Let me qualify, dog, it isn't hard......................................................................................
You are trying way too hard to find fault with what I post.
Let me qualify, dog, it isn't hard......................................................................................
You are trying way too hard to find fault with what I post.
Thanks for the specifics......Let me qualify, dog, it isn't hard.
I am not trying too hard to find fault with you. I did challenge the use of the word "technically." While you are correct literally, in context it implies a minimization of an event.I don't get it? Seriously?
I am agreeing with you.
The definition of the word "technically" means "according to the facts". The facts are that the system in place at the time was the recognized system of the day - like it or not.
You are trying way too hard to find fault with what I post.
Well, technically, I used the word technically as technically is defined in the dictionary.I am not trying too hard to find fault with you. I did challenge the use of the word "technically." While you are correct literally, in context it implies a minimization of an event.
Lest you think that I am just being silly, let me refer you to Marc Antony's funeral oration in Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar." It's the one that starts out: "Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears." In it, Marc Antony keeps referencing Brutus as an "honorable man" but implies that his actions against Caesar were dishonorable. Again, he says that Brutus was honorable in words but implies the opposite in context. The same appears to be the use of the technicality in your post.
You did use the word correctly; that is not in dispute. But if you were simply being serious, the use of "technically" was unnecessary. Your use of the word in context implies minimization. (It is true but it really isn't.) You are smart enough to know which it was. Your point about a single voter suggests fiat, while minimizing the general acceptance by the public of the recognition. Don't be disingenuous.Well, technically, I used the word technically, as technically is defined in the dictionary.
This is what makes us little brother. We should only be worried about 15,477 days & counting… but I guess all the Painter supporters are ok with counting how many days since we beat a team that has a losing record to every B10 school except 2-3 schools in the past 6 years. Do better and have better expectations
Typical tactic of the math-fanboi type. If someone wants a FF more frequently than every 50 years you call them an IU fan. So tired.Let me guess, you really don't like the "IU Sucks!" chant, too? I guess most IU fans don't...
Typical tactic of the math-fanboi type. If someone wants a FF more frequently than every 50 years you call them an IU fan. So tired.
Painter win a NC? Put the pipe down Crackhead Bob. You must be smoking crack if you believe that....and a lot of it. I'll bet crack has taken all of your teeth. You are delusional!Because a FF is what? It means nothing. I want a national championship, not a final four. People clamoring for a (quite meaningless) FF and also crying about making fun of our rival is typical dumbass material. You must be the chief.
After re-reading the post that you were replying to, this your response does not make sense.Painter win a NC? Put the pipe down Crackhead Bob. You must be smoking crack if you believe that....and a lot of it. I'll bet crack has taken all of your teeth. You are delusional!
Why don't you re-re-read it you dotard. He says he doesn't want FF's, he wants a National Championship. He must be on crack. Not going to happen with Painter. Duh.After re-reading the post that you were replying to, this your response does not make sense.
Can we bet the over/under on what next Monday's number is going to be?
Well much like the last few years IU HAS won the summer feel good season. At least you'll always have that.Only about 120 days until Indiana defeats Purdue! (Oh wait, I guess that's for a different thread title).
True. And as James Brown sang, "I feel good!"Well much like the last few years IU HAS won the summer feel good season. At least you'll always have that.
Wrong board - ask your son! Also, you can Google it.So what is the number for IU track against Purdue track?
Isn’t Mr. Basketball selected by the IU star? A paper that employs over 90% IU grads and virtually no Purdue grads. Funny how that works out huh? Haven’t the last TWO Mr. Basketballs gone to Purdue, Not to mention the 1st runner up as well? Huh, looks like total dominance to me! Now, look behind you!What a coincidence!........ Its been approximately that long since an Indiana Mr. Basketball went to Purdue(Swanigan).....
Weird thing though............ the Hoosiers drought hasn't hurt their abiliity to bring home the state's best player(s). Is it IU? Or more a Purdue thing? Hmmmmm.....
Oh, and if it wasn't for Caleb...... man.......... we're talkin' Glenn Robinson. Some of you weren't even on the planet... let that one sink in....
