Deleted my thread because so many of you got your panties in a bunch over such a simple thing. I'm so sorry to have ruined your Friday. Now go drink a beer and cool off.
things go poorly
I'm never this guy, but... there's three other threads to post your thoughts on. I'm not happy about it either, pretty much for the same reason, but how about we just forget about it until after the 2013 season?
As for the original author....Suck it up
Please, make a separate post to tell us your personal opinion on a topic instead of placing it in one of the other threads with 90 other people saying the same thing.
I feel like I've read this somewhere before.
No? No charm here? Bummer for the OP.
It's in 2014.
Is when you're eating fruity pebbles and the first few bites are awesome but it gets soggy really quick . I could always put less milk in or just eat a different cereal but I don't want to change. This posses me off and I figured I'd tell you guys about it because I think my opinion deserves it's own post.
and who wants to drink the blue milk thats left at the bottom of the bowl? At least with Cocoa Crispies the milk leftover is chocolate. The only time I've ever seen anyone drink freaking blue milk is when Luke was at Uncle Owens bombing womp rats
Just eat it right out of the box, with no milk. I know its a radical concept, let me know how it works out, in 2014.
Good get it over with. It's like jumping right in a cold lake instead of the painstaking wading in one small step at a time. Good to see Brandon has the courage to jump right into Lake Michigan in September.Just another example of the honor of Manball.
How is sitting in a very low row rank vs in the middle at Michigan Stadium? Say, row 6 vs 50. Both are in the endzone. My concern is the lower rows are not as steep and the view will be obstructed by the 7 or eight rows ahead of me and seeing the whole field will be difficult compared to being higher. But this is just speculation... Need to decide for ND game. Thanks.
50 gets you a nice angle like in NCAA Football 12 or Madden.
Personally, I'd rather sit in row 90 than row 6. I've had seats in row 2 and row 9 and both times I felt like it was hard to see even though I was around the 40 yard line.
I sat in row 91 freshman year...I'll take your row 6 tickets.
It depends where you sit. My freshman year was the last year when students were not guaranteed tickets in the student section. So I ended up with row 30 in the opponent endzone. I would take those row 91 tickets over where I was placed.
Not sure why this is running off topic. I thought I would sneak a question into a forum that has no new ideas. Thought I was doing everyone a favor by not creating a new forum which I never planned to do. I think I will go for a higher row. Thanks for the feedback. I guess its Row A or Row 30+ :)
I've found that I don't care so much about the row -- the view has more to do with sideline vs. corner vs. end zone to me. You can see the whole field just fine if you have the kind of location I had for Illinois 2010: row 79, but section 1 right near midfield.
I know you said your choices are end zone or end zone, but I'm not a huge fan of end zones and corners. Anything much the other side of your nearer 40-yard line, you need binoculars or have to follow the action on the new Godzillatrons.
My opinion/preference is to get between the 20-yard lines and not care about the row. This is just my opinion though, and YMMV.
and it is *my* opinion, so I was going to give it a thread of it's own. That is a lot of work though, so maybe not.
If Michigan has to worry about who they play for fear of losing, it is time to reconsider a few things.
Did anybody think that field goal was going in? I remember think there is no way he was going to make it.
Having it blocked really pissed me off though.
No, I figured he wouldn't put enough angle on it and he'd miss it right.
Who cares what you think, I read better comments on the subject yesterday.
Most underrated comment in the thread IMHE.
I don't know how it got "flamebaited" without a white knight to swoop in and sprinkle magic "normal" dust on it.
Try this out for size:
Jerry Moore, their coach, is the ONLY person who will have been directly involved in both games. Other than that, not a single player from either team will have direct involvement in both games. We've been through two coaching changes since then. App state of 2014 is NOT App State in 2007, and the same can be said for the Wolverines. The only thing the same is the names. So what's the big deal?
What about Fred Jackson?
All right, fair enough. The point still stands though.
I think the big deal is that is opens an old wound that really no one is in a rush to revisit. If we win the game some people might view it as redemption, but I won't just because us beating them is supposed to happen. If we humiliate them then I will just think we were picking on the little guy (and most of the college football world will probably view it this way). If we lose however it will just be utterly humiliating and would be terrible. Its a no win situation. Whatever we do it won't change the past so why not just let it remain buried and move on?
There are plenty of other cupcake schools that we could have picked to open the season with.
I don't see why it matters, the world is going to end next year.
Logged in to downvote. I agree, but I didn't start my own thread.
How many more of these will we see in the next three years? Gah.
"Apparently some of you did not get laid last night..."
*sheepishly raises hand*
At least ONE person liked your post. Let's see who that was...
/Checks voting history
all aroung most humorous poster. I went and checked voting details, and almost spit IPA all over my laptop. (I have the day off.) Funny as hell, dude.
+1 BISB. Seriously Sithster, you can also go to the helpful little MGoBoard tab on the right, and click a few times to see the other topics posted. YOU DONT EVEN HAVE TO REFRESH THE PAGE!
The first thread is still on the front page of the site. No excuse there. The other thread is on the 2nd page of new threads. It took me literally 20 seconds to find both...
Well, if you don't want to check "every fucking thread" for stuff about Appalachian State, maybe only check the ones with Appalachian State in the title? You don't even have to read it, man. Just open it up and toss your opinion in at the end. Or is your precious opinion too special to be buried at the bottom?
We now know what grinds DarthSidious' gears.
Hopefully you have learned a valuable lesson: Use the Site Search box to check and see if your topic has already been posted.
No, it's M Fans who don't want message boards like MLive. This isn't Nam, there are rules.
Or you could simply put the subject of the thread you are writing about in the site search thing right over there. If you would have just typed Appalachian State into it you would have seen that the top two results were both started yesterday.
Hence why a search would be helpful...
And now you do.
Still doesn't explain the tantrum you're throwing...
"doesn't know everything about it?"
But you have been on here for almost two years, and have posted over 100 times ?
Just enjoy the blog, and since you don't follow it that often (I don't either), don't post new threads. Just about ANYTHING M related has been, or will be covered.
Dudes with low point totals like yours will almost always get bombed to shit, even if the post is actually worthy of discussion. It isn't right, but it is the simple truth. Enjoy the forum, post your two cents, and if you want to start a thread, do a search. Wait until you have 1,000+ though. Hope this helps.
Edit: One more thing...NEVER complain about getting negged, or you'll get neg-fucked even harder.
Dudes with low point totals who post a discussion-worthy thread that was already discussed all of 1 day ago, can be found with a simple search, and just happens to be a post with hundreds of replies will get bombed to shit.
Take two aspirin & go read a good book. You'll feel better.
The Horror was merely a prequel to the next 3 years.....of pain and suffering.
Funny how a self-deleted thread can have the words "what angers me" in it, but then the poster accuses responders of having their "panties in a bunch" in his edited version. In comparison, I would imagine that the OP is singing soprano by now...