To all Kansas, Texas & Oklahoma A&M fans

[vicarious]

Go screw yourself.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

:ez-roll::ez-roll::ez-roll::ez-roll::ez-roll:

 

[Jason]

Only if I'm running from the cops for kidnap with a sharp object to a girls neck.

Meh, we can go back and forth all day with this.

 

[propoke]

You sooner fans crack me up. Congrats on not embarrassing yourself further by getting blown out in the CBI.:clap

 

[ousooners1baby]

And thank you!

 

[Big Old Booger]

That's the team you're a fan of blh. You've got to be kidding me. Your team fell apart like a vanilla ice cream cone. Talking about a bunch of pre-maddonas with no heart. I knew you team was going to lose. What happened to them in Norman? We should've beat you in Austin. Your sqad is a laugh too. Talk about horrible. BOOMER SOONER BABY!!!

Can somebody explain what a "pre-madonna" is? Is that a Madonna having Pre menstrual syndrome? Is it Madonna before she became Madonna?

Please help.

 

[Big Old Booger]

You're not a bright one.

Barnes has owned ou for a minute now, and Texas has been the second best team in the Big 12 under Barnes. ou finally won against Texas this year. That has been rare lately. You're bragging about last year, that's funny. Barnes has never allowed us to fall to the NIT. ou has been there and couldn't even make the NIT this year.

Then you talk down on a Texas degree.

Your smack is horrible. It's grade school stuff. Get some help.

Truthfully, Barnes owns Capel, but I'm not sure that's saying much. We did beat you last year in Norman as well as this year, but prior to that win in Norman last year Capel was 0-fer vs Barnes.

I'd argue that Texas has been the 2nd best in the Big 12. OU was definitely the 2nd best program in the Big 12 before KS left and he owned Barnes. Surely you can at least admit KS owned Barnes, right?

Both teams have 1 final four in the Big 12, OU has more conference tournament championships and both programs have 1 big 12 regular season championship. Texas has a few years they didn't even play in the post-season (98, and maybe 97) but OU had an NIT (under Sampson).

Hopefully Capel can get us back on track as the 2nd best program in the conference and maybe surpass KU...

 

[stoops4pres]

Truthfully, Barnes owns Capel, but I'm not sure that's saying much. We did beat you last year in Norman as well as this year, but prior to that win in Norman last year Capel was 0-fer vs Barnes.

Before the 2008-2009 season Barnes owned Capel. Now since going 2-2 the last two seasons (also should point out one of those games was without BG, nonetheless) I don't think it can be said Barnes owns him. Capel has evened things out head-to-head wise. But yeah, before last season Barnes did own him.

 

[Big Old Booger]

Before the 2008-2009 season Barnes owned Capel. Now since going 2-2 the last two seasons (also should point out one of those games was without BG, nonetheless) I don't think it can be said Barnes owns him. Capel has evened things out head-to-head wise. But yeah, before last season Barnes did own him.

Considering Capel is 2-7 vs. Barnes...I'd say Barnes owns Capel. Maybe Capel is starting to turn the tide by going 2-2 the past 2 years, but let's see where it stands after next season.

 

[stoops4pres]

Considering Capel is 2-7 vs. Barnes...I'd say Barnes owns Capel. Maybe Capel is starting to turn the tide by going 2-2 the past 2 years, but let's see where it stands after next season.

Barnes had owned Capel prior to last season. Going 2-2 over the last 2 seasons you can't say Barnes still owns Capel. Now, if Barnes sweeps Capel next season then that's a different story. But at this point in time recently (i.e. last 2 seasons) Capel has evened things, or has turned the tide like you said, head-to-head with Barnes. After all, if you turn the tide you can't say you're getting owned.

 

[Big Old Booger]

Barnes had owned Capel prior to last season. Going 2-2 over the last 2 seasons you can't say Barnes still owns Capel. Now, if Barnes sweeps Capel next season then that's a different story. But at this point in time recently (i.e. last 2 seasons) Capel has evened things, or has turned the tide like you said, head-to-head with Barnes. After all, if you turn the tide you can't say you're getting owned.

2-7 isn't turning any tides. Sorry.

By your math, Mack Brown owns Stoops and that's not true either.

 

[stoops4pres]

2-7 isn't turning any tides.

You just suggested Capel is possibly turning the tide in your previous post, now you're sure he's not? You're contradicting yourself.

Throughout the entire series, Barnes HAD owned Capel. How can you say recently Barnes has owned Capel, however, when they have split the series the last 2 seasons. Again, the keyword is RECENTLY. So Barnes owns Capel, even though it's been even the last couple of seasons? Before the last 2 seasons, yes. Recently, no. Its simple.

 

[oSuJeff97]

This thread is so Aggie.

 

[Big Old Booger]

You just suggested Capel is possibly turning the tide in your previous post, now you're sure he's not? You're contradicting yourself.

Throughout the entire series, Barnes HAD owned Capel. How can you say recently Barnes has owned Capel, however, when they have split the series the last 2 seasons. Again, the keyword is RECENTLY. So Barnes owns Capel, even though it's been even the last couple of seasons? Before the last 2 seasons, yes. Recently, no. Its simple.

I said MAYBE Capel is starting to turn the tide. That doesn't mean it's been turned.

You make it sound like Capel's first 5 losses in the series should be overlooked because he's now 2-2 vs Barnes over the last 2 seasons. That just can't be done.

 

[stoops4pres]

I said MAYBE Capel is starting to turn the tide. That doesn't mean it's been turned.

I never said you felt its been turned. Go back and read what I just said. I said you suggested that Capel is POSSIBLY turning the tide. Possibly is the same thing as maybe.

Regardless, you're still contradicting yourself saying Capel is possibly turning the tide, then assuredly saying he's not a post later.

You make it sound like Capel's first 5 losses in the series should be overlooked because he's now 2-2 vs Barnes over the last 2 seasons. That just can't be done.

I disagree, I'm not making it sound like that. You're assuming things. All I'm saying is recently, again, recently, Barnes hasn't owned Capel. How can you dispute otherwise? When you've recently split the series--which is what Capel has in the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 seasons--you can't say recently Barnes owns him. Because he hasn't as of late. That's the entire point.

 

[JohnnyBlack]

GO SCREW YOURSELVES!!!!!


Sorry, just had to get this thread back on topic.

 

[blh111]

Barnes had owned Capel prior to last season. Going 2-2 over the last 2 seasons you can't say Barnes still owns Capel. Now, if Barnes sweeps Capel next season then that's a different story. But at this point in time recently (i.e. last 2 seasons) Capel has evened things, or has turned the tide like you said, head-to-head with Barnes. After all, if you turn the tide you can't say you're getting owned.

So you think Mack owns Stoops. I'm just using your logic and the time span of lately when going head to head.

 

[BigTime]

So you think Mack owns Stoops. I'm just using your logic and the time span of lately when going head to head.

He isn't saying that Capel OWNS Barnes. Just that, recently, Barnes does not own Capel.

It's not that hard to understand.

 

[stoops4pres]

He isn't saying that Capel OWNS Barnes. Just that, recently, Barnes does not own Capel.

It's not that hard to understand.

Exactly. There you go blh.

 

[boksooner]

So you think Mack owns Stoops. I'm just using your logic and the time span of lately when going head to head.

Reading is hard

 

[SoonerBounce13]

This thread is so Aggie.

this