- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Reality Check: 3 SEC teams won 11 games, 6 SEC teams won 10 games
Posted on 11/26/12 at 10:34 pm to theunknownknight
Posted on 11/26/12 at 10:34 pm to theunknownknight
18 out of 120 (15%) teams won 10 or more games. 10 wins was enough to win or play for the conference championship in all other BCS conferences and most non-BCS conferences. In nearly all conferences, less than 10 was enough to get a shot.
1/3 of 10+ win teams came from the SEC. 10 wins is a great season. It's just unfortunately not enough in the ridiculously talented SEC.
1/3 of 10+ win teams came from the SEC. 10 wins is a great season. It's just unfortunately not enough in the ridiculously talented SEC.
1
Posted on 11/26/12 at 10:46 pm to ForeLSU
quote:
You missed a key word buffoon...
You think A&M goin to the Cotton and UGA to the Cap One and Scar to Outback are regional.
hey Fore, heres a clue:
2010 Outback Northwestern vs Auburn
2009 CapOne Penn State vs LSU
2010 CapOne Bama vs Mich St
2012 Cotton Johnny frickin Heisman
Its all about appeal, and LSUs style of playing is lacking in that area
Posted on 11/26/12 at 11:04 pm to theunknownknight
quote:
And so are 5 other teams in the SEC.
We are also 5 plays from being 5-7
Are you trying to be intentionally provocative? What is your bottom line?
What does winning 10 games mean? If Gene Chizik won 10 games a year he's not unemployed right now. There's very few coaches in college football that AVERAGE 10 wins a season. Let that sink in.
Just because we're stuck in a conference with an abundance of good teams doesn't minimize the signifcance of winning 10 games in a season. It's a statistical anomaly that will correct itself. Doesn't mean it's time to overreact to short term results. Les Miles has this team in position to compete for a conference championship nearly every year. I'd bet on him before I'd bet on any of those other non-Bama teams.
Friggin fans are spoiled rotten. Do you even enjoy watching football anymore?
This post was edited on 11/26/12 at 11:07 pm
Posted on 11/26/12 at 11:04 pm to theunknownknight
@theunknownknight
If you don't account for the strength of the schedules then you are not thinking. Every 10 win season is not equivalent...not even in the SEC.
So are you really asking this question for discussion or are you simply looking for a way to express your overall discontent?
If you don't account for the strength of the schedules then you are not thinking. Every 10 win season is not equivalent...not even in the SEC.
So are you really asking this question for discussion or are you simply looking for a way to express your overall discontent?
Posted on 11/27/12 at 1:13 am to Tigerinasia
quote:
So are you really asking this question for discussion or are you simply looking for a way to express your overall discontent?
I'm asking because it seems "the Curley Hallman" years are the barometer for success at LSU. If we are decent to good and have legit concerns certain posters repeat TEN WINS AND THE 90's....without realizing winning 10 games in today's college football is much easier than the 90's.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 1:20 am to Tigerinasia
In other words, there is a 67% increase in 10 win teams compared to 1992, for instance, a year when only 2 SEC teams won 10 games.
10 wins today = 9 wins in the 90's.
10 wins today = 9 wins in the 90's.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 2:38 am to theunknownknight
Which makes sense given that a 12th rent-a-win is on the schedule compared to then.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 2:53 am to LeonPhelps
[quote]LeonPhelps[
You have to look at it both ways because we easily could have lost to South Carolina, A&M, Auburn, and Ole Miss.
/quote]
SC- NO
A&M- NO
Auburn- Stupid close but NO.
Ole Miss- NO.
You have to look at it both ways because we easily could have lost to South Carolina, A&M, Auburn, and Ole Miss.
/quote]
SC- NO
A&M- NO
Auburn- Stupid close but NO.
Ole Miss- NO.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 3:49 am to theunknownknight
quote:
Every team deals with injuries etc.
Not to the extent we have.
Not always at their weakest points either.
And more to the point, the ones that do, usually don't have their entire season implode
This is actually part of what happened to USC....
This post was edited on 11/27/12 at 3:51 am
Posted on 11/27/12 at 6:30 am to BOZ4LSU
How many had a losing record, 10 wins is awesome.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 6:38 am to theunknownknight
quote:
3 SEC teams won 11 games
2 of those 3 only played a 2-game schedule FWIW.
Bama (vs LSU, vs A&M)
Georgia (vs USC, vs Florida)
Posted on 11/27/12 at 8:54 am to JPLSU1981
And 2 of the 3 of those beat LSU, with LSU never playing the third team.
