Marcus Haislip Signs With The Spurs.

[hatvol96]

1. Yeah, Seton Hall was a killer matchup for Louisville. Its a good thing they didn't make it to the tournament...if UL would have drawn them in the first round, they might have been one and done.

The Lakers lost both games to Charlotte this season. I bet they were really relieved when the Bobcats missed the playoffs. I love it when people act like playing to the level of one's competition in a meaningless regular season game has importance.

 

[kidbourbon]

The Lakers lost both games to Charlotte this season. I bet they were really relieved when the Bobcats missed the playoffs. I love it when people act like playing below the level of a certifiably terrible team in a conference game -- all of which are important -- isn't important at all.

Fixed that for you. And it has importance because they would have similarly played below the level of the quality competition of UT...and they would have lost...much like your argument.

Out.

 

[hatvol96]

Fixed that for you. And it has importance because they would have similarly played below the level of the quality competition of UT...and they would have lost...much like your argument.

Out.

Yet another losing post by a lost poster. The proof is simple. They played, Louisville dominated. Just because it further illustrates to all the Pearlophiles and Tyler Smithites that neither of their heroes can cut it in the big time doesn't make it any less true.

 

[hatvol96]

Fixed that for you. And it has importance because they would have similarly played below the level of the quality competition of UT...and they would have lost...much like your argument.

Out.

You didn't fix anything. You simply proved my point. How much did the losses to Cincinnati and Seton Hall damage Louisville's season? About as much as the two losses to Charlotte sank the Lakers.

 

[kidbourbon]

My initial statement.

Tennessee would have beaten Louisville earlier in the season. Louisville was peaking. We were going the other way.

Your initial response.

Tennessee wouldn't have beaten Louisville at any point.

And then...

Yet another losing post by a lost poster. The proof is simple. They played, Louisville dominated. Just because it further illustrates to all the Pearlophiles and Tyler Smithites that neither of their heroes can cut it in the big time doesn't make it any less true.

I am pretty sure that in order to win an argument, one must actually address the argument. Yes, I am quite certain I read that somewhere.

Might want to stay on topic before you start declaring victory, Napolean.

 

[kidbourbon]

You didn't fix anything. You simply proved my point. How much did the losses to Cincinnati and Seton Hall damage Louisville's season? About as much as the two losses to Charlotte sank the Lakers.

Okay, so let me get this straight. Your point was that Louisville would have beaten UT at any point during the season. Correct? My point was UT would have beaten UL earlier in the season. Still good?

I point to UofL's losses to mediocre-to-garbage teams in support of my point. You responded that these losses were "meaningless." I then pointed out that they were most decidedly not meaninglesss. Still following me? Agree with everything said thus far?

And from this, you conclude that I have made your point? Huh? Hat: meet mr. sequitur. Mr. Sequitur: meet Hat.

UofL's improvement at the end of the year is in no way relevant to the question of whether Tennessee would have beaten them earlier in the year. Again, I urge you to stay on point. It makes for a much better discussion.

 

[hatvol96]

Okay, so let me get this straight. Your point was that Louisville would have beaten UT at any point during the season. Correct? My point was UT would have beaten UL earlier in the season. Still good?

I point to UofL's losses to mediocre-to-garbage teams in support of my point. You responded that these losses were "meaningless." I then pointed out that they were most decidedly not meaninglesss. Still following me? Agree with everything said thus far?

And from this, you conclude that I have made your point? Huh? Hat: meet mr. sequitur. Mr. Sequitur: meet Hat.

UofL's improvement at the end of the year is in no way relevant to the question of whether Tennessee would have beaten them earlier in the year. Again, I urge you to stay on point. It makes for a much better discussion.

I urge you to go consume Drano. Louisville would have beaten Tennessee on December 1st, February 1st, or April 1st. The only thing you have backing you up is a couple of meaningless losses to nondescript teams. That's it. Tennessee couldn't compete with the Cards. Period. They could have played on July 1st at the momument to gaudiness Tanning Bed calls a house and Tennessee would have still gotten their asses kicked. Then again, you'd take Tyler Smth over two guys whose bags he can't carry.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[kidbourbon]

I urge you to go consume Drano. Louisville would have beaten Tennessee on December 1st, February 1st, or April 1st. The only thing you have backing you up is a couple of meaningless losses to nondescript teams. That's it. Tennessee couldn't compete with the Cards. Period. They could have played on July 1st at the momument to gaudiness Tanning Bed calls a house and Tennessee would have still gotten their asses kicked. Then again, you'd take Tyler Smth over two guys whose bags he can't carry.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Nice response. You got in all the essentials:
1. You urged me to physically harm myself
2. Provided the same bald conclusory statements you have been saying from the get go.
3. You got in a nice dig at Bruce Pearl even though it has absolutely nothing to do with this argument.

Good to see you are sticking with the "I've lost the argument what should I do now" template. Seems to be working out great for you.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Okay, so let me get this straight. Your point was that Louisville would have beaten UT at any point during the season. Correct? My point was UT would have beaten UL earlier in the season. Still good?

I point to UofL's losses to mediocre-to-garbage teams in support of my point. You responded that these losses were "meaningless." I then pointed out that they were most decidedly not meaninglesss. Still following me? Agree with everything said thus far?

And from this, you conclude that I have made your point? Huh? Hat: meet mr. sequitur. Mr. Sequitur: meet Hat.

UofL's improvement at the end of the year is in no way relevant to the question of whether Tennessee would have beaten them earlier in the year. Again, I urge you to stay on point. It makes for a much better discussion.

How is that true? For a bigger game, as UT surely would have been, there would clearly have been a different defensive intensity. The matchups clearly favored UL in a gigantic way, especially on our offensive end, and we all know about our defensive end.

