« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU  (Read 5553 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline EllToPay

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5174
  • Typical EMAW
    • View Profile
@MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« on: January 04, 2011, 07:46:39 AM »
would kill for 2-2.


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)
Logged

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2011, 07:56:13 AM »
Quote from: EllToPay on January 04, 2011, 07:46:39 AM
would kill for 2-2.
be honest, have you watched aTm play?
Logged
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline Doberman_CATS!!!

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 589
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2011, 08:11:33 AM »
My predicto

W @MU
W @A&M
W BU
@KU we either win by 1 or we lose by 15
Logged

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 88751
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2011, 08:14:55 AM »
@MU and @KU are so long shot I can't even see them. 
Logged

Offline RonLongshaft

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 615
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2011, 08:20:29 AM »
Quote from: steve dave on January 04, 2011, 08:14:55 AM
@MU and @KU are so long shot I can't even see them. 

wrong sir
Logged

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2011, 08:21:54 AM »
Quote from: RonLongshaft on January 04, 2011, 08:20:29 AM
Quote from: steve dave on January 04, 2011, 08:14:55 AM
@MU and @KU are so long shot I can't even see them. 

wrong sir

No, he's right.
Logged

Offline RonLongshaft

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 615
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2011, 08:26:41 AM »
Logged

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2011, 08:32:35 AM »
Weird quarter there.  Use the Haley method.

@OSU, CU, Tech, @MU

3-1

@aTm, BU, @KU, NU

2-2

@ISU, @CU, KU, OU

3-1

@NU, MU, @UT, ISU

3-1
Logged

Offline Doberman_CATS!!!

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 589
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2011, 08:40:10 AM »
Quote from: ksu_FAN on January 04, 2011, 08:32:35 AM
Weird quarter there.  Use the Haley method.

@OSU, CU, Tech, @MU

3-1

@aTm, BU, @KU, NU

2-2

@ISU, @CU, KU, OU

3-1

@NU, MU, @UT, ISU

3-1

Haley method is so much easier to comprehend, he's so smart! CHIEEEEEEFFFFFSSSS

I'm sticking to my my guns and say we beat BU. They have a three game stretch of KU, @OSU, @KSU. After they get worked by KU @home they will bounce back with a win @OSU then be demoralized when the enter the  :doom:
Logged

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 88751
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2011, 08:46:52 AM »
Quote from: ksu_FAN on January 04, 2011, 08:32:35 AM
Weird quarter there.  Use the Haley method.

@OSU, CU, Tech, @MU

3-1

@aTm, BU, @KU, NU

2-2

@ISU, @CU, KU, OU

3-1

@NU, MU, @UT, ISU

3-1

TAKE THAT HALEY QUARTER OF CONFERENCE SEASON THING AND RUN!  :cheese:
Logged

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 88751
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2011, 08:48:46 AM »
Logged

Offline 0.42

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7746
  • pasghetti
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2011, 08:49:41 AM »
Logged

Offline Saulbadguy

  • Administrator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 9939
  • what
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2011, 08:52:08 AM »
We will murder them.
Logged
Where did you get that overnight bag?

Sugar Dick

  • Guest
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2011, 09:31:56 AM »
I think aTm and BU are good matchups in our favor.  MU is going to destroy us twice.  No idea about UKL because they haven't played anyone worth a sh*t, prolly a split.
Logged

Offline mcmwcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5313
  • trips: "MCMW"
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2011, 09:42:22 AM »
like every other year we'll lose a close one in Columbia and lay down a merciless beating to them in Manhattan.

doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this.  but i consistently overestimate the intelligence of most of our fans.
Logged

Offline AbeFroman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 8330
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2011, 09:51:29 AM »
Quote from: mcmwcat on January 04, 2011, 09:42:22 AM
like every other year we'll lose a close one in Columbia and lay down a merciless beating to them in Manhattan.
yep, only death and taxes are more of a certain thing than KSU/Mizzou games.
As for Baylor and A&M, both of them look worse than us right now. Baylor can't even beat Gonzaga  :lol:
Logged

