The W
Views: 95593561
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
18.4.14 0343
The W - Football - AP/Harris polls
This thread has 7 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.02
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
(1343 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (48 total)
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.97
Ok, maybe I'm biased but does anybody besides me think that it's stupid that a top 5 team has to lose to drop? Shouldn't teams in the top 5 move up for winning big games regardless if the team ahead of them doesn't lose? I understand that USC was #1 last year and they have a great team, but Texas beat OHIO STATE, Texas should be #1. Florida beat Tennessee, they should be #2. When USC starts beating good teams, fine move them up. But don't give them #1 until they lose just because they were good last year. That's a joke.

Then you have the new Harris poll. The Harris poll is not released until the fifth week so that way we have a better, more accurate poll that wasn't decided by stupid preseason polls. But you know what? It's still wrong! They still have USC ahead of Ohio State and Florida and they still have Virginia Tech ahead of Florida. The only difference in the top 5 of the Harris poll is that Florida is ahead of LSU. So what's the point of the Harris poll?

Am I the only one who thinks this is stupid? It's unlikely, but what if USC, Texas, and Florida go undefeated? USC and Texas will remain #1 and 2 just because they started there and Florida will be left out even though a) they'll have a better season than those two teams and b) they'll have a better season than the teams that got left out of the past two championship games.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
Promote this thread!
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 11 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.47
I think you'd have a beef if USC's CLOSEST win wasn't by 32. Do you really think that USC wouldn't be favored against Texas and heavily favored against Florida?

Autzen is a TOUGH place to play, and the Trojans put up 45 unanswered points on a decent Oregon team. Is Oregon as good as Ohio State or Tennessee? No, but these aren't close games USC's playing.

(Also, polls don't matter until November, anyway.)

EDIT: Also, with playoffs none of this would matter at all.

(edited by JayJayDean on 26.9.05 1028)


"You know what you need?
Some new quotes in your sig.
Yeah, I said it."
-- DJFrostyFreeze

redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 291 days
Last activity: 291 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.14
Florida would have more a beef if they didn't blow a cover in a game where they were up 42 and the spread was 23. Penn State lost a national title in '94 because Indiana hit a worthless Hail Mary against them to lose by only 6, swinging it so Nebraska jumped them.
And, I would like to see Tennessee beat LSU before considering beating Tennessee to be a quality win. Tennessee did go down to the wire at home against UAB.
And, as always in college football, get through the season and the conference title game undefeated. Beat Bama in Tuscaloosa, LSU in Death Valley, Georgia, Florida State and the conference title game. Do that and not get in the national title game, you have a real complaint. Wyoming and Lousiana Tech aren't exactly a murderers row of non-conference wins at this point either.
BigSteve
Pepperoni








Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2653 days
Last activity: 2381 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.06
The question for the people they're polling is "did you think that USC was the best team at the beginning of the year"? If you did, then the way they've played and the talent they have on the team gives you no reason to think that they aren't number one.



(edited by BigSteve on 26.9.05 1620)
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.97
Ok so USC has a great offense I'm not denying that, and yes their closest game was 32 points, but get back to me when they play a good defense. Besides it's not like USC is the only dominating offense. We all know about how USC was down by 13 and came back and scored 45 points, because people talked about it all weekend. But what they didn't talk about was how Florida was also losing 7 - 0 and then turned it around and scored on the next 7 consecutive possesions and Kentucky was actually playing good defense, Florida just played pretty much perfectly in the first half. And it didn't take late in the fourth to get to 45 points, they already had 49 with 2 minutes left in the first half.

The only reason Florida lost the spread, which by the way, who the hell cares, is because they took out their starters at 2 minutes left in the FIRST HALF. When you take out all your starters your team tends to not play as well. If Florida had left in all their starters they could've won 70 - 7 like USC does too.

Yeah, Wyoming and Lousiana Tech aren't tough non-conference wins but they have a better record than Arkansas and Hawaii and then Florida has a win overs over Tennessee and Kentucky against USC's game against Oregon. Seems pretty simple to me that Florida has played the better schedule and won all their games which means they've had a better season.


And RSN, you're right, if they do beat all those teams, which I don't think is going to happen, and they don't get into the National Title game, then they have a beef. Which is exactly what Auburn did last year (except for playing FSU) and they didn't get it. The only reason they didn't get in was because they started lower on the preseason polls, which backs up my whole point that teams should move up based on performance not based on where they started in the preseason polls.

