- 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: Did we not already see this matchup back in 2011 LSU Oregon
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:04 pm to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:04 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
This whole paragraph proves my point. 0-2 is meaningless, all it proves is that they didn't beat Auburn or LSU.
Seriously just STFU. This is an embarrassing quote for you. All we can go by is what actually happened. And all Oregon had done is lose to top SEC teams.
quote:
Either you don't understand the transitive property or irony. You are the one playing the transitive game by compariing LSU's 2013 passing output to 2011. The fact is both LSU and Oregon are completely different teams in 2013 than 2011, trying to draw meaning from that game and apply it to now is just silly.
More idiocy from you. You've done nothing but use the transitive property to say Oregon would beat top SEC teams. I said a top SEC team THAT HAS ALREADY BEATEN Oregon would do so again. Big difference.
quote:
Before JFF got that opprotunity many people said their O couldn't work against SEC defenses
No one knew who JFF was then you tard. No one knew what A&M had, including them. Seriously, do you even watch football?
ETA:
quote:
My point is that given the chance, Oregon COULD (not would or will for sure) but COULD do similar things to what A&M did last year in the SEC. If you deny that you are hopelessly biased.
ULL COULD do it too. Except they also have shite the bed against top SEC competition. Oregon has had opportunities, and has yet to do it with 2 of their supposed best ever teams. Until they actually win a game against good SEC teams, they don't get the benefit of the doubt. That's not bias you halfwit.
This post was edited on 9/16/13 at 1:07 pm
1
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:19 pm to H-Town Tiger
Mariota, while not JFF, is a very good QB, top 5 in the country. Oregon would have beaten the Alabama team we saw last week, maybe even drop 40 plus on that slow defense.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:20 pm to PianoTiger
quote:
Mariota, while not JFF, is a very good QB, top 5 in the country. Oregon would have beaten the Alabama team we saw last week, maybe even drop 40 plus on that slow defense.
Who on their defense is stopping Bama?
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:27 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
No, it confirms they can't compete. They are 0 for 2. Until they play more and win, all they are is winless against top SEC talent. That's not bias, it is fact.
While UO has never beaten a top SEC team recently, the sample size is still pretty small. The Auburn game could have gone either way and UO hung on for a while in the LSU game before LSU took control in the second half.
quote:
What are you even blabbing about? JFF has had the opportunity to, and has beaten top SEC talent. No one at Oregon can say that. Again, what I say is facts, not bias.
You bias brah. You scared of the Ducks. This Oregon team is a completely different team in terms of personnel. The key QB and RB positions are upgrades compared to 2010 and 2011. They have a top 5 QB and RB, with great play-makers at WR, and an underrated defense.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:29 pm to PianoTiger
quote:
Oregon would have beaten the Alabama team we saw last week, maybe even drop 40 plus on that slow defense
no they wouldn't, they lost to Auburn in 2010 and LSU in 2011 there fore they can never beat top SEC teams
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:31 pm to LNCHBOX
Their defense is better than Texas A&M's IMO.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:32 pm to PianoTiger
quote:
While UO has never beaten a top SEC team recently, the sample size is still pretty small.
It's all there is. Anything else is conjecture.
quote:
The Auburn game could have gone either way and UO hung on for a while in the LSU game before LSU took control in the second half.
Blah blah, if if if blah. Bottom line, Oregon is 0 for 2 against top SEC teams. Doesn't matter how they lost, all that matters is they did.
quote:
You bias brah
Nope.
quote:
You scared of the Ducks
Yea, I'm so scared of them
I mean eventually that offense will work against real defenses, right? quote:
The key QB and RB positions are upgrades compared to 2010 and 2011. They have a top 5 QB and RB, with great play-makers at WR, and an underrated defense.
They've played nobody this year. Shutting down UT and Nicholls isn't exactly the same as stopping A&M. Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:32 pm to PianoTiger
quote:
Their defense is better than Texas A&M's IMO.
I should certainly hope so. A&M's defense is fricking awful.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:33 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
no they wouldn't, they lost to Auburn in 2010 and LSU in 2011 there fore they can never beat top SEC teams
Trying to piggyback off someone else's post since I completely ripped your posts to shreds? Nice.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:34 pm to LNCHBOX
Ok...I'm just saying...the SEC should be scared of this team. UO can hang with the best...don't be suprised, when in January, we see the Ducks leaving the SEC champion grasping at air.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:37 pm to PianoTiger
quote:
Ok...I'm just saying...the SEC should be scared of this team.
Why? It's the same story every year. Until Oregon's offense works against a good SEC team, nothing is different. I'm not saying they aren't good, but they have so far proven to not be able to score like they are used to when faced with top defenses.
quote:
UO can hang with the best...don't be suprised, when in January, we see the Ducks leaving the SEC champion grasping at air.
