-
Posts
2596 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Bill Lumbergh last won the day on September 29 2024
Bill Lumbergh had the most liked content!
Reputation
7375 Surly 1%About Bill Lumbergh
Recent Profile Visitors
The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.
-
Looks like someone forgot that we actually played each other this year, so they can't do the crazy triangulation justification they've done for the past 10+ years to prove that they're better anymore. Poor aggy.
-
With the game on the line Ewers threw a beautiful TD on 4th and forever to save the season. Levitt threw a pick.
-
He played hard and backed up his shit talk on the field. He was still annoying as fuck with his over the top theatrics and I enjoyed watching him melt when they lost. I'm 100% certain he rehearsed a "no respect" post game speech for when they won.
-
CFP Playoff Round 1: SMU @ Penn State - 11 am CT on TNT
Bill Lumbergh replied to ztejas's topic in Football
This game is great, mostly bc it means Texas, TCU, and SMU all made the playoffs before aggy.- 780 replies
-
- 14
-
Texas A&M Recruiting 2025: The Land of Melk & No Money
Bill Lumbergh replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
It's early, but it seemed to me like Elko really did want to wash the Jimbo culture stink off of that team. My guess is that he was given the leash to do that right up until he lost to dadgum tu, being "physically annihilated" in the process, and now he's being told to load up on stars at all costs. -
Negative Recruiting Your Own School: The aggy Screenshot Megathread
Bill Lumbergh replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
I mean, those figures were posted upthread so I'm going to assume they're accurate. -
Negative Recruiting Your Own School: The aggy Screenshot Megathread
Bill Lumbergh replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
I mean, you just summed up why they'll never get there. To make drastic changes, you have to admit that you're very far from where you want to be. Aggy's pride will never let them admit that they're so far off (and particularly not while we're clearly doing well) and so they find signs to cling to and believe they're "on the precipice" of something great. Since they never admit they're far off, they're unwilling to do what they need to do to change, so they stay the same. Rinse, repeat. -
Negative Recruiting Your Own School: The aggy Screenshot Megathread
Bill Lumbergh replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
This has always been hilarious to me, how one random poster with no way of knowing anything throws out a number they've "heard" and automatically that is adopted and repeated as fact. Meanwhile it is widely known in circles that aggy had to give Chace Sims $10M and DJ Sanders $12M not to flip to us, so they really shouldn't be talking about throwing money around to sign players. -
Negative Recruiting Your Own School: The aggy Screenshot Megathread
Bill Lumbergh replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
I love today. I love it almost as much as aggy hates it. Let's fuck up Georgia tomorrow and force aggy to continue watching us live their sec dreams. -
Texas Recruiting Notes 2025: Duck Around and Find Out
Bill Lumbergh replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
Not for everyone. -
Negative Recruiting Your Own School: The aggy Screenshot Megathread
Bill Lumbergh replied to texifornia's topic in 🤫$9.95🤫
If there ever was a case study for the value of studying and learning from history, it's texags. In just those last posts, I've learned that their problem under Jimbo is they WEREN'T BUYING ENOUGH PLAYERS and that the only reason they lost to us was a couple of unlucky bounces and otherwise the programs aren't very far apart. So what they propose to do from here, if I understand correctly, is 1) focus on buying more mercenary players, especially on the dline, and 2) not change much else bc they're on the right track otherwise and just need some luck. And they honestly don't know why they're a perennial middle-dweller. Just incredible. -
l31sobfede0b1.mp4
-
I think that applies if there's a penalty without the targeting. For instance, roughing the passer, with targeting. You can lose the targeting and still have the penalty. If it's only a penalty of targeting, I think if you lose targeting you lose the penalty. Edit: Huck beat me to it
-
I hadn't really noticed, but if so that's really good development. It felt for a while that they'd gone overboard with interpretation of the rule. There have been plenty of calls in the last few years that clearly were not targeting for what the rule is meant to prevent, but upheld. It's good to hear if this is changing. This was definitely a "not targeting by intent" call.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!