Play with the Cards that are Dealt
Joe Paterno teams have missed being recognized as Champions in several seasons because of some damn reason or another. Let Joe Pa get all the recognition he can in his final years at Penn State.
We the fans did not create the rules for the conference. Joe Pa did not create the rules for the conference. If the rules annoint a Co-Championship on Penn State regardless of Head-toHead play, then I will happily accept it.
Thanks for the fanpost! Please do not post any content from a premium site that requires a subscription. Also, if you just want to share a link consider using fanshots instead. Thanks.
0 recs |
11 comments
| Add comment
Comments
eh
I’m conflicted on that subject. Stanziball will probably keep us from having to worry about sharing anything — after that last game I’m convinced there’s mysterious forces at work aiding Iowa’s team. Call it voodoo, divine intervention, or whatever; I can’t remember the last time a team got that many miracle plays in their favor. Most teams get one, maybe two a year. Iowa gets that many every single game.
"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.
by millzners on Nov 2, 2009 11:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Voodoo, divine intervention, or....referees and replay officials? hehe
by dawsonPSU10 on Nov 2, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
spelling error:
referees = referines
by NittanySeaLion on Nov 3, 2009 8:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
spelling error:
referines = whiny baby penn state fans who can’t rise above the basest form of sports criticism
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
by jtothep on Nov 3, 2009 10:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that doesn't make sense
if they were Penn State fans, then why would they be blowing all those calls in the Wolverines’ favor?
huh, answer me that, smarty pants.
by The JuggerNitt on Nov 3, 2009 7:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As long as you don't also make fun of Ohio State
I don’t care which side of the debate you are on, as long as you are consistently on that side of the debate. If you accept a title should one occur this year between us and Iowa, you can never say anything to any OSU fans about 2005 and 2008. If you’re like me, and you choose not to acknowledge that we are in any way champions, having lost to the co-champ (if that’s how it shakes out), you can carp on the OSU people, you just can’t count 2009 as a championship. Make a decision, but stick by your decision and don’t be a hypocrite.
by PSUJunny05 on Nov 2, 2009 11:48 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I, for one, tend to agree with you here. And, I very much hate the Buckeyes' claims to a title
That being said, if we were to wind up tied, I would say that Penn State has won 4 Big Ten titles. However, I would not refer specifically to this year.
Maybe that doesn’t make sense, but the fact is, if it happens, the Big Ten recognizes use as champs. They will record “Penn State, 4 time Big Ten Champion” in their annals, and I will look wrong if I say we only won it 3 times. But, if I had to brag about a year, I would brag about 2005 or 2008 (I don’t remember 1994, I was only 10 and just starting to get into football).
"Every player we have, someone-maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone-poured their soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world."
-J.V.Pa.
by psume06 on Nov 2, 2009 11:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ahhh, here we go
Before engaging, assumptions must be noted. First, the Moo Point Mantra (PSU Must. Win. Out.) Second, that Iowa drops one and only one game, resulting in PSU & Iowa having identical 7-1 conference records (and 11-1 overall records) which the Big Ten Conference recognizes individually as Co-Champions.
Now, given that HYPOTHETICAL situation, and noting we are writing only of the Big Ten Conference and not of the BCS and its Rose Bowl tiebreakers, we can begin. The Big Ten Conference will recognize / declare / confer / anoint, whatever action verb you choose, this Co-Championship to each team and this is not debatable. It will be done and will be final and they will take whatever actions are associated with that anointment, which should be spelled out here by somebody who’s more in the know than me. For it will help us with the next part of discussion: how to deal with that declaration.
UncleNit says he will ‘happily accept it’. That’s the choice of one Fan, one of many stakeholder groups with choices for dealing with this declaration. The others are The Players, The Coaches and The University. The Fans probably have the most flexibility, then the Players and Coaches and then the University. Things each stakeholder can do:
The Fans: We can ‘accept’ it and that can take different forms. I’d be proud of the team of course, but I’m with Junny and won’t go the OSU route and do that to Iowa. So you won’t hear me claiming back to back Big Tens (verbally or in writing) and I won’t rock any tee shirts or gear with that kind of language on it. And generally, I’d just verbally asterisk it anytime it comes up. Wherever it might get posted here, I’d asteriskically comment upon it, and I’d offer gradulations to Iowa over at BHGP.
The Players & Coaches: they’re a little more stuck, but mostly have the same options. Every time they’re asked about it, they can be gracious and use acceptance and pride language and then they also have a choice of additionally including the verbal qualifyer that Iowa beat them and gradulations to them on a great season. I mean, it can be done, without being a total douchea.
The University is more tightly bound. They’d look like total doucheas for doing anything other than ‘accepting’, both from the conference itself and totally from the MSM, which would have a meaty little mouse to pounce upon. The on-stadium written recognition is probably tightly bound to this, but I’m open for more kennoledgable folks to enlighten me as to the options there.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
by jtothep on Nov 2, 2009 1:21 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
+1 for "asteriskically"
"Every player we have, someone—maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone—poured their life and soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world." - Joe Paterno
by Horse N Buggy on Nov 2, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1 more for 'kennoledgable'
"I thought the kid we were using had the potential to be a good quarterback, and I blew that one." - Joseph V. Paterno
by leeharvey418 on Nov 2, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks
-1 to SB for removing hard returns and making my cogent thesis downright unreadable.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
by jtothep on Nov 3, 2009 9:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 



















