UMassHoops.com

or roughly the same number of people who will instantaneously show up in Foxborough if someone posts to a message board that Tom Brady dropped a used hair gel bottle in the parking lot.

A tweet about the potential for Brady's discarded items would not be the most pathetic effort UMass has ever made to increase awareness/attendance...

Even though it hurts that we are still on there, I do enjoy reading these... ALMOST guys... one more win should do it!

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... -bottom-10

ScottieB wrote:Even though it hurts that we are still on there, I do enjoy reading these... ALMOST guys... one more win should do it!

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... -bottom-10

So, if I understand this , #1 in the bottom 10 is actually the worst of the lot and #10 is the best of worst...meaning uconn is considered to be worse than UMass because they're ranked higher in the bottom 10. Is that right? [enter head scratching smiley here]

LS71 wrote:

ScottieB wrote:Even though it hurts that we are still on there, I do enjoy reading these... ALMOST guys... one more win should do it!

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... -bottom-10

So, if I understand this , #1 in the bottom 10 is actually the worst of the lot and #10 is the best of worst...meaning uconn is considered to be worse than UMass because they're ranked higher in the bottom 10. Is that right? [enter head scratching smiley here]

You are correct. #1 in the bottom 10 is the worst, so UConn is worse. But, then again he has Mizzou as being worse too.

MajBugman wrote:

LS71 wrote:

ScottieB wrote:Even though it hurts that we are still on there, I do enjoy reading these... ALMOST guys... one more win should do it!

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... -bottom-10

So, if I understand this , #1 in the bottom 10 is actually the worst of the lot and #10 is the best of worst...meaning uconn is considered to be worse than UMass because they're ranked higher in the bottom 10. Is that right? [enter head scratching smiley here]

You are correct. #1 in the bottom 10 is the worst, so UConn is worse. But, then again he has Mizzou as being worse too.

Mizzou isn't worse than UMass. In his column of the bottom 10, the #5 spot is reserved for a power conference team that f***ed up in their previous game. It's a bottom 10 tradition. Mizzou got routed by a Georgia team w/o their best player. Hence, Mizzou shit their pants and was awarded the "reserved" #5 spot.

^ Fair enough....and thanks, MajBugman.

As long as UMass is better than uconn...it's a good season.

So if, I mean when, UMass wins Saturday, it'll be its first winning steak since the move and good bye to the Bottom 10.

Go UMass...win out!!

Not sure how my post appeared twice so I'm deleting the content of the 2nd one.

Marshmont_63 wrote:
Mizzou isn't worse than UMass. In his column of the bottom 10, the #5 spot is reserved for a power conference team that f***ed up in their previous game. It's a bottom 10 tradition. Mizzou got routed by a Georgia team w/o their best player. Hence, Mizzou shit their pants and was awarded the "reserved" #5 spot.

Didn't know that and never made the connection. That's even funnier, thanks!

MajBugman wrote:...That's even funnier, thanks!

And the whole point of it is to be funny. Taking the ranking as anything other than humor (and embarrassment) is humorous itself.

That is exactly what it is, and I look forward very soon to not being the butt of any more jokes.

DrG wrote:That is exactly what it is, and I look forward very soon to not being the butt of any more jokes.

Yeah, will leave the jokes to be made about the hockey team.

Marshmont_63 wrote:

MajBugman wrote:

LS71 wrote: So, if I understand this , #1 in the bottom 10 is actually the worst of the lot and #10 is the best of worst...meaning uconn is considered to be worse than UMass because they're ranked higher in the bottom 10. Is that right? [enter head scratching smiley here]

You are correct. #1 in the bottom 10 is the worst, so UConn is worse. But, then again he has Mizzou as being worse too.

Mizzou isn't worse than UMass. In his column of the bottom 10, the #5 spot is reserved for a power conference team that f***ed up in their previous game. It's a bottom 10 tradition. Mizzou got routed by a Georgia team w/o their best player. Hence, Mizzou shit their pants and was awarded the "reserved" #5 spot.

Speaking of Mizzou, pretty good chance you see Florida in this spot next week.

Missouri won today, 42-13, despite managing only 119 yards of total offense. They scored on kickoff, punt, interception and fumble returns.

I also just read that in the last 10 seasons, teams are 147-2 when holding an opponent under 120 yards. Both losses are by UF under Muschamp.

Any chance he's still there when UMass visits Gainesville in two years?

^Is the other game the one where some random team (forget who) didn't attempt one pass play the entire game and still beat Florida in the Swamp?

Marshmont_63 wrote:^Is the other game the one where some random team (forget who) didn't attempt one pass play the entire game and still beat Florida in the Swamp?

Not quite ... it was Florida State in 2011.

That game was even more bizarro. FSU did have four interceptions, one for a score and two that set up the two 1-yard TDs. But they did have the ball for more than half the game and still managed only 95 yards of offense.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... /17503141/

Some national "recognition". Better than being on the other side.