr Here is what I got from the RPI Men's Basketball RPI Team RPI 1. Florida 2. Arizona 3. Kansas 4. Wichita State 5. Villanova 6. Wisconsin 7. Iowa State 8. Virginia 9. Duke 10. Creighton Conference RPI 1. Big 12 2. Big Ten 3. Pac 12 4. Big East 5. ACC 6. Atlantic 10 7. SEC 8. American Athletic 9. West Coast 10. Mountain West NCAA Mens College Basketball RPI, Teams, Scores, Stats, Rankings - WarrenNolan.com There is the link. So yours and mine show different RPI rankings. I tried clicking on your links and they went to Bluegrasspreps pages. By the way, look at the link I showed for the RPI, they even had SMU ranked higher than NC State...just sayin. What is interesting however is you could see where RPI apparently did play into some of the committee selections and seeding but not all of them. It seems they just used the RPI when it would benefit their argument and ignored it when it went against their argument (same as some on here about the conference rankings lol) RPI would have UL 4 seed and Duke a 3 seed, yet Va shouldn't be a 1 seed and SMU should be in the tourney. Hmmmmm Bottomline, according to RPI, AP and Coaches poll's SMU should be in the tournament ahead of NC State. So even with your argument that the committee uses coaches and AP over RPI, they still screwed up when they left SMU out. I didn't post a link. Copied and pasted from this page. Realtimerpi.com RealTimeRPI.com Real Time Sport Rankings - A leading sports ratings and resources community on the Internet But that's cool. Your RPI link says Duke is not only a 3 seed but the top 3 seed. ACC is the 5th best conference? Cool. I don't care. RPI rules the day and Duke is a 3 seed. I was wrong. You were right. :thumb:
March 17, 201412 yr Kentucky needs to look at the #8 seed as just beat the Shockers and follow the #1 seed path.
March 17, 201412 yr I didn't post a link. Copied and pasted from this page. Realtimerpi.com RealTimeRPI.com Real Time Sport Rankings - A leading sports ratings and resources community on the Internet But that's cool. Your RPI link says Duke is not only a 3 seed but the top 3 seed. ACC is the 5th best conference? Cool. I don't care. RPI rules the day and Duke is a 3 seed. I was wrong. You were right. :thumb: Hahaha, just like I said, some people use it when it benefits their argument but ignores it when it doesn't. I was just asking what you have to prove otherwise about the ACC and you nor any other Duke fans have been able to give us anything to validate your argument.
March 17, 201412 yr Yet when I said those same things, you seemed to have a problem with that. No worries though, I am used to that type of response when I debate things. Just like in the Bengals threads where I debated FC about the Bengals not being the most talented team int eh NFL last year and he said they were, as soon as I supplied facts to the argument he dissapeared and I still haven't heard a peep out of him or his backers since then and it's been months. Don't believe what he says on this part, I supplied many times how and why. He simply just chooses to ignore and thinks his opinion is a fact. As you all are seeing here it is pointless to argue with him because he truly acts like his opinions are facts. (Interesting I get brought up in a thread, someone said they didn't do these things.) With that said Hellbird I do agree with you that there is no way Duke should be seeded in front of UL. Carry on....
March 17, 201412 yr Don't believe what he says on this part, I supplied many times how and why. He simply just chooses to ignore and thinks his opinion is a fact. As you all are seeing here it is pointless to argue with him because he truly acts like his opinions are facts. (Interesting I get brought up in a thread, someone said they didn't do these things.) With that said Hellbird I do agree with you that there is no way Duke should be seeded in front of UL. Carry on.... Feel free to go into the NFL thread and finally respond then.
March 17, 201412 yr Feel free to go into the NFL thread and finally respond then. I have responded many times to your opinions of things. I have wasted many hours showing you examples of many things that prove you wrong. I have showed you many links over the last two years proving you wrong. What you typically show is opinions. The day I call you out in a thread that was actually about football, you get all bent out of shape and even resort to private messaging me it had you bent out of shape. Then you go and do the exact same thing and you do it in a basketball thread haha. I see exactly the type of person I am dealing with, and I have wasted to much time on you. Because at the end of the day you still will think your opinion on everything is a fact, and don't realize your opinion is just an opinion. So there is no need to get things started again in that thread either because it will get us no where. So carry on, at least we are in agreement though that UL got shafted because no way Duke should have been seeded over them.
March 17, 201412 yr Hahaha, just like I said, some people use it when it benefits their argument but ignores it when it doesn't. I was just asking what you have to prove otherwise about the ACC and you nor any other Duke fans have been able to give us anything to validate your argument. Because it is an obvious waste of time. I'll tell you what though, you tell me what it would take to convince you that the ACC is the 3rd best conference and I'll prove it on your terms. Unless you tell me what it would take I'm not going to waste my time. If we're just going to go by the RPI only, then fine, you win. :thumb:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.