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2011, 10:10:07 AM »
Baylor is struggling with some of the same issues we are; missing an experienced PG and trying to figure out how to play with this year's pieces.  They provide an interesting match-up for us b/c they do a great job not allowing Oboards, They force TOs, and they don't let opponents get to the FT line much; all things we need to handle better to win in the league.

aTm is slowing the game down to Doc-ish pace and is an undertalented team without a lot of depth.  They have some of the same defensive strengths as Baylor.  Plus they have some nice wins at home.  It won't be easy to win there.

Missouri is solid and will present us match-up problems, but we also present them for them.  If (IF) we can handle pressure, our bigs should be able to get their bigs in trouble and kill them on the boards.  Then you have to slow down their jump shooting offense, which is tough, b/c they are a very good jump shooting team.

3-1 in the 4 games against those teams would be really, really good.  2-2 is probably more realistic. 
Logged

Offline Havs

  • Taco Walk'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 3285
    • View Profile
    • Twitter
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #17 on: January 04, 2011, 10:39:54 AM »
2-2 sounds about right.
Logged

Online CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38127
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #18 on: January 04, 2011, 10:42:33 AM »
2-2
Logged

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20997
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #19 on: January 04, 2011, 10:54:12 AM »
Use the Haley method.

@OSU, CU, Tech, @MU

3-1

@aTm, BU, @KU, NU

2-2

@ISU, @CU, KU, OU

3-1

@NU, MU, @UT, ISU

4-0


Finish strong.
Logged

Online CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38127
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #20 on: January 04, 2011, 10:59:51 AM »
Quote from: Mr. KK on January 04, 2011, 10:54:12 AM
Use the Haley method.

@OSU, CU, Tech, @MU

3-1

@aTm, BU, @KU, NU

2-2

@ISU, @CU, KU, OU

3-1

@NU, MU, @UT, ISU

4-0


Finish strong.

Not our M.O.
Logged

Offline Havs

  • Taco Walk'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 3285
    • View Profile
    • Twitter
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #21 on: January 04, 2011, 11:05:05 AM »
Quote from: CNS Casey on January 04, 2011, 10:59:51 AM
Quote from: Mr. KK on January 04, 2011, 10:54:12 AM
Use the Haley method.

@OSU, CU, Tech, @MU

3-1

@aTm, BU, @KU, NU

2-2

@ISU, @CU, KU, OU

3-1

@NU, MU, @UT, ISU

4-0


Finish strong.

Not our M.O.

Yea, the one time I'd have actually been content with KSU beating ISU... You guys really wanted McDermott to stay in the Big 12 didnt you??
Logged

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40815
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #22 on: January 04, 2011, 02:31:17 PM »
baylor's zone is crap.  their defensive numbers are a mirage built against lower-level teams that can't handle their length, no matter how porous their zone is.

they can still score though, as always.  but @ ood, if kstate doesn't win, it would a surprise and a disappointment.
Logged
"a garden city man wondered in april if the theologians had not made a mistake in locating the garden of eden in asia rather than in the arkansas river valley."

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #23 on: January 04, 2011, 02:32:52 PM »
Quote from: sys on January 04, 2011, 02:31:17 PM
baylor's zone is cac.  their defensive numbers are a mirage built against lower-level teams that can't handle their length, no matter how porous their zone is.

they can still score though, as always.  but @ ood, if kstate doesn't win, it would a surprise and a disappointment.

Good points.  The only 3 decent teams they played pretty much destroyed their defense.
Logged

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 47988
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: @MU, @A&M, BU, @KU
« Reply #24 on: January 04, 2011, 05:39:38 PM »
Quote from: pissclams on December 26, 2010, 10:52:42 AM
Who misses who more:  k@s and dens clems or Baylor and tweedy?  Both are feeling impact of lack of pg play
Logged


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »