It wasn't all that special. Now I'll go on to tell you how 99% of the time it doesn't happen and how he'll never repeat it. Again....not special, tho.
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
Well, if only the team was up to the standards of St. Joe of the Children ( all genuflect and sing his praises) their OL would have been able to stop JT, and the "lucky bounces" that led to his picks would never have happened.
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
"Hi, I'm Zurp."
"Hello, Zurp."
"I'm a cultaholic. I love hearing things cults believe and think and say. I believe I'm addicted to it."
(General grumbling from the crowd.)
"But it had been 3 days since I went onto Nittany Lounge, and I was feeling pretty good."
"Good for you, Zurp, maybe you're starting to improve."
"But this morning, I fell off the wagon. But look at what I found!!! It's hilarious!"
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/good-game-nits.325902/page-3
The thread was started after Ohio State beat Penn State. Some Buckeye fan started a "good game" thread. And they've been cool about it. But, as all cool-tempered threads over there do, this one has turned into "RAWR!!! WE WERE SCREWED!!!" They don't think they were screwed in the game, but just over the years. Screwed because Michigan State has had more success this century than they did.
New guy gets involved and responds to the claim that they only lost to Pitt that year on a fluke play.
If I remember correctly, it was Alabama at 1 and Clemson at 2. And Clemson jumped Ohio State at that point - Ohio State was #2 going into The Game. The final 2 spots were going to go to Ohio State (1 loss - only to Penn State), Penn State (2 losses - to *ichigan by a lot and to Pitt), and Washington (1 loss, but I forget to whom). I think if Penn State beat Pitt, Ohio State probably should have been ranked above Penn State, due to their records against each other. Ohio State with a 3 point win and a 3 point loss. Penn State with a 3 point win and a 39 point loss. So it should have been between Penn State and Washington. Penn State very well may win that argument, in that case.
But... that wasn't the case. Go cry on your message board and then go unclog the toilet that I just clogged for you.
"Hello, Zurp."
"I'm a cultaholic. I love hearing things cults believe and think and say. I believe I'm addicted to it."
(General grumbling from the crowd.)
"But it had been 3 days since I went onto Nittany Lounge, and I was feeling pretty good."
"Good for you, Zurp, maybe you're starting to improve."
"But this morning, I fell off the wagon. But look at what I found!!! It's hilarious!"
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/good-game-nits.325902/page-3
The thread was started after Ohio State beat Penn State. Some Buckeye fan started a "good game" thread. And they've been cool about it. But, as all cool-tempered threads over there do, this one has turned into "RAWR!!! WE WERE SCREWED!!!" They don't think they were screwed in the game, but just over the years. Screwed because Michigan State has had more success this century than they did.
(Make sure you reinforce that the sanctions were undeserved.)
So... luck is the reason Michigan State did well for a couple of years, and the reason Penn State isn't doing very well. I guess if you don't have anyone else to blame, blame your luck.
There it is - "We got screwed in 2016!" And it goes on:
Oh no!!! Was Penn State the victim of a fluke play in 2016??? Let's make sure to right the wrong by bitching about it on a message board!
That's the first I've heard that.
The argument is mostly between LandoComando and PSU2UNC. I'll let you decide which is the goober PSU homer.
New guy gets involved and responds to the claim that they only lost to Pitt that year on a fluke play.
I don't think anyone is arguing that point. I think many or most of us would even agree.
If I remember correctly, it was Alabama at 1 and Clemson at 2. And Clemson jumped Ohio State at that point - Ohio State was #2 going into The Game. The final 2 spots were going to go to Ohio State (1 loss - only to Penn State), Penn State (2 losses - to *ichigan by a lot and to Pitt), and Washington (1 loss, but I forget to whom). I think if Penn State beat Pitt, Ohio State probably should have been ranked above Penn State, due to their records against each other. Ohio State with a 3 point win and a 3 point loss. Penn State with a 3 point win and a 39 point loss. So it should have been between Penn State and Washington. Penn State very well may win that argument, in that case.
But... that wasn't the case. Go cry on your message board and then go unclog the toilet that I just clogged for you.
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
By the way, I'm looking for this "fluke play". I'm not seeing it. Pitt had a 42-31 lead late. Penn State scored a touchdown and then got the 2 points. They got the ball back, converted on a 4th and 16, then threw an interception in the endzone with about a minute to go. Is that the fluke play? Throwing an interception in double coverage? I didn't see any pass interference or anything either.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
https://buckeyeplanet.com/forum/threads/penn-state-cult-joe-knew.627022/
So some nerd uses NCAA14 to simulate the game with today's players. Then he posts them on Nittany Lounge. I think they're supposed to get all pumped up or something.
This week, they played Rutgers, and won 36-33 in overtime. (23-23 in regulation.)
So some nerd uses NCAA14 to simulate the game with today's players. Then he posts them on Nittany Lounge. I think they're supposed to get all pumped up or something.
This week, they played Rutgers, and won 36-33 in overtime. (23-23 in regulation.)
I love it: "Documented Pitt fan". Are we supposed to get documentation on who we root for? I mean, I'm not saying anyone should put any value in these videos - they mean about as much as a fart in the wind. But if he's really just a troll, don't you think he could do better than this? Make the stats for Penn State players 0, and watch them get rolled 120-0 by Rutgers.
Upvote
0
Yeah, they have checkpoints set up all across central PA manned by pedophiles in brown shirts and cardboard Joeped cutouts. "Your papers please."
