UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince will remain No. 1 QB

Judged:

3

3

3

PEE PEE PETE wrote:

<quoted text>Oh my, I guess we ended up undersized in the baseball department too. They said we were supposed to win a World Series this year, or something like that. You Trojan He-men know how to lay the smack down on us Bruins.:(

Judged:

1

1

1

PEE PEE PETE wrote:

<quoted text>Oh my, I guess we ended up undersized in the baseball department too. They said we were supposed to win a World Series this year, or something like that. You Trojan He-men know how to lay the smack down on us Bruins.:(

Judged:

8

8

8

Trojan wrote:

Right you are, My Friend.
Current medal count:
USC-17
UCLA-8
So much for their excuse of, "Of course you have more medals, you've been playing longer. Waaahhh!!"
FTFO!!!

Judged:

4

4

3

Double Standard wrote:

<quoted text>All that means is that USC has more successful "individual" athletes and nothing more. And besides, most of you SC fans are always critizicing UCLA for having most of the titles won by them because it's the women winning the majority lately? well, it seems to me in watching the Olympics that it's the USC women winning the medals, not so much the men. So, it seems a little hypocritical to me that you are gloating about the medals won by former USC athletes when they are mostly women, you can't have it both ways my friend. If you can celebrate women's Gold Medals won by the USC women, then it's perfectly fine for UCLA fans to gloat about having the most national titles, in which the women have won more than the men in recent years.

Judged:

5

5

5

Bruin Nation wrote:

<quoted text>
good post, I saw where one of the Men of troy who won a gold won it representing another country, so much for loyalty.

Judged:

10

10

10

Double Standard wrote:

<quoted text>All that means is that USC has more successful "individual" athletes and nothing more. And besides, most of you SC fans are always critizicing UCLA for having most of the titles won by them because it's the women winning the majority lately? well, it seems to me in watching the Olympics that it's the USC women winning the medals, not so much the men. So, it seems a little hypocritical to me that you are gloating about the medals won by former USC athletes when they are mostly women, you can't have it both ways my friend. If you can celebrate women's Gold Medals won by the USC women, then it's perfectly fine for UCLA fans to gloat about having the most national titles, in which the women have won more than the men in recent years.

Judged:

2

2

2

Double Standard wrote:

<quoted text>All that means is that USC has more successful "individual" athletes and nothing more. And besides, most of you SC fans are always critizicing UCLA for having most of the titles won by them because it's the women winning the majority lately? well, it seems to me in watching the Olympics that it's the USC women winning the medals, not so much the men. So, it seems a little hypocritical to me that you are gloating about the medals won by former USC athletes when they are mostly women, you can't have it both ways my friend. If you can celebrate women's Gold Medals won by the USC women, then it's perfectly fine for UCLA fans to gloat about having the most national titles, in which the women have won more than the men in recent years.

Judged:

4

4

4

Trojan wrote:

<quoted text>
Give me a break. UCLA fans,(well, some of them) are the kings of double standards.
OK, you want team sports. 50-0, Baby! 1 win for the Bruins in the past 13 years in the biggest team sport. LOL!!

Judged:

1

1

1

Bruin Nation wrote:

<quoted text>
He does have a point, you are the 1st one to point out the UCLA women"s titles and act like they are tainted, but the sc womens medals are different? tit for tat my friend, tit for tat.
..........
and now a message from my stalker fight_on (AKA Bruin fan)

Judged:

1

1

1

Trojan wrote:

<quoted text>
So, women's collegiate athletics are as big of a deal as women's Olympic events? Interesting.
I believe the Nielsen ratings would indicate otherwise.

Judged:

1

1

1

Bruin Nation wrote:

<quoted text>
Nice spin... why am I not surprised? I would expect nothing less from you. spin, spin, spin.
and now a word from my stalker fight_on.

Judged:

1

1

1

Trojan wrote:

Hey, what really matters is that we are less than 3 weeks away from college football!

Judged:

1

1

Trojan wrote:

<quoted text>
Spin? You're hilarious. I'd expect that weak response from your buddy, Bullshit FOr Life.
I can't help it that hundreds of millions of people watch the Olympics. It is what it is. Only a fool would argue with the numbers that support its relevance.

Judged:

1

1

1

Bruin Nation wrote:

<quoted text>
Say what u want but you and CT always down play womens titles, except when it benefits sc. But I would expect nothing less from you guys.

Double Standard wrote:

I just saw this post on another site, and I thought it to be worthwhile considering. Current of former USC Trojans in the Olympics, won 25 Medals and the 25, 18 were won by the women, and 7 by the men, BUT of the 7 won by the men ONLY 2 were were won by men representing the U.S.(Bryshon Nallum - silver and Josh Mance - Bronze) Olympic team.
So I guess the revelence of the women representing USC only applies when it comes to USC and not UCLA. So if 18 Medals were won by the women of Troy, then it is perfectly fine to assume the men of Troy, just aren't very good. As for UCLA athletes in the Olympics, at least we won 2 Gold Medals, Kevin Love and Russell Westbrook. Go Bruins!