Heard this in 2010 and 2011. I guess if you keep saying it it will eventually be right.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 1:41 pm to PianoTiger
One more quick word:
Mariota is the big game changer. He is a guy any team will have to specifically prepare for. He is very good in the pocket and can also burn you with his legs. The fact that teams now have to game-plan for the no huddle and play-makers like Huff and Black Mamba as well as for Mariota's impromptu QB runs, makes for a very complex offense to solve. After game-planning for those, there is still the fact that Mariota is a good pocket passer with weapons all over the field. This is the best Oregon team ever.
Mariota is the big game changer. He is a guy any team will have to specifically prepare for. He is very good in the pocket and can also burn you with his legs. The fact that teams now have to game-plan for the no huddle and play-makers like Huff and Black Mamba as well as for Mariota's impromptu QB runs, makes for a very complex offense to solve. After game-planning for those, there is still the fact that Mariota is a good pocket passer with weapons all over the field. This is the best Oregon team ever.
This post was edited on 9/16/13 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:20 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Seriously just STFU. This is an embarrassing quote for you. All we can go by is what actually happened. And all Oregon had done is lose to top SEC teams.
No sorry, you don't understand statistics if you think a 2 game sample proves anything. LSU went 45 years without winning a NC, according to your logic, we could never win one.
quote:
More idiocy from you. You've done nothing but use the transitive property to say Oregon would beat top SEC teams.
This show you don't understand my argument and are just retrenching into an SECSECSEC type of argument. I said they COULD, not would COULD beat a top SEC team. I used examples to show why and to refute your claims, but you apparently can only take things literally. You find excuses for anything that doesn't support you view and attaching meaning to anything that does. There is a word for that, bias.
quote:
No one knew who JFF was then you tard. No one knew what A&M had, including them. Seriously, do you even watch football?
Think about what you are saying
No one knew who JFF was then and no one knows how 2013 Oregon would do against 2013 LSU, 2013 Alabama, 2013 UGA etc.
quote:
ULL COULD do it too. Except they also have shite the bed against top SEC competition.
No, ULL can't, they do not have the caliber of athletes that Oregon does. Have they ever beaten even an SEC bottom feeder 59-10? Or any of the other beat downs Oregon has laid on Tenn recently?
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:20 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Oregon has had opportunities, and has yet to do it with 2 of their supposed best ever teams
This statement really shows where we disagree you attach meaning where you shouldn't and take things too literally. Yes, they lost to Auburn but only by 3 and yes their O was below their season avg. But it is 1 game. 1 game does not tell you anything meaningful about a team, program or offense in general. If you think 1 3 point loss shows they would lose 9 out of 10 to auburn, you really don't understand basic statistics and sound more like someone that's never watched football. 2 years ago they beat Stanford something like 52-31, last year they lost to Stanford 17-14. What does that tell you? Well nothing except they lost one and won one. No one plays the exact same every game. That's why you have to look at long term trends and not 2 games.
I used A&M as an example because people like you always said those type of offenses can't work against SEC defenses. Its not the exact same as Oregon but similar. When they do you just say, well they have JFF and he is a special player, but there are other special players maybe not as good, but only marginally so. Mariota is close enough. Hell people where making excuses about A&M's success this off season. Saying now people have film and Saban's had all off season to prepare and guess what, he was even better against Bama this year. They lost because their D blows and Bama also has some great talent on offense.
That 2010 was maybe Oregon's best team to date is also meaningless noise. Circumstances vary from year to year. Some years the top teams are better than the top teams other years. What's important is how this team stacks up. IMO right now, I think Oregon is the best team and that this is their best team. I also don't think this year Bama, LSU or UGA have as good of Defenses as they've had in years past. We'll see, its a long season. The Pac-12 looks like the 2nd best conference, so Oregon should be tested more this year than years past. Will they win it all? I don't know. Would they beat an SEC team? Again, no one knows. But they COULD and the fact that the lost to SEC teams in 2010 and 2011 doesn't change that. If it makes you skeptical, that's fine. Just like some were skeptical that Peyton Manning could beat NE before he did. Just don't say Oregon can't (can't and haven't are 2 different things), because that's simply not true.
This post was edited on 9/16/13 at 2:26 pm
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:24 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
This statement really shows where we disagree you attach meaning where you shouldn't and take things too literally. Yes, they lost to Auburn but only by 3 and yes their O was below their season avg. But it is 1 game. 1 game does not tell you anything meaningful about a team, program or offense in general. If you think 1 3 point loss shows they would lose 9 out of 10 to auburn, you really don't understand basic statistics and sound more like someone that's never watched football. I used A&M as an example because people like you always say those type of offenses can't work against SEC defenses. When they do you just say, well they have JFF and he is a special player, but there are other special players maybe not as good, but only marginally so. Mariota is close enough.