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
I don't know why I was even reading that thread. It's pretty lame.
But they start arguing about whether they should root for the Big Ten or not.
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/worst-case-scenario-for-psu.327882/page-2
Then, one of my favorite arguments came up:
So... I may be reading more into this post than I should be, but I've seen it much more clear than this one. The argument is that the Big Ten voters kept Penn State out of the championship. I love it.
First, because no, they didn't. Check out this map:
Let's just assume it is correct, based on the fact that the link has "PSU" in the URL: http://www.personal.psu.edu/staff/j/e/jed124/1994_AP_Vote_Maps.html
And it's a post bitching about how the Big Ten was bullying the new kid.
And according to this site: https://collegepollarchive.com/football/ap/seasons.cfm?seasonid=1994, Penn State got 10.5 first place votes, and Nebraska got 51.5 first place votes. I count 10 Penn State logos in the above map. Since I can't count to 51, I'll assume that part is correct.
First, eff that nerd who didn't make a decision. It looks like that 1 guy gave Nebraska 24.5 points and Penn State 24.5 points.
Take him out and there are 61 voters. 51 picked Nebraska, and 10 picked Penn State.
Total points becomes 1515 for Nebraska, and 1473 for Penn State.
Take out their first place votes, and Nebraska has 240 points from 10 voters = 24 points per voter = all picked Nebraska #2.
Take out their first place votes, and Penn State has 1223 points from 51 voters = 23.98 points per voter. If we guess one jerk picked Penn State #3, they have 1200 points from 50 voters = 24 points per voter. So Penn State got 10 first place votes, 50 second place votes, and 1 third place vote.
Next, let's say I can assume I know which state the logos belong in. I count 3 N's in Illinois (one might be Missouri, though), 1 N in Indiana, 1 N in *ichigan, 4 N's in Ohio, 2 N's in Pennsylvania (hahaha!). Iowa also has 1 N, but they're shared with Big 12. I see 5 P's in those states. I see 4 P's in SEC states, and 1 way out there in Utah. Now let's just say we can flip all those N's to P's, because.. Big Ten support and stuff. That's 12 N's that become P's (counting the one in Iowa). That gives Penn State 22 first place votes, 38 second place votes, and 1 third place vote. (I'm assuming one of the N's flipping to Penn State wasn't a 3rd place vote.) Nebraska still has 39 first place votes and 22 second place votes. So cry all you want about Big Ten support, it wouldn't have given Penn State a championship in 1994.
Also, you didn't even get a majority of the voters in your own state. Stop crying about conference allegiance.
Finally, all of that is irrelevant because it doesn't really address the number of voters that the Big Ten actually has: ZERO! The Big Ten has zero voters. The Big 12 has zero voters. Neither conference had any in 1994, either. Stop your whining about this.
But they start arguing about whether they should root for the Big Ten or not.
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/worst-case-scenario-for-psu.327882/page-2
Then, one of my favorite arguments came up:
So... I may be reading more into this post than I should be, but I've seen it much more clear than this one. The argument is that the Big Ten voters kept Penn State out of the championship. I love it.
First, because no, they didn't. Check out this map:
Let's just assume it is correct, based on the fact that the link has "PSU" in the URL: http://www.personal.psu.edu/staff/j/e/jed124/1994_AP_Vote_Maps.html
And it's a post bitching about how the Big Ten was bullying the new kid.
And according to this site: https://collegepollarchive.com/football/ap/seasons.cfm?seasonid=1994, Penn State got 10.5 first place votes, and Nebraska got 51.5 first place votes. I count 10 Penn State logos in the above map. Since I can't count to 51, I'll assume that part is correct.
First, eff that nerd who didn't make a decision. It looks like that 1 guy gave Nebraska 24.5 points and Penn State 24.5 points.
Take him out and there are 61 voters. 51 picked Nebraska, and 10 picked Penn State.
Total points becomes 1515 for Nebraska, and 1473 for Penn State.
Take out their first place votes, and Nebraska has 240 points from 10 voters = 24 points per voter = all picked Nebraska #2.
Take out their first place votes, and Penn State has 1223 points from 51 voters = 23.98 points per voter. If we guess one jerk picked Penn State #3, they have 1200 points from 50 voters = 24 points per voter. So Penn State got 10 first place votes, 50 second place votes, and 1 third place vote.
Next, let's say I can assume I know which state the logos belong in. I count 3 N's in Illinois (one might be Missouri, though), 1 N in Indiana, 1 N in *ichigan, 4 N's in Ohio, 2 N's in Pennsylvania (hahaha!). Iowa also has 1 N, but they're shared with Big 12. I see 5 P's in those states. I see 4 P's in SEC states, and 1 way out there in Utah. Now let's just say we can flip all those N's to P's, because.. Big Ten support and stuff. That's 12 N's that become P's (counting the one in Iowa). That gives Penn State 22 first place votes, 38 second place votes, and 1 third place vote. (I'm assuming one of the N's flipping to Penn State wasn't a 3rd place vote.) Nebraska still has 39 first place votes and 22 second place votes. So cry all you want about Big Ten support, it wouldn't have given Penn State a championship in 1994.
Also, you didn't even get a majority of the voters in your own state. Stop crying about conference allegiance.
Finally, all of that is irrelevant because it doesn't really address the number of voters that the Big Ten actually has: ZERO! The Big Ten has zero voters. The Big 12 has zero voters. Neither conference had any in 1994, either. Stop your whining about this.
Upvote
0