Pitt the third

[Jaromir Jagr]

That's not what you said.

This is what you actually said.



When proven wrong, you changed your tune instead of admitting that you were ignorant of history.

We don't compete on a national level. Beating Boston College and Virginia Commonwealth isn't a "national level". When we get blasted by Florida in Omaha, that's national.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

That takes all 3 facets of the game: hitting, pitching and fielding. The Canes are doing 1 of 3 well right now. That won't get it done. It won't get you out of a regional if you even get there in the first place.

You're flailing to spout out more cliches and still getting it wrong.

The 2003 team couldn't field or pitch (by your standard) and went to Omaha. Almost the same in 2006.

Your knowledge is crap.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

We don't compete on a national level. Beating Boston College and Virginia Commonwealth isn't a "national level". When we get blasted by Florida in Omaha, that's national.

This has nothing to do with anything that I responded to.

You definitely don't read anything.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

I've played baseball in Div-1 and was a 4 year starter. I've watched nearly every Miami game for the past 4 years.

I know baseball.

If you don't know? You don't know!!!

Haha

You're a clown.

You're about as knowledgeable as a door ****.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

You're flailing to spout out more cliches and still getting it wrong.

The 2003 team couldn't field or pitch (by your standard) and went to Omaha. Almost the same in 2006.

Your knowledge is crap.

The 2006 team that couldn't field or pitch got eliminated by scoring 2 and 1.

The 2003 team that couldn't field or pitch got eliminated by scoring 2 and 1.

Good thing those teams could hit........

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

This has nothing to do with anything that I responded to.

You definitely don't read anything.

You claim that we have competed on a national level. We have not.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

You claim that we have competed on a national level. We have not.

The teams that got to Omaha did.

No reasonable person would say otherwise (that's why you'll say otherwise).

 

[Peter Gibbons]

The 2006 team that couldn't field or pitch got eliminated by scoring 2 and 1.

The 2003 team that couldn't field or pitch got eliminated by scoring 2 and 1.

Good thing those teams could hit........

Both teams finished 5th in the country.

They competed on the national level.

You compete on a national level in stupidity.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Both teams finished 5th in the country.

They competed on the national level.

You compete on a national level in stupidity.

They didn't compete, though. They got there and fell apart, just like every Omaha team after 2001.

But that was back when we used to make the NCAA tournament.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

They didn't compete, though.

They did.

Again, no reasonable person would say otherwise.

And then there's you.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

They did.

Again, no reasonable person would say otherwise.

And then there's you.

Losing 13-2 isn't competing.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Losing 13-2 isn't competing.

Keep flailing.

I already knew that Omaha wasn't satisfactory to you.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Keep flailing.

I already knew that Omaha wasn't satisfactory to you.

We have won five games in Omaha in 17 years. Never more than one in an appearance. Those are numbers you and CTCANE are happy with.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Those are numbers you and CTCANE are happy with.

No, they're not.

When in doubt, just lie. That's the Jagr way.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

No, they're not.

When in doubt, just lie. That's the Jagr way.

So you're not happy with Omaha. I knew it.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

So you're not happy with Omaha. I knew it.

Yet another lie.

You talked about the number of wins, not getting there.

And I was having a factual conversation while you were lying and manipulating your *** off.

Getting to Omaha is competing on a national level. Fact.

You then need to change the subject so you talk about people being "happy" with 5 wins.

A totally different conversation.

Par for the course.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Yet another lie.

You talked about the number of wins, not getting there.

And I was having a factual conversation while you were lying and manipulating your *** off.

Getting to Omaha is competing on a national level. Fact.

You then need to change the subject so you talk about people being "happy" with 5 wins.

A totally different conversation.

Par for the course.

Getting to Omaha is competing on a regional level. Once you get to Omaha, that IS the national level. When you get out there and go 5-12 over an 18 year period, that is not competing on a national level.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Getting to Omaha is competing on a regional level.

I love when you employ semantics.

Being one of the final 8 teams in the country (and finishing 5th) is competing on a national level.

Keep flailing away at this, though.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

I love when you employ semantics.

Being one of the final 8 teams in the country (and finishing 5th) is competing on a national level.

Keep flailing away at this, though.

Actually it's competing on a regional level. If you get to the final eight and get blown out, you aren't competing. You're showing up for your goodie bag and free meal.

 

[canesproponent]

It is really amusing to read this thread and not see who they are arguing with. Am assuming it is the gnome.

Reaching Omaha is the "Final Four" of college baseball. How is it not? Not sure how even the gnome would say that it is not. I understand the underlying probabilities of Omaha, so am well versed in why teams such as Fresno State, Coastal Carolina and others can win. I personally define success as reaching Omaha every 2-3 years consistently.

UM is two years removed from two consecutive Omaha trips. UCLA basketball "would do anything" to have UM's recent 4-year baseball record in basketball.