Those mutants will just bounce off of their rubber-like heads. Common sense and self awareness bounces off, sadly, so will the pavement. I still like the wall idea but it's going to have to get filled in.
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter mercer_buckeye
- Start date
Those mutants will just bounce off of their rubber-like heads. Common sense and self awareness bounces off, sadly, so will the pavement. I still like the wall idea but it's going to have to get filled in.
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/psu-indiana-game-thread.154919/page-8
More Big Ten Shizholean referees screwing Penn State.
Proof? We can just assume it's holding.
More Big Ten Shizholean referees screwing Penn State.
Proof? We can just assume it's holding.
Upvote
0
Just the B1G doing all it can to keep the Pedsters down. You will recall it was a close win over Indiana which removed them from the #1 ranking in 1994, a spot they never recovered ... though they would have if it wasn't for the B1G region voters.
Upvote
0
martinss01
blissfully stupid
ummmm... zurp, the poster already presented 100% indisputable proof..
wtf man?? did you not even read that part?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
martinss01
blissfully stupid
so its clear none of them have ever signed any form of responsibility to report agreement of any type on any level. in fact, their comprehension of the law period seems to begin and end with "innocent until proven guilty". which i have to say is really just wildly incomplete. do they actually practice law in that state? the fact that the following post was made over a week ago and has not been corrected by someone with even the most basic knowledge of law or business or logic...
[Kinda...but in law it is not. You prove it or you drop it. the people that purport to be lawyers want to have it both ways. And that was the point of his post, and why I posted back. Since the event happened in 2001, and Schultz was in charge of campus security (and a CSA), if he wrote up a report that was since lost, destroyed or stolen, who would know? Furthermore, since he was the senior person over campus security, who would he submit a report to?[/quote]
this entire post makes me sad as a tax payer. wtf are people being taught in elementary school these days??? basic reading comprehension disproves half this post!
so this person is basically saying the following proves paterno is innocent:
paterno was told something he legally had to report
he only told the chief campus rent a co.... the guy in charge of campus security
the guy in charge of campus security is a csa, just like paterno
there is no proof paterno or the campus security chief ever filed any report to anyone
omfg!!! just for starters, if you are trying to prove someone fulfilled their legally binding responsibility to report. saying that there is no evidence they ever reported anything is probably not the best argument ever. if you signed a responsibility to report level agreement, you KNOW who you are supposed to report this stuff to. ITS IN THE AGREEMENT! further, if you are a csa and you have info that has to be reported to a specific group per the responsibility to report agreement and stop at telling another csa.... it doesn't matter if that person is the ceo of god. you are STILL in violation of your responsibility to report agreement. basic logic should tell you this.
[Kinda...but in law it is not. You prove it or you drop it. the people that purport to be lawyers want to have it both ways. And that was the point of his post, and why I posted back. Since the event happened in 2001, and Schultz was in charge of campus security (and a CSA), if he wrote up a report that was since lost, destroyed or stolen, who would know? Furthermore, since he was the senior person over campus security, who would he submit a report to?[/quote]
this entire post makes me sad as a tax payer. wtf are people being taught in elementary school these days??? basic reading comprehension disproves half this post!
so this person is basically saying the following proves paterno is innocent:
paterno was told something he legally had to report
he only told the chief campus rent a co.... the guy in charge of campus security
the guy in charge of campus security is a csa, just like paterno
there is no proof paterno or the campus security chief ever filed any report to anyone
omfg!!! just for starters, if you are trying to prove someone fulfilled their legally binding responsibility to report. saying that there is no evidence they ever reported anything is probably not the best argument ever. if you signed a responsibility to report level agreement, you KNOW who you are supposed to report this stuff to. ITS IN THE AGREEMENT! further, if you are a csa and you have info that has to be reported to a specific group per the responsibility to report agreement and stop at telling another csa.... it doesn't matter if that person is the ceo of god. you are STILL in violation of your responsibility to report agreement. basic logic should tell you this.
Upvote
0
Onebuckfan
classof76
this entire post makes me sad as a tax payer. wtf are people being taught in elementary school these days??? basic reading comprehension disproves half this post!
so this person is basically saying the following proves paterno is innocent:
paterno was told something he legally had to report
he only told the chief campus rent a co.... the guy in charge of campus security
the guy in charge of campus security is a csa, just like paterno
there is no proof paterno or the campus security chief ever filed any report to anyone
omfg!!! just for starters, if you are trying to prove someone fulfilled their legally binding responsibility to report. saying that there is no evidence they ever reported anything is probably not the best argument ever. if you signed a responsibility to report level agreement, you KNOW who you are supposed to report this stuff to. ITS IN THE AGREEMENT! further, if you are a csa and you have info that has to be reported to a specific group per the responsibility to report agreement and stop at telling another csa.... it doesn't matter if that person is the ceo of god. you are STILL in violation of your responsibility to report agreement. basic logic should tell you this.[/QUOTE]
Basic logic not in play at Happy Valley.
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
I'd be interested and probably disgusted to know how many Penn State fans would happily send their children to spend one night with Jerry Sandusky, if it meant that he could get out of jail and cleared of all charges. I think that they think that everyone in the country thinks that Penn State was at the pinnacle of all that is good and right and holy and awesome with college football. And the only reason they aren't still there is because of Jerry Sandusky, and the evil media has used that excuse to tear Joe Paterno, and by extension, Penn State, down.
That's how their "logic" works.
Upvote
0
It has to be dawning on those paranoid imbeciles that they could get left out of the CFP as B1G champs
I bet those are fun threads
I bet those are fun threads
Upvote
0
ORD_Buckeye
Wrong glass, Sir.
Please let the pedsters get upset by Rutgers with a couple of questionable/bad calls at crucial moments going against the cult. That would make my weekend completely unruined.
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/i-love-it-that-if-psu-wins-out-then.155195/
I'd be happier with this revelation if those same referines didn't bone Ohio State out of a win in Happy Valley.
Same thread:
No real anger about it, though.
Most are just salivating that they have the inside track to the Rose Bowl.
Upvote
0
Maybe we all need to kick in a little extra to "The Fund" for the Sparty/PSU game.
The bastards owe us one!
Upvote
0