Page 1 of 2
We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:49 pmby KnuckleStang
This list has no credibility! Wait, maybe they're talking about hot chicks who actually stay through the 2nd quarter...
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/244543-college-footballs-40-hottest-fanbases
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:53 pmby ponydawg
best post ever.
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:11 pmby crazy horse
Send this to Orsini.
I thought we were supposed to be Top 25 in EVERYTHING we do!
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:17 pmby SMU21TCU10
Texas A & M at 10?!?!?!?! it should be in the bottom 10. When i went to SMU i saw pretty girls everywhere. Every class was loaded. Walks between classes were extremely enjoyable with all the amazing women. Living in the co-ed dorms was AWESOME.
When i walk through the A & M campus i honestly hardly ever see really pretty girls. No joke. In a class of 200 people there will maybe be 3 or 4 good looking girls. This list sucks.
UT and Ole miss have 500 times better looking girls than A & M... Yet they are way behind them on the list
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:41 pmby One Trick Pony
Nebraska BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH HAHA H HAHA HAH AH AHAHHAHAHAHH
This guys on drugs.
LSU girls look like they could hurt you!
UCF has great looking women!
SMU women are beautifull
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:44 pmby kull
A&M @ 10; fail.
Minnesota, Oregon, Oregon State, Ohio State, LSU, any California school (except Fresno) UNLV, UW, ASU= Prime
there is some nice beaver in Nebraska, but they go to Creighton
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:41 pmby EastStang
Penn State, Maryland, Wisconsin, A&M, Tech all ahead of SMU? Are they on drugs? Perhaps they like slutty chicks instead of hot with a touch of class. From the pictures, skankiness seemed to be the MO they followed.
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:29 pmby down n out
how do i get that job??
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:44 pmby ponyte
Not to sound too skeptical, but a couple of those pictures looked more like professionals than students. Was the judging based on the best pics available? Or did the judge(s) actually go to campus and make a determination?
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 4:13 pmby jtstang
EastStang wrote:Perhaps they like slutty chicks instead of hot with a touch of class. From the pictures, skankiness seemed to be the MO they followed.
You say that like there's something wrong with it.
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 4:16 pmby EastStang
Well, Skanks do have a certain joi d' vive'.
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 4:31 pmby Mustangsabu
EastStang wrote:Well, Skanks do have a certain joi d' vive'.
But SMU girls have class and therefore "joie de vivre"
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 4:34 pmby jtstang
Nobody here is any danger of marrying any of the chicks on the 'vard, so who gives a crap about class? Big [deleted] are the order of the day.
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 4:55 pmby EastStang
Come on jt, you've gotten more tail than Daniel Boone's coonskin cap factory.
Re: We're not in the top 40?
Posted:
Mon Aug 31, 2009 5:27 pmby StallionsModelT
I've been thinking about red and blue sundresses all offseason. Damn its good to be a Mustang