McHoop
This is a BS thread. It ignores a more recent Purdue win and thus is only here to antagonize. As such, the thread should be eliminated and Inspector banned.
I am not in favor of banning people as I value free expression. Inspector, you are not interested in discussion and rather are just seeking to annoy. As such, you should just quit this. I realize that the recent and very long streak that Purdue had against IU has obviously really gotten into your head to the point that it has made your silly behavior acceptable. Unfortunately, it is not.
Annoy IU fans. How dare he/she do that! Today it's probably around 245.This is a BS thread. It ignores a more recent Purdue win and thus is only here to antagonize. As such, the thread should be eliminated and Inspector banned.
I am not in favor of banning people as I value free expression. Inspector, you are not interested in discussion and rather are just seeking to annoy. As such, you should just quit this. I realize that the recent and very long streak that Purdue had against IU has obviously really gotten into your head to the point that it has made your silly behavior acceptable. Unfortunately, it is not.
There is no sarcasm in my post. It is a statement of fact. Inspector's posts are simply here to annoy. IU did have a wining days streak for about a month based upon their breaking the multi-year streak that Purdue had by virtue of their win in the first of the two games played last season. However, it ended via the second game when Purdue won. The chosen act of ignoring the second game (which is evidenced by his posts) is designed to annoy.I feel like this is sarcasm... but am afraid it isn't.
There is no sarcasm in my post. It is a statement of fact. Inspector's posts are simply here to annoy. IU did have a wining days streak for about a month based upon their breaking the multi-year streak that Purdue had by virtue of their win in the first of the two games played last season. However, it ended via the second game when Purdue won. The chosen act of ignoring the second game (which is evidenced by his posts) is designed to annoy.
As such, what value do his posts bring to discussion here? I see none at all - other than to demonstrate his foolishness and immaturity. As I posted, I am all in favor of the honest exchange of ideas even if I disagree with them as consideration of those to which you may be opposed can nonetheless cause you to reflect more carefully upon your own. However, that is predicated upon an honest exchange, which Inspector's are clearly not.
Excuse me but he is not. Please look at post #534 in this thread. His count clearly reflects the days since IU won the game in Bloomington. His counts from then reference that IU game, not the second one. Go see for yourself. If I am wrong, I am willing to stand corrected, but I do not see that I am.Inspector is counting the days of Purdue's winning streak over IU... no? I don't think he is ignoring anything, Purdue won in early March - that does seem like the count may be off.
I think you are mistaken. If you really count the days since IU beat Purdue, you must start the day after the last Purdue loss, not the last Purdue victory.Excuse me but he is not. Please look at post #534 in this thread. His count clearly reflects the days since IU won the game in Bloomington. His counts from then reference that IU game, not the second one. Go see for yourself. If I am wrong, I am willing to stand corrected, but I do not see that I am.
The streak got up to 2161 and was broken by a rare IU win. The next day it started over at 1 and is now back up to 245. Inspector is a Purdue fan who I'd guess is planning to count it back up over 2000 again.Excuse me but he is not. Please look at post #534 in this thread. His count clearly reflects the days since IU won the game in Bloomington. His counts from then reference that IU game, not the second one. Go see for yourself. If I am wrong, I am willing to stand corrected, but I do not see that I am.
If what you say is correct, then please explain the count of days used in post 534 in this thread and since continued on. Because it does not correlate with what you have posted. As I wrote, if I am wrong I want to be corrected but based upon what is written I do not see that I am.The streak got up to 2161 and was broken by a rare IU win. The next day it started over at 1 and is now back up to 245. Inspector is a Purdue fan who I'd guess is planning to count it back up over 2000 again.
It's a harmless troll of a rival. Go take a nap.
It correlates completely. The number represents days since IU last beat Purdue. Always has since Page 1.If what you say is correct, then please explain the count of days used in post 534 in this thread and since continued on. Because it does not correlate with what you have posted. As I wrote, if I am wrong I want to be corrected but based upon what is written I do not see that I am.