(edited by Quezzy on 26.9.05 1340)

(edited by Quezzy on 26.9.05 1341)

Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
RYDER FAKIN
Six Degrees of Me








Since: 21.2.02
From: ORLANDO

Since last post: 488 days
Last activity: 71 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.85
redsoxnation: Florida would have more a beef if they didn't blow a cover in a game where they were up 42 and the spread was 23.

HEYOOO!!!

Queezy: The only reason Florida lost the spread, which by the way, who the hell cares, is because they took out their starters at 2 minutes left in the FIRST HALF.

Believe me, there's a whole lotta people who care..."Spurrier wern't ta let that happen"...ha ha...they are already roasting Oscar Meyers in effigy! Kinda clever if you think about it

FLEA



Demonstrations are a drag. Besides, we're much too high

1ryderfakin.com - THE IWC 100! And The Wrestling Dead Pool!!
Jaguar
Knackwurst








Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 10 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.61
The NCAA Division one Title is a joke. And it will remain that way until they get overthemselves and go to a damn playoff system.



Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 146 days
Last activity: 139 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.51

Who voted for Illinois???!?



As of 2/28/05: 101 pounds since December 7, 2004
OFFICIAL THREE-MONTH COUNT: 112 pounds on March 9, 2005
OFFICIAL SIX-MONTH COUNT: 142 pounds on June 8, 2005
As of 9/26/05: 170 pounds "I've lost a light heavyweight"
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 11 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.47
    Originally posted by Eddie Famous
    Who voted for Illinois???!?


Here is the resume for the University of Idaho Vandals.

at WSU, L 38-26
at UNLV, L 31-24 (UNLV's only win in '05)
at Washington, L 34-6 (Washington's only win in '05)
Hawaii, L 24-0 (Hawaii's only win of '05)

Idaho received five votes in the Harris poll.



"You know what you need?
Some new quotes in your sig.
Yeah, I said it."
-- DJFrostyFreeze

Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.97
    Originally posted by JayJayDean
      Originally posted by Eddie Famous
      Who voted for Illinois???!?


    Here is the resume for the University of Idaho Vandals.

    at WSU, L 38-26
    at UNLV, L 31-24 (UNLV's only win in '05)
    at Washington, L 34-6 (Washington's only win in '05)
    Hawaii, L 24-0 (Hawaii's only win of '05)

    Idaho received five votes in the Harris poll.


Wow, that's messed up, have they said at all what the Harris poll takes into consideration?



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
Whitebacon
Boudin blanc








Since: 12.1.02
From: Fresno, CA

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.90
    Originally posted by Quezzy
    But what they didn't talk about was how Florida was also losing 7 - 0 and then turned it around and scored on the next 7 consecutive possesions and Kentucky was actually playing good defense, Florida just played pretty much perfectly in the first half.

    (edited by Quezzy on 26.9.05 1340)

    (edited by Quezzy on 26.9.05 1341)


Can't say I saw the game, but allowing a team to score on seven straight possessions can't be considered playing good defense.



Can you touch a rainbow? Can you put the wind in your pocket? No! Such is Neifi!

TheMark 9.6.05 2227.30 - 9.6.05 2242.29. Gone, but not forgotten.
Mayhem
Scrapple








Since: 25.4.03
From: Nashville, TN

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.85

What baffles me is why did the polls come out on Sunday? There was still a game between two Top 10 teams to be played on Monday Night ... which I am happy to say was a DANDY, won by those Volunteers of mine.
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 40 days
Last activity: 17 hours
AIM:  
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.68
Ok, first USC won't play a good defense until they make the national title game, just like the previous years with the exception of Virginia Tech who gave them all they could handle. The Pac 10 doesn't play good defense. But I really don't see how anyone could doubt that they are the best team right now. Until someone actually beats them, what reason do we have to drop them down? Now I do have a gut feeling they will lose a game this season, but who knows.

Now Florida in my view has little case for the top spot. I watched all of their games so far and aside from whipping an overrated Kentucky team, their offense has looked like poop on a stick. The SEC is next to impossible to run through undefeated, no to mention they still play FSU. The chances Florida with that team still learning will win out are slim to none. They just don't look good enough. And yes Tennessee won last night but were still overrated coming into the season anyway.

Texas is definatly the number two team I think. Ohio State may play the worlds most boring football, but beating them is no small task. Figuring on the rest of the Big 12 continuing to suck ass, and we've likely got Texas as a lock for the national title game.

FSU, well no they won't go unbeaten so whatever.

