nyjunc Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 very dumb argument. They were going to be a #2 anyway. The comical thing was you insisting they wouldn't get a #2. Now you're trying to cover yourself, and you look like a real moron trying to do it. What else is new? At no point did I insist they wouldn't get a 2, I said at the time they weren't a 2 and they would need alot of teams to struggle down the stretch to get a 2 seed. That happened. th eonly dumb argument is calling memphis the best team in the Country and saying that a month and a half ago when even after 3 teams that got 1 seeds lost AT LEAST 2 times and Memphis ran the table memphis STILL didn't get a 1 seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yisman Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I never said they definitely would get a #1. You said Duke would definitely get a #1, though. You were wrong. By the way, stop dodging the question: If the committee was correct not to give Memphis a #1, why did Louisville get the #1 overall? You cannot keep up with me, junc. It's pathetic to watch your frantic attempts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I never said they definitely would get a #1. You said Duke would definitely get a #1, though. You were wrong. By the way, stop dodging the question: If the committee was correct not to give Memphis a #1, why did Louisville get the #1 overall? You cannot keep up with me, junc. It's pathetic to watch your frantic attempts. My 4 year old son can keep up with you. UL and memphis have nothing to do w/ each other. UL didn't deserve the 1 overall but they deserevd a 1. You were saying Memphis deserved a 1 seed a month and a half ago and, as usual, you were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yisman Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 My 4 year old son can keep up with you. That's true, because unlike yourself, your 4 year old son is not mentally retarded. UL and memphis have nothing to do w/ each other. UL didn't deserve the 1 overall but they deserevd [sic] a 1. I'll say it again, slowly: If Memphis did not deserve a #1 because they didn't get a #1, then you must be admitting Louisville deserved the #1 overall. Get your 4 year old to help you read my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 So b/c they made 1 mistake that means they made another? That makes no sense. At least UL was clearly a 1 seed so thr error wasn't outrageous. It was outrageous if a month and a half ago they should have been a 1 seed and since then ran the table while 3 other 1 seeds lost at least 2 games. Memphis looked like a 1 seed today, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yisman Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 stop deflecting. Your argument makes no sense. Are you giving the committee's decisions legitimacy? If yes, then Louisville deserved the #1 overall and Memphis did not deserve a #1. If no, then Louisville did not deserve the #1 overall and Memphis did deserve the #1. You can't say the committee is right when it's convenient for you and say it's wrong when it's not. Otherwise, I'll go ahead and say the committee was right not to go ahead and give UNC the #1 overall and was wrong in failing to give Memphis a #1. That would be a junc-style argument. When something supports you, claim it's right. When it doesn't, say they're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 stop deflecting. Your argument makes no sense. Are you giving the committee's decisions legitimacy? If yes, then Louisville deserved the #1 overall and Memphis did not deserve a #1. If no, then Louisville did not deserve the #1 overall and Memphis did deserve the #1. You can't say the committee is right when it's convenient for you and say it's wrong when it's not. Otherwise, I'll go ahead and say the committee was right not to go ahead and give UNC the #1 overall and was wrong in failing to give Memphis a #1. That would be a junc-style argument. When something supports you, claim it's right. When it doesn't, say they're wrong. So basically you are saying b/c they made 1 mistake that the rest of their decisions were mistakes. That is your argument and THAT makes no sense. Yes I feel the committee was right in not giving memphis a 1 and wrong in giving Ul the #1 overall. Why can't I say that, one has nothing to do w/ the other. The 1 overall was close. according to you- a month and a half ago memphis was worthy of a 1 seed yet they ran the table while 3 other 1 seeds lost AT LEAST 2 games. How could they have been close to a 1 at that point if that was the case? The answer? They WERE NOT close to being a 1 at that point just like I told you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yisman Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 So basically you are saying b/c they made 1 mistake that the rest of their decisions were mistakes. That is your argument and THAT makes no sense. That is not my argument. My argument is that you either treat the committee's decisions as gospel or you don't. If you're going to start saying "this was a mistake", then that is your subjective opinion. To you, one was a mistake and the other wasn't. You cannot use the committee's decision to claim "I'm wrong", when you already said the committee was wrong in several decisions. You feel the committee was right in giving Memphis a #2, but wrong in giving Louisville the #1 overall. Yes I feel the committee was right in not giving memphis a 1 and wrong in giving Ul the #1 overall. Why can't I say that, one has nothing to do w/ the other. I already explained this multiple times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyjunc Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 That is not my argument. My argument is that you either treat the committee's decisions as gospel or you don't. If you're going to start saying "this was a mistake", then that is your subjective opinion. To you, one was a mistake and the other wasn't. You cannot use the committee's decision to claim "I'm wrong", when you already said the committee was wrong in several decisions. You feel the committee was right in giving Memphis a #2, but wrong in giving Louisville the #1 overall. I already explained this multiple times. Why do I have to agree w/ everything the committee did? It's not possible that got some right and some wrong? The problem is when you say a month and a half ago memphis deserved a 1 then we know all that has happened since then in their favor and they still didn't get a 1 well that tells you they weren't close to a 1 at the time. and I feel they were right in giving UL a 1 just wrong in giving them the 1 overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yisman Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 because once you already say they're making mistakes, which ones were the mistakes and which ones weren't is ALL subjective opinion. I say I'm right and you're wrong. You say the opposite. Most people would agree with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.