Jump to content

Looking back on my season prediction


Recommended Posts

I joined this thing on July 6th after reading a thread about predicting the upcoming season. Back then, I predicted we'd go 1-4 out of the gate, then recover. So far, I'm pretty close:

Well, I haven't been to any of the fall practices or had the time to peruse the injury list, but this is what I think on July 6, 2005 about how the Mean Green will fare during their 2005 college football season:

Game One - Loss, 0-1 (0-0)

Louisiana State University 39, University of North Texas 13

Game Two - Win, 1-1 (1-0)

University of North Texas 28, Middle Tennessee State University 22

Game Three - Loss, 1-2 (1-0)

University of Tulsa 30, University of North Texas 19

Game Four - Loss, 1-3 (1-0)

Kansas State University 40, University of North Texas 20

Game Five - Loss, 1-4 (1-1)

Troy State University 26, University of North Texas 23

Game Six - Win, 2-4 (2-1)

University of North Texas 33, Florida International University 21

Game Seven - Loss, 2-5 (2-1)

Louisiana Technical University 28, University of North Texas 27

Game Eight - Win, 3-5 (3-1)

University of North Texas 28, University of Louisiana at Lafayette 21

Game Nine - Win, 4-5 (4-1)

University of North Texas 28, University of Louisiana at Monroe 21

Game Ten - Win, 5-5 (5-1)

University of North Texas 26, Florida Atlantic University 17

Game Eleven - Win, 6-5 (6-1)

University of North Texas 29, Arkansas State University 19

I think that Troy State University will have two conference losses, so the University of North Texas will once again win the Sun Belt Conference despite what the worm-eating sandbaggers that don't like Darrell Dickey say.

Edited by The Fake Lonnie Finch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the three games played, you had NT scoring 67 points, just off the actual scoring of 23 points.

The average point difference in the two losses were a predicted 15.5, barely missing the actual margin of defeat of 49.5.

When you consider the accuracy displayed in these astonishing numbers and the fact you are the only prognisticator with the foresight to see that NT would beat Little Middle and lose to Tulsa and KSU, you have every right to brag. It's always fun to break out the calculator and sarcasm.

Edited by Coach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how exactly are the people who dont have green tinted glasses and dont blindly follow dd, "worm eating sandbaggers"

Rudy,

That thread had people saying we'd go through the season with two or fewer losses. I was the one not wearing green-tinted glasses in that thread. I figured with our losses on defense, we'd be near the 50-50 mark at 5-6 or 6-5. And, yes, people who bag on Darrell Dickey after the success he's given the program are worm-eating sandbaggers.

Coach,

Yeah, the numbers are off, but you've got to consider that the thing was written in July. That was one of my qualifications before the predictions - having not seen fall practices and not knowing what part injuries might play throughout the season.

It could be that we're as bad as the numbers indicate. Or, it could be that Tulsa and Kansas State are better than everyone thought they'd be, and Middle Tennessee wasn't.

Either way, I still like the way things shape up for conference play. And, it's the conference that counts. OU's Bob Stoops said the same thing yesterday about his team's early struggles. If they turn it around and win the Big 12, they're in a BCS bowl. If we win five more of our conference games, we'll go bowling.

Edited by The Fake Lonnie Finch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, yes, people who bag on Darrell Dickey after the success he's given the program are worm-eating sandbaggers.

Well, there you have it. The fake Johnny Bench says that we are worm eating sandbaggers if we bag on DD. It is official. We are not allowed to question the coach no matter how bad we lose or who we lose to. Any dissent will be met with an iron fist. All offenders will be thrown into a gulag and alternately flogged about the head and shoulders with an autographed copy of Bootleggers Boy and a bag of sporks.

Edited by Eagle-96
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there you have it. The fake Johhny Bench says that we are worm eating sandbaggers if we bag on DD. It is official. We are not allowed to question the coach no matter how bad we lose or who we lose to. Any disent will be met with an iron fist. All offenders will be thrown into a gulag and alternately flogged about the head and shoulders with an autographed copy of Bootleggers Boy and a bag of sporks.

Who said you couldn't dissent? All I said was that if you bag on Dickey, you're a worm-eating sandbagger. Dissent all you want.

Edited by The Fake Lonnie Finch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, then explain your point. Do you even know what a sandbagger is?

Yes, it has several meanings. The one I have in mind is Webster's 2.b.

Main Entry: sandbag

Function: transitive verb

1 : to bank, stop up, or weight with sandbags

2 a : to hit or stun with or as if with a sandbag b : to treat unfairly or harshly c : to coerce by crude means <are raiding the Treasury and sandbagging the government -- C. W. Ferguson> d : to conceal or misrepresent one's true position, potential, or intent especially in order to take advantage of

- sand·bag·ger noun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it has several meanings.  The one I have in mind is Webster's 2.b.

Main Entry: sandbag

Function: transitive verb

1 : to bank, stop up, or weight with sandbags

2 a : to hit or stun with or as if with a sandbag b : to treat unfairly or harshly c : to coerce by crude means <are raiding the Treasury and sandbagging the government -- C. W. Ferguson> d : to conceal or misrepresent one's true position, potential, or intent especially in order to take advantage of

- sand·bag·ger noun

So if we critcize DD for his abysmal non-conference record and and his stubborness with respect to running the ball at 9-man fronts ad nauseum we are treating him harshly and/or unfairly? That's rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i just thought it was funny that you ask him if he knew what a sandbagger was and he posted the dictionary definition of it.  it was like...we know that webster knows the definition of it, we were wanting to know if you knew the definition  smile.gif

The reason I did was because the most common use of sandbagging is getting someone to believe you don't know or can't do something, then taking advantage of them because you actually do know or can do it. That's not the meaning I meant in July, and that meaning wouldn't have made sense. I posted the Websters because I figured not many people knew of the other uses of the term sandbagging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.