And yet again stop with the playoffs will fix everything bs. You still have to pick teams for a playoff and there is no viable way to do that other than a poll. More teams you pick, more controversy you make. It won't work. Dump the BCS and go back to what it used to be.
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 11 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.47
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    And yet again stop with the playoffs will fix everything bs. You still have to pick teams for a playoff and there is no viable way to do that other than a poll. More teams you pick, more controversy you make. It won't work. Dump the BCS and go back to what it used to be.


I take issue with this thought unless you can tell me, without consulting the internet or looking it up any other way, who were the three teams that got screwed the most by being left out of last year's basketball tournament. In a 16-team tournament, there would be little griping about who team #17 would've/should've been, unless it's REALLY egregious, like they beat the #16 team but got left out anyway, and it goes away fairly quickly and quietly, in any case.

Also, I don't remember hearing from any Division I-AA, Division II, Division III, or NAIA fans that wish their teams went to bowls instead of having playoffs.



"You know what you need?
Some new quotes in your sig.
Yeah, I said it."
-- DJFrostyFreeze

Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.97
Ok, one more time I'll explain it and then I'll be done. I am not saying USC is not the best team in the nation, I'm not saying they will not go undefeated and win the whole thing, what I'm saying is they should not be #1 right now because they haven't beaten anyone. The rankings should not be how you think they are going to finish at the end of the year it should be what the team is doing RIGHT NOW. Right now Texas has beaten Ohio State, Florida has beaten Tennessee and USC has beaten Oregon. You can't tell me that beating Oregon, no matter by how many points it is, is better than beating Ohio State and Tennessee.

The reason I think it should be this way is because if you base it on how the teams perform throughout the season it will probably work out in the end. USC can move up when they beat a good team, Florida and Texas can drop if they lose or just have a bad game. But if you give USC the number one spot automatically and Texas the number two spot automatically no matter what # 3 does, then number 3 could have a better season and not get in the championship.

This is exactly what happened last year, a couple of people now have said Florida won't go undefeated because the SEC is too hard. So if a team DID go undefeated don't you think that's pretty impressive? Cause Auburn did that last year and they were left out. Why were they left out? Not because they didn't have as good as season but only because USC started the season #1 and Oklahoma started the season #2, at some point Auburn's performance should've moved them into the top 2.

Whitebacon - Since you didn't see the game let me explain. Florida ran the option and just about every time Kentucky had someone in position to make a play, Leak just made the right decision whether to pitch it or keep it, if the option is ran properly it can beat you even if you are playing good defense. I'm not saying Kentucky has a super defense or anything, but they were prepared and had the offense well scouted, Florida just outplayed them.

wmatistic - you're full of it for 2 reasons, 1. you didn't watch the Florida/Wyoming, Florida/La Tech or Florida/Kentucky game unless you are a Florida fan or a fan of one of the other teams (in which you wouldn't have watched the other two). 2. you didn't watch those games if you think Florida's offense is "poop on a stick" unless you don't know what a good offense is. So they were rusty against Wyoming, so what? It's the first game they have EVER used that offense and it's not like it was a close game. Their offense looked incredible in the LA Tech and Kentucky games and Tennessee was a tough game because Tennessee is a top 10 team and annually one of the best defenses. Plus it's not just about scoring points and gaining yards it's about performing at the right time, against Tennessee Chris Leak threw it on third down 7 times, every time he completed the pass, only once it wasn't for a first down, against Kentucky he was perfect 5 for 5 on third down conversions when passing it. The offense is dominating, if you can't see that, get your eyes checked.

Plus, I'm sure people haven't noticed unless they have watched Florida's game, but their defense is pretty darn good too. Even though they lost the spread, which I still think is a non-factor, and gave up 28 to Kentucky, they have still given up less points per game than USC's wonderful defense.

As for a playoff, sure that is the solution, but it's not going to happen. If it were, I suggest this. Put the winner of every conference in the playoff, if the conference has two division, but both division champions in the playoff So then you have:

ACC Atlantic Champion
ACC Coastal Champion
Big 12 North Champion
Big 12 South Champion
Big East Champion
Big Ten Champion
Conference USA East Champion
Conference USA West Champion
Mid American East Champion
Mid American West Champion
Mountain West Champion
Pac 10 Champion
SEC East Champion
SEC West Champion
Sun Belt Champion
WAC Champion

- If you are in a conference that has two divisions then you play the other division winner in the first round, that way you can still have your championship game and the conference champion is guaranteed to go farther.

