This May Be Blasphemy But...

GTKyle said:
but aren't they demonstrating their love for tech by hating GA?

depends how our record was at the time. if we were not bowl eligible regardless of the outcome of the game, then yes.
Click to expand...

Let me put it this way:

If you have a sticker on your car with the stinking bulldog in a red circle with a line through it, you hate ga more than you love tech.

I, for one, would never have anything resembling such an image anywhere near anything I own. Why would I put myself through looking at that horrible brain-death-evoking image every day. I don't care if Calvin is peeing on it, or if it has a line through it. That image need not enter my everyday life. I'll love Tech regardless of the existence of ga. I'd prefer if the school and that image was banished from the universe, and engineers, scientists, etc. roamed free of morons who get behind a clueless, drooling fiend of a mascot.

There, happy Monday. A post, complete with run-on sentences. TO HELL WITH gEORGIA.
 
GTMensLax&SoccerD1Soon! said:
UGA had more of a claim than did any ACC teams. And I would also say that the way OSU has been manhandled lately that UGA v. LSU would have been a better game to watch...
Click to expand...
Who cares if they had a better claim and an ACC team? They had no realistic rationale for being in the MNC game and were rightfully passed over.
 
If you have a sticker on your car with the stinking bulldog in a red circle with a line through it, you hate ga more than you love tech.

I, for one, would never have anything resembling such an image anywhere near anything I own.
Click to expand...

Neither would I, but for different reasons. If it were *safe* to have that, I'd have it, but I know for a fact that I'd get my car firebombed if I had something like that on it.
 
ncjacket said:
Who cares if they had a better claim and an ACC team? They had no realistic rationale for being in the MNC game and were rightfully passed over.
Click to expand...

I Agree, the two teams that played were the two teams that should have played. All I'm saying is that when a conference has two 2-loss teams that are even in consideration it says a lot about the respect that people have for that conference. And the best way for us (Georgia Tech) to earn respect is to have ACC teams do well and be contenders on the national level.
 
GTMensLax&SoccerD1Soon! said:
UGA had more of a claim than did any ACC teams. And I would also say that the way OSU has been manhandled lately that UGA v. LSU would have been a better game to watch...
Click to expand...

You do realize that the only ACC team with somewhat of a claim was vt, right? And I'll give you that. However, do you honestly think they should have been in the national title game over LSU, Oklahoma, and USC? At most, I would put them above USC, but LSU and Oklahoma both won their conferences. Also, before anyone rants on the whole "win your conference" deal, keep in mind that LSU won uga's own conference. If there is EVER a national title contender that gets in over it's conference champion when they have the same record, I will punch someone in the mouth. I'm still pissed about Oklahoma getting in after losing to K-State way back when...
 
GTSaxophone said:
You do realize that the only ACC team with somewhat of a claim was vt, right? And I'll give you that. However, do you honestly think they should have been in the national title game over LSU, Oklahoma, and USC? At most, I would put them above USC, but LSU and Oklahoma both won their conferences. Also, before anyone rants on the whole "win your conference" deal, keep in mind that LSU won uga's own conference. If there is EVER a national title contender that gets in over it's conference champion when they have the same record, I will punch someone in the mouth. I'm still pissed about Oklahoma getting in after losing to K-State way back when...
Click to expand...

Read my post... "The two teams that played were the teams that should have played..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top