Florida - Loss
Bama - Loss
Georgia - NP
Florida - Loss
Bama - Loss
Georgia - NP
Posted on 11/27/12 at 9:01 am to tiger perry
quote:
Would you want to trade places with Auburn, Tennessee or Arkansas???
good one
Posted on 11/27/12 at 9:13 am to theunknownknight
So if BAMA loses the SEC Champ. Game and is 11-2, did they have a better season than LSU?
Posted on 11/27/12 at 9:13 am to League Champs
quote:
Its all about appeal, and LSUs style of playing is lacking in that area
Gotcha, so when the xyz bowl visits LSU to discuss an invitation, they'll say "we know you'll bring a bunch of fans who will spend lots of money in our town, but we're not inviting you because your stats vs Arkansas were disappointing"
Posted on 11/27/12 at 9:37 am to theunknownknight
quote:
I'm asking because it seems "the Curley Hallman" years are the barometer for success at LSU. If we are decent to good and have legit concerns certain posters repeat TEN WINS AND THE 90's....without realizing winning 10 games in today's college football is much easier than the 90's.
Not one person said the Hallman days were the barometer. Thats obnoxiously obtuse. All these people are saying is...be careful what you complain about. Yes, LSU blew a lead and a chance at NC. Yes, we didn't play well against inferior opponents. But if you made it through the 90's as a fan, you can make it through this "down" season of only 10 wins which is only worth 9 since we are back in the 90's. Sure is tough to be an LSU fan (only if you are just jumping on the bandwagon). Those of us who have been here and will be here for the long haul know its a great time to be an LSU fan.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 9:45 am to GRTiger
quote:
18 out of 120 (15%) teams won 10 or more games. 10 wins was enough to win or play for the conference championship in all other BCS conferences and most non-BCS conferences. In nearly all conferences, less than 10 was enough to get a shot.
1/3 of 10+ win teams came from the SEC. 10 wins is a great season. It's just unfortunately not enough in the ridiculously talented SEC.
This. /Thread.
Did everyone catch this? Only 18 out of 120 have 10+ wins this year. 18. Good God some of you are idiotic. So 85% of college football didn't make a 10+ win season that some of you seem to think is so easy now with extra games.
Obviously 85% of CFB doesn't find 10 wins so easy.Posted on 11/27/12 at 10:14 am to theunknownknight
quote:
It seems as if we are being hypnotized into being simply "good" but not "great".
The goal is to be great. To beat everybody. Bama, Florida, Georgia, A&M, SC, Arky and stay undefeated. To win a NC and be the best ever.
However, some fans will upsell a decent season to feel better about it. They are probably still ecstatic we even have a football team.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 10:16 am to Bel Air Tiger
quote:
The real reality unless already mentioned is that our top 6 SEC teams in the BCS top 10 sustained all their losses from EACHOTHER.
There were no other SEC or non conference teams that beat our top 6.
FINALLY some intelligence in this thread.
In the West, LSU beat A&M, A&M beat Alabama, Alabama beat LSU. The three top teams were 1-1 vs. each other.
In the East, Georgia beat Florida, Florida beat SC, and SC beat Georgia. The three top teams were 1-1 vs. each other.
The inequity of the league schedule shows though when you compare the teams and their records vs. the top teams in the other division:
Record vs USC/FLA/UGA:
LSU: 1-1
A&M: 0-1
ALA: 0-0
Record vs. ALA/LSU/A&M
FLA: 2-0
USC: 0-1
UGA: 0-0
To me, Florida has the best resume' of the bunch. They beat 2 of the top 3 West teams, lost only to UGA, who was a great East team, and beat Florida State handily on the road.
The East teams all got a bonus victory since Missouri joined the league as well...replacing a Western Division opponent with Missouri certainly helped the East build its record.
Posted on 11/27/12 at 10:34 am to LSUGrad9295
The only reason Bama and Georgia are in the chmapionship game is because Bama did not play Florida, Georgia or South Carolina.
And Georgia did not play Bama, LSU or Texas A&M.
Here is how many 10+ wins teams they each played:
Bama 2 1-1 LSU-Texas A&M
Florida 5 4-1 LSU, Texas A&M, USC, Georgia, FSU
Georgia 2 1-1 USC, Florida
LSU 4 2-2 Texas A&M, Bama, Florida, USC
South Carolina 4 2-2 Georgia, Florida, LSU, Clemson
And Georgia did not play Bama, LSU or Texas A&M.
Here is how many 10+ wins teams they each played:
Bama 2 1-1 LSU-Texas A&M
Florida 5 4-1 LSU, Texas A&M, USC, Georgia, FSU
Georgia 2 1-1 USC, Florida
LSU 4 2-2 Texas A&M, Bama, Florida, USC
South Carolina 4 2-2 Georgia, Florida, LSU, Clemson
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News