- If you are an independent team, get your ass in a conference or don't be eligible.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
BigSteve
Pepperoni








Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2653 days
Last activity: 2381 days
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.06
I still don't get why scoring 49 on Kentucky is so impressive. Kentucky is going to win to about three games this year, right? Yes, 49 points is impressive, but if you want to call yourself a top five team (let alone best team in the country), you had better be able blow out sorry teams like UK, La Tech, and Wyoming.

There's no need to get excited about the first poll anyway. The top three teams all beat a top 25 team and blew out some horrible teams. They all have similar enough resumes that it's pointless to carp about the exact positioning. If they're all undefeated on November 1st, then it's time to start debating who should be where. Until then, it's fairly irrelevant.

That playoff setup you mentioned Quezzy would never work. You can't have two teams from the MAC and CUSA but only one from the Big 10 and Pac 10. And I don't see why a team should have to be in a conference to get a bid. I'd bet the farm that Notre Dame plays a much tougher schedule than whoever it is that winds up taking the Big East or the MAC.

I don't mind the bowl system, but I hate the BCS. The only reason to continue with bowls instead of a playoff is for the tradition, and if we have the Big East and SEC playing in the Rose Bowl, that ain't tradition. Plus it isn't like the BCS has done a great job of giving us that undisputed chammpion that everyone wanted. It's probably done a great job of lining certain folks pockets though, and that's really what counts, isn't it?

EDIT to below: I don't think that anything bigger than a 16 team playoff would be feasible. With 32 or 48 teams you're adding five or possibly six games to an 11 or 12 team schedule. The alternative is to cut back the regular season, but does anyone think that any of these schools are going to give up money making home games even for a potentially lucrative playoff? I doubt it. I do see the point that you're making about less teams losing out on bowl/postseason money, but I think that the other considerations would outweight that.

How about an eight team playoff with the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange Bowls serving as QF matches with the winners advancing? That has the potential to be the best of both worlds.

(edited by BigSteve on 27.9.05 1312)

(edited by BigSteve on 27.9.05 1315)
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
As JJD and I have said these past couple of years, a 48, 32, or 24 team playoff would work with 119 I-A teams this year.

The BCS is basically their version of the basketball RPI and that would be used to select the non-automatic bids (basically conf champs and extra selections based on a conf's success).

I-A ADs will still say how they can't have their kids missing school, but the other divisions don't have a problem.

It's all about the bowl money. And claiming how they want half the schools to win their last game. But it's more about the money.

I just don't see a playoff system coming unless the NCAA was controlling it, and the schools don't want that to happen.




The Catastrophic Annihilation War Room
"You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing?" --Toby, West Wing

wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 40 days
Last activity: 17 hours
AIM:  
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.49
    Originally posted by JayJayDean
      Originally posted by wmatistic
      And yet again stop with the playoffs will fix everything bs. You still have to pick teams for a playoff and there is no viable way to do that other than a poll. More teams you pick, more controversy you make. It won't work. Dump the BCS and go back to what it used to be.


    I take issue with this thought unless you can tell me, without consulting the internet or looking it up any other way, who were the three teams that got screwed the most by being left out of last year's basketball tournament. In a 16-team tournament, there would be little griping about who team #17 would've/should've been, unless it's REALLY egregious, like they beat the #16 team but got left out anyway, and it goes away fairly quickly and quietly, in any case.

    Also, I don't remember hearing from any Division I-AA, Division II, Division III, or NAIA fans that wish their teams went to bowls instead of having playoffs.


If I hear one more person compare the other divisions of college football to division one I might drive a nail through my skull. They are not even close to the same thing. If a DIII school gets screwed out of a playoff spot, who the hell knows about it? No controversy cause no one gives a rip.

When it comes to the rankings, what seperates teams ranked 12-24 or so? Pretty little realistically. You'll get a whole range of teams and if you take the top 16, hell yes you should have probably five to six schools with the same record and legit claims for being left out. Right now we end up with one team complaining about not getting to the title game. Ok you just multiplied that number by five. Thanks for getting rid of the controversy.

So take 32 you say? As if we really need to see USC play the 32 ranked team in the country to know USC will win? It's a waste of a game, and god forbid the QB gets taken out against SouthWestNorthMiddle Tennesse State, screwing USC when they really need him. Basketball is different in that they can play the games every couple of nights and so a couple of extra games is no big deal, plus they take over half the teams out there. If you could do that with football, maybe ok, but it's silly to even think of a 64 team football playoff. No way in hell would that be worth it to anyone involved. Much better for some of those teams to play bowl games they actually stand a chance of winning then let them get spanked.