Every team drops some games they shouldn't, but the best teams with best coaches tend to play well in the big ones. I don't think we could have played them within 10 without them simply being off.

 

[PandamoniumReigns]

That goof spends most of his time here posting things directed at someone who doesn't see his posts or have the first modicum of respect for them.

This entire statement lacks any logic.
If you are unable to see what someone is posting, how do know what they are posting? (Aside from the very few posts that are quoted?) You cannot make a blanket statement such as the one you did when you have essentially handicapped yourself in regards to your attempted "shot".

I think my 4 year old nephew could see the total lack of common sense in that post.

This is not a "shot", just a general observation.

Side Note: I am rather enjoying the "discussion" between Hat and KidBourbon. Please continue.opcorn:

 

[BigPapaVol]

This entire statement lacks any logic.
If you are unable to see what someone is posting, how do know what they are posting? (Aside from the very few posts that are quoted?) You cannot make a blanket statement such as the one you did when you have essentially handicapped yourself in regards to your attempted "shot".

I think my 4 year old nephew could see the total lack of common sense in that post.

This is not a "shot", just a general observation.

Side Note: I am rather enjoying the "discussion" between Hat and KidBourbon. Please continue.opcorn:

I don't want to break up your bliss, but he can see anything you post if someone else quotes it.

 

[PandamoniumReigns]

I don't want to break up your bliss, but he can see anything you post if someone else quotes it.

Ummm...yes. I know. Thats why stated this:

If you are unable to see what someone is posting, how do know what they are posting? (Aside from the very few posts that are quoted?)

However, now that you posted what you did, I'd put $20 bucks down that he will respond to your post about mine and make some type of attempted insult about how "that imbecillic buffoon didn't know that I could see his posts if they were quoted, and he therefore has no life". (unless of course, someone tips him off.) Waiting..........

By the way, how did a thread about Marcus Haislip turn into "Could Tenn beat Louisville" thread?

 

[hatvol96]

Nice response. You got in all the essentials:
1. You urged me to physically harm myself
2. Provided the same bald conclusory statements you have been saying from the get go.
3. You got in a nice dig at Bruce Pearl even though it has absolutely nothing to do with this argument.

Good to see you are sticking with the "I've lost the argument what should I do now" template. Seems to be working out great for you.

You would be the expert on losing arguments, not me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[hatvol96]

he can see anything you post if someone else quotes it.

Which I am cursing you for doing. There has to be some technology available to Freak that would allow the total eradication of the work of a poster one isn't interested in seeing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[IPorange]

.

He has you blocked, dude. Why do you make over half your posts in his threads, responding to him, when you know he isn't going to read them? It's kind of sad.

I deliberately didn't actually quote what you wrote, as I don't want to play into your hands.

EDIT: Papa beat me to the punch.

 

[hatvol96]

Nice response. You got in all the essentials:
1. You urged me to physically harm myself
2. Provided the same bald conclusory statements you have been saying from the get go.
3. You got in a nice dig at Bruce Pearl even though it has absolutely nothing to do with this argument.

Good to see you are sticking with the "I've lost the argument what should I do now" template. Seems to be working out great for you.

My "bald conclusory statement" has evidence to back it up. Your Pearl slurping babble has the same thing buttressing it that most of your comments do: Nothing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[PandamoniumReigns]

Someone owes me $20.




Back to ORIGINAL topic: I'm thrilled for Haislip. One of my favorite players at Tennessee. Hope he makes the best of this opportunity! Although, I can't say I'm a big fan of the Spurs, but I will definitely be watching them more now.

 

[IPorange]

You spelled "pandemonium" wrong, you know. Unless you were trying to describe a panda riot.

 

[PandamoniumReigns]

You spelled "pandemonium" wrong, you know. Unless you were trying to describe a panda riot.

Thank you. The misspelling was actually intentional. Its an inside thing with my nephews.

You spelled I Pee Orange wrong also.

Your dislike for my posts has you resorting to locating grammatical errors? Really?

 

[IPorange]

It's initials, actually. And yes, my dislike for your posting habits has me resorting to pointing out grammatical errors. Really. Understand that while this reflects negatively on me, it does on you as well. After all, I am pretty easy-going.

 

[hatvol96]

You spelled "pandemonium" wrong, you know. Unless you were trying to describe a panda riot.

Koala riots are more exciting.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[PandamoniumReigns]

It's initials, actually. And yes, my dislike for your posting habits has me resorting to pointing out grammatical errors. Really. Understand that while this reflects negatively on me, it does on you as well. After all, I am pretty easy-going.

It's just an attempt to cleverly make a phonetic sound to suggest my urine is orange- a play off of the claims of a fan "bleeding" their school's color.

Your post on 6-24-09 states otherwise.

I'm an easy-going guy myself. And don't worry about my posting habits. The aforementioned poster who I have zero respect for is now the one and only member of my blocked list. Can't believe it took me this long to put him on it.

 

[Jaytrain5]

Koala riots are more exciting.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

And totally effing cuter.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Your post on 6-24-09 states otherwise.

I'm an easy-going guy myself. And don't worry about my posting habits. The aforementioned poster who I have zero respect for is now the one and only member of my blocked list. Can't believe it took me this long to put him on it.

can one not use initials for I Pee?

 

[PandamoniumReigns]

can one not use initials for I Pee?

Yup. Sure can. I have no problem with it.
That was just simple response to IP's post on why my name says "PandAmonium" instead of "PandEmonium"

In the same way he used a play on phonetics to create his user name, I used a similar tactic in mine. I was merely pointing out that although he attempted to take a jab at me for something he thought was in error, it could easily be turned around on him using the same logic.

I am fine with Initials myself though. Thanks BPV