That 2010 was maybe Oregon's best team to date is also meaningless noise. Circumstances vary from year to year. Some years the top teams are better than the top teams other years. What's important is how this team stacks up. IMO right now, I think Oregon is the best team and that this is their best team. I also don't think this year Bama, LSU or UGA have as good of Defenses as they've had in years past. We'll see, its a long season. The Pac-12 looks like the 2nd best conference, so Oregon should be tested more this year than years past. Will they win it all? I don't know. Would they beat an SEC team? Again, no one knows. But they COULD and the fact that the lost to SEC teams in 2010 and 2011 doesn't change that. If it makes you skeptical, that's fine. Just like some were skeptical that Peyton Manning could beat NE before he did. Just don't say Oregon can't (can't and haven't are 2 different things), because that's simply not true.
Just shut up already. Of course they COULD. But until they DO, they don't get the benefit of the doubt because of their past games. It's not like Oregon hasn't played top SEC teams and I'm just speculating. They have played top teams and lost.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:28 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
puhleeze, they damn near beat Auburn
AU had a middle of the pack defense in the SEC that year though. They weren't on LSU/Bama level on defense.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:36 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Just shut up already
back at you, sorry you don't like to debate or can't refute any of my points while just resorting to quoting past scores.
quote:
Of course they COULD
my man, you finally get it.
quote:
they don't get the benefit of the doubt because of their past games. It's not like Oregon hasn't played top SEC teams and I'm just speculating. They have played top teams and lost
Doh, getting ahead of myself. 2 games don't prove anything, that you don't get that is too bad. Do you know why casinos post what the last several spins on a roulette table were?
That you also don't get that what their 2010 and 2011 teams did or did not do has no bearing on their 2013 team is also unfortunate. Teams change from year to year. Did it also ever occur to you that because they lost those games, they may have tried to improve something like their defense, offensive line and passing game? Not giving them the benefit of the doubt is not the same thing as saying they have no shot or that they'd lose 9 out of 10 which is what someone else said above. If they play Alabama or an undefeated LSU in the BCS CG, the SEC team will be favored, but don't think that means Oregon can't win, that's all.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:45 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
back at you, sorry you don't like to debate or can't refute any of my points while just resorting to quoting past scores.
I've refuted just about everything you've said in this thread. quote:
my man, you finally get it.
I never said they couldn't, but props on your reading comprehension.
quote:
Doh, getting ahead of myself. 2 games don't prove anything, that you don't get that is too bad. Do you know why casinos post what the last several spins on a roulette table were?
This is a game of luck and randomness you dumbass. What a horrible analogy.
quote:
That you also don't get that what their 2010 and 2011 teams did or did not do has no bearing on their 2013 team is also unfortunate.
I do get that. I also get that they always have video game numbers until they play a good defense. Maybe this is the year they finally do it, but until they do, they are 0fer, and those losses were recent enough for them to be used in this conversation.
quote:
Teams change from year to year. Did it also ever occur to you that because they lost those games, they may have tried to improve something like their defense, offensive line and passing game?
Every team tries to improve, doesn't mean it works. quote:
Not giving them the benefit of the doubt is not the same thing as saying they have no shot or that they'd lose 9 out of 10 which is what someone else said above.
They have done nothing to give them the benefit of the doubt of winning against a good defense. Auburn's D wasn't even that good.
quote:
If they play Alabama or an undefeated LSU in the BCS CG, the SEC team will be favored, but don't think that means Oregon can't win, that's all.
I never once said they couldn't win. But so far, very recent history suggests that Good SEC defenses trump their high powered offense. That's all I've said, and I have facts to back that up. What do you have?
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:46 pm to Powerman
quote:
AU had a middle of the pack defense in the SEC that year though. They weren't on LSU/Bama level on defense
Neither did Oregon that year, but they held Auburn to their 2nd lowest score of the year, less than LSU and Bama did. Also overall Auburn's D was so so, but they arguablly had the best defensive player in the SEC and he was dominant in that game. Oregon has made an effort to recruit better on the OL since then, I know that.
So far this year, I don't think either LSU or Bama have typical LSU/Bama defesne either. Manziel may be better than Mariota, but overall I think Oregon has better talent on offense than A&M and almost certainly a much better defense. Would be a very interesting match up and to say Oregon can't win is just foolish and I think you know that.
Posted on 9/16/13 at 2:52 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Would be a very interesting match up and to say Oregon can't win is just foolish and I think you know that.
I'm gonna scream this in hopes that it sinks in this time: NO ONE SAID THAT OREGON CAN'T WIN
The only thing said is the odds are heavily against them. There are so many examples of high powered offenses getting shut down by good SEC defenses. That's why Oregon isn't getting the benefit of the doubt.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News