No I don't like the BCS, because it has created a pie for everyone to fight over. Before we had bowl games, all on Jan 1st for the most part, and people were ok with that. Now we have these four/five games that everyone wants a part of and nothing else will do. Create a playoff and that makes things worse. Nope, get rid of all this and go back to a mythical champion. If there isn't anything to fight over maybe then we'll get some peace to enjoy the games.

JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 11 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.47
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    If I hear one more person compare the other divisions of college football to division one I might drive a nail through my skull. They are not even close to the same thing. If a DIII school gets screwed out of a playoff spot, who the hell knows about it? No controversy cause no one gives a rip.

    When it comes to the rankings, what seperates teams ranked 12-24 or so? Pretty little realistically. You'll get a whole range of teams and if you take the top 16, hell yes you should have probably five to six schools with the same record and legit claims for being left out. Right now we end up with one team complaining about not getting to the title game. Ok you just multiplied that number by five. Thanks for getting rid of the controversy.

    So take 32 you say? As if we really need to see USC play the 32 ranked team in the country to know USC will win? It's a waste of a game, and god forbid the QB gets taken out against SouthWestNorthMiddle Tennesse State, screwing USC when they really need him. Basketball is different in that they can play the games every couple of nights and so a couple of extra games is no big deal, plus they take over half the teams out there. If you could do that with football, maybe ok, but it's silly to even think of a 64 team football playoff. No way in hell would that be worth it to anyone involved. Much better for some of those teams to play bowl games they actually stand a chance of winning then let them get spanked.


If you're going to just say "I like the bowl games", that's fine, but don't try to act like they are superior to a would-be playoff. How's this for a difference between the lower divisions and Division I: the teams of Divsion I-AA include Eastern Washington University, in Cheney, which is basically the middle of nowhere, like a lot of smaller schools. Their championship game takes place in Chattanooga, TN. To me, the logistics of getting a team from Cheney to Chattanooga on a D-IAA budget is a lot more imposing a student-athlete than flying on D-I budget to major cities where most of these playoff games would likely take place.

Your comment about "what separates the 12-24" teams can esily be applied to the teams from 30-40 (where they get the last at-large teams) in basketball, yet they seem to manage to make a bracket every year. And like I said, which didn't answer, you can't name the teams that get screwed out of March Madness bids every year, because they all could've done something better during their seasons to deserve a spot in the bracket. In football, neither Auburn, Utah, or Lousiville could've won any more football games than they did, yet they were denied a chance to compete for the championship.

Also, 64 is not half the number of Division I basketball teams. There are 119 Division I football teams, but there are around 320 basketball teams, so they're really taking presumably the best 20%, which is what you'd get with a 16-24 team playoff format in football, and the teams that would get cutoff would be 8-3 or 8-4 teams, not 11-0 or 11-1 teams.

Maybe the USC's would get to basically have byes in the first-round of playoffs under such a scenario, but every year in March Madness a #3 seed loses to a #14, a #4 loses to a #13, and occassionally a #2 loses to a #15, so it wouldn't be worthwhile to see how a North Texas (four straight Sun Belt titles and counting) could match-up with one of the big boys?

They're not going to stop awarding the trophy with the big crystal football on it, so they might as well make it possible for all 119 teams to win the thing (which it's not now, no matter how you try and spin it). That's my biggest issue with the bowls/playoff debate.



"You know what you need?
Some new quotes in your sig.
Yeah, I said it."
-- DJFrostyFreeze

pieman
As young as
he feels








Since: 11.12.01
From: China, Maine

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 14 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87

I think JJD makes a lot of sense. I really don't see any downside to having a playoff with 16 teams.

The missing class excuse holds zero water. Every other sport in every other division can do it, why can't they. Money. Zeruel is right about that. It's only about the money. It's never about the "student"-athlete.







Gabba gabba hey!
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
Thread rated: 5.02
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
Thread ahead: A feel-good Tom Brady story
Next thread: WEEK 4 LIVE FROM MEXICO
Previous thread: Madden curse lives on?
(1343 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
I'm sorry, but just making that one mistake is not the only thing Madden ever did wrong. I think the most important thing is to never, ever, ever, ever, ever let him draw on the screen with that pen.
- chazerizer, Jeremy Shockey (2002)
The W - Football - AP/Harris pollsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.147 seconds.