Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Griffmann
I disagree. It doesn't have to be a clear cut win/loss summary to define consistency, which is the definition you are going by. Look at the actual games.

You started the season strong, winning big and barely losing to the Thrashers. So far so good, and Lisbon looks like a top tier team. Then you just barely beat the Outlaws and Impalers, both 2nd tier teams at best, 1 which depended on luck to even make the playoffs, and Lisbon required last minute scores for both wins. So now Lisbon is a mediocre team who would have lost to barely-playoff-eligible teams if the game were 58 minutes instead of 60. Compare those to NISSA's 33 pt blowout of the Impalers or Chernobyl's 55 pt blowout of the Outlaws.

Then you come back and destroy the Pirates, an arguably better team than the Impalers and Outlaws. So now maybe you guys are pretty good?

Then you lose to the Tanners in a game that was much worse than the score suggests. A Tanners team that lost to NISSA by 38. So now maybe you guys suck?

And of course, the upset against NISSA. So you guys are good again

And while I will hide behind the fact that I know the Zeta teams much better, and can only base Alpha judgments on the numbers, it seems fair to say that I think I've just described "inconsistent" by any definition

I'll make some playoff predictions just for fun, but it would be pretty subjective since I have no spreadsheet to help define spreads and projections. Still, what's the point of playing for the Cubicles if I can't insult a team or 3?

The only thing you can go by in this game is wins and losses. We lost to teams who are (were) ranked higher than us. That is not inconsistent. Again, YOUR projections had us losing 4 games. We lost 3.

Originally posted by Bowens
The only thing you can go by in this game is wins and losses.
I'm not really sure there's any real point in arguing further. You beat the Outlaws with a TD with 52 seconds left. The same Outlaws team that depended on another team losing to even make the playoffs, the same Outlaws team that got blown out by Chernobyl twice, by 50 points, and 40 points. If you'd like to believe that to define Lisbon consistency, then that's fine by me.

Originally posted by Bowens
We lost to teams who are (were) ranked higher than us. That is not inconsistent.
You played Tanners in week 12. Lisbon was 10-1, Tanners were 7-4. Lisbon finished 13-3. Tanners finished 12-4. I think you need to check your facts, since at no point were they ranked higher than you. Assuming of course, the only thing we can go by is "wins and losses."

By the way, Nick Saban kicked ass again this year in recruiting....................

good luck with lame kitten......................




EDIT: Again, YOUR projections had us going 12-4. We are now 14-3. I guess your projections were beyond inconsistent?

LOL I love that you keep using "YOUR" over and over, as if I made the projections up. Obviously you seem to be really upset by it, so by all means go on the GLB wiki and follow the link to the projection spreadsheet and feel free to file your objections with the creator I just paste the numbers heh heh

Also, good job in posting a response but ignoring how you were completely wrong about Lisbon losing to a lower ranked team. Can you please explain that one to me?

As for my opinion that Lisbon is an inconsistent team, that has nothing to do with your record, and everything to do with your game play. You seem to somehow believe that a spreadsheet with projections that *someone else* created is tied to my analysis of Lisbon being inconsistent.

Is this guy really getting upset because some computer generated prediction spread sheet had him going 12-4? Wow, you pulled off a last game upset of Nissa, hell anyone would say you were gonna go 12-4 going into that game. But you came out with a win.

methinks you guys don't understand the concept of these



o_0



and others................

I wish there was one for shrugging.

And um, not upset with a computer generated spread sheet. Not really upset at all, just bored and making a point---passing the time until day 40.

That is all.


Oh, Griff, almost forgot, losing one game makes us inconsistent? Really, is that what you are saying? One game that according to "YOUR" spreadsheet we should have won makes us inconsistent? Ok, you win. I was always told never argue with an idiot because no one can tell the difference.



Roll Tide!

Originally posted by Bowens
Oh, Griff, almost forgot, losing one game makes us inconsistent?
Um, have you read anything I posted? At all? I'm going to try it one last time.

I have already said 3x, my saying Lisbon being inconsistent has nothing to do with wins and losses. I don't know how to make it clearer. I gave you a good example of your game play in specific games, which I guessed you ignored. I actually flat out state

Originally posted by Griffmann
It doesn't have to be a clear cut win/loss summary to define consistency, which is the definition you are going by. Look at the actual games.
Which again, you just ignore. I even try one last time

Originally posted by Griffmann
As for my opinion that Lisbon is an inconsistent team, that has nothing to do with your record, and everything to do with your game play.
Which again, you just ignore. It seems like this whole conversation is basically me saying "It has nothing to do with your record" and you responding "Just look at our record." I'm starting to believe you have trouble reading and I don't want to make fun of the illiterate. That's just like making funny faces at blind people.

The only times I've mentioned YOUR one loss is because YOU said YOU only lost to teams better than YOU, and I'm asking YOU to explain how the 7-4 Tanners were better than 10-1 Lisbon. So along with trouble reading, you have trouble with math. But have no fear, Griffmann the prophet can save you...

Originally posted by Griffmann
They might win a game or two in the playoffs, but when they lose, you'll probably hear, "That's about right.. they're good but weren't really elite."

I also think it's funny that everyone who responded in this thread understands what I'm talking about and agrees with me, but Bowens still somehow doesn't understand.

Well, after seeing Lisbon's exit, my final say on this matter is... that's about right.. Lisbon's good, but they weren't really elite.

You could mention who beat them......................

Originally posted by xylo
You could mention who beat them......................

LMAO Props to the Meltdowns!

Thanks sdt74. I was nervous on this one. I think you are obviously in our league. I think if we play 10 games you guys win 3-4. You proved that in two close games and in beating Nissa. Good luck collecting at least a silver trophy next season!

I hope so. Good luck to you on the final and for next season.

We need a pot stirring emiticon.........................


I don't think my sense of humor is coming over very well.......o_0


So, you're saying a team that goes 14-4 and loses in round 2 of the playoffs is inconsistent?

Again, notice the

you know what means right?



By the way, that Vol coach really looks like a keeper! LMAO

Originally posted by Bowens
I don't think my sense of humor is coming over very well.......o_O

it's because you're not funny

/stirspot

Originally posted by Bowens
We need a pot stirring emiticon.........................


I don't think my sense of humor is coming over very well.......o_O


So, you're saying a team that goes 14-4 and loses in round 2 of the playoffs is inconsistent?

Again, notice the

you know what means right?



By the way, that Vol coach really looks like a keeper! LMAO

Oh you're funny alright, i'm laughing so hard seeing what an idiot you are.