- 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
0
Posted on 7/28/08 at 12:50 pm to winner
quote:
this ranking is a good argument for defending their star rankings. the top ranking teams are the ones playing in and winning national titles. guess stars actually matter on recruits
que Hester was a two star conversaton
Also, I can't believe ULL out recruits Tulane.
This post was edited on 7/28/08 at 12:58 pm
Posted on 7/28/08 at 12:55 pm to Cash
quote:
Also, I kind believe ULL out recruits Tulane
everybody in the state out recruits tulane apparently. which is pathetic considering that the school is in an awesome college city and offers a strong academic reputation.
Posted on 7/28/08 at 12:59 pm to TulaneTigerFan
I had a brain freeze but edited. It is pathetic and hopefullly Toledo changes that.
Posted on 7/28/08 at 1:04 pm to Cash
he's doing a good job so far. people on the tulane boards are really excited over that 3 star player that committed a while back. there was a thread on here about it. and it really is pathetic. we shouldn't be great by any means, but we should be better than ULL and ULM
Posted on 7/28/08 at 2:09 pm to 12inches
quote:
this shows USC has really under-achieved for the insane amount of tallent they have.
Also with the exception of Georgia all of the top ten in recruiting have a national title (or 2 for LSU)in the past 10 years
1 USC NC 2004
2 Florida NC 2006
3 LSU NC 2003 & 2007 (soon to be 2008)
4 Oklahoma NC 2000
5 Texas NC 2005
6 Georgia NC Who knows
7 Ohio State NC 2002
8 Michigan NC 1998
9 Florida State NC 1999
10 Miami NC 2001
Very well said, and or the other possibility is that thier recruits are over rated due to more recruiting services have talent evaluators in CA than the SouthEast per capita and per talent.
Thus, recruiting agencies are more inclined to pump up local guys in Ca, than to get on a plane which cost money vs. drive to a local High School.
And, it very well may be combination of both.
Bottom-line, I agree...they continue to underachieve.
Posted on 7/28/08 at 3:56 pm to Catahoula Lake LA
When you realize Rich Rodriguez is a Tulane reject, you can understand why Tulane is where they are. 
I officially gave up on Tulane when they didn't give the job to Rodriguez. They didn't want to continue with the offense that produced their perfect season--amazing!
I officially gave up on Tulane when they didn't give the job to Rodriguez. They didn't want to continue with the offense that produced their perfect season--amazing!
Posted on 7/28/08 at 4:22 pm to JPLSU1981
Comprehension of Rivals’ star rating system is beyond most of their clueless heads.
They are too eager to refute something they don't even understand--typical geek mentality.
They are too eager to refute something they don't even understand--typical geek mentality.
Posted on 7/28/08 at 4:33 pm to Rickety Cricket
The Bammers are funny...I like the guy who is happy that they have more talent than Auburn...since you lost to them 6 straight years thats no something you want to take pride in.
Posted on 7/28/08 at 4:42 pm to Catahoula Lake LA
I find it funny USC has underachieved in your "opinions".
We have two national titles, three Heismans and six straight BCS bowls, in which we are 5-1. We also lost a national title to VY, and were two upset losses (ucla in '06 and Stanford in '07) from playing for the mnc again each year.
We also have had a multitude of AAs and a large number of 1st and 2nd round draft picks.
If underachieving is being the most dominant program in the decade, then everyone should strive to underachieve as well!
We have two national titles, three Heismans and six straight BCS bowls, in which we are 5-1. We also lost a national title to VY, and were two upset losses (ucla in '06 and Stanford in '07) from playing for the mnc again each year.
We also have had a multitude of AAs and a large number of 1st and 2nd round draft picks.
If underachieving is being the most dominant program in the decade, then everyone should strive to underachieve as well!
Posted on 7/28/08 at 5:18 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
If underachieving is being the most dominant program in the decade, then everyone should strive to underachieve as well!
Team of The Decade: Not USC according to this poll (and it's not even close)
This post was edited on 7/28/08 at 5:19 pm
Posted on 7/28/08 at 5:21 pm to JPLSU1981
Try some football accolades, and not fans voting for their favorite team 50 times...
Posted on 7/28/08 at 5:26 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
We have two national titles
You may, but LSU played for and won two National Championship games.
ETA: And they didn't do it in the P-10
This post was edited on 7/28/08 at 5:29 pm
Posted on 7/28/08 at 5:28 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
Try some football accolades, and not fans voting for their favorite team 50 times...
USC
81-21 overall record (0.794 winning percentage)
6 Pac 10 titles
5-1 BCS record
5-2 overall bowl record
1 BCS national title (2004)
LSU
82-22 overall record (.788 winning percentage)
3 SEC titles
4-0 BCS
6-2 overall bowl record
2 BCS national titles (2003, 2007)
Posted on 7/28/08 at 5:35 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
We have two national titles, three Heismans and six straight BCS bowls
Pick 1 or the other only, buddy. As far as I can remember, you guys won only 1 National Title (in the BCS era).
If you think the BCS title is worthless, and USC has won 2 natinal titles in the BCS era, then don't brag about 6 straight BCS bowls either.
Do you know which school has 2 BCS trophies so far (and the only one in all of college football)???
Posted on 7/28/08 at 5:37 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
Try some football accolades, and not fans voting for their favorite team 50 times...
First of all, I must point out that both LSU and USC have had extremely successful decades. USC and LSU have been the two most successful teams in college football this decade, and every other team is a notch or two below.
Having said that, if you're trying to make the argument that USC has done more this decade than LSU, you need to take your red and yellow glasses off.
I'm not proclaiming LSU has done more than USC (because it's pretty damn close), I'm just saying I think it's crazy for anyone to say that USC has done more than LSU.
Posted on 7/28/08 at 5:41 pm to Rickety Cricket
quote:
The Bammers found this thread
I did think it was funny how a couple of them actually read the post and thought they were #2 in that list last year ... lol.
This post was edited on 7/28/08 at 5:55 pm
Posted on 7/28/08 at 7:13 pm to Catahoula Lake LA
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this shows USC has really under-achieved for the insane amount of tallent they have.
Also with the exception of Georgia all of the top ten in recruiting have a national title (or 2 for LSU)in the past 10 years
1 USC NC 2004
2 Florida NC 2006
3 LSU NC 2003 & 2007 (soon to be 2008)
4 Oklahoma NC 2000
5 Texas NC 2005
6 Georgia NC Who knows
7 Ohio State NC 2002
8 Michigan NC 1998
9 Florida State NC 1999
10 Miami NC 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very well said, and or the other possibility is that thier recruits are over rated due to more recruiting services have talent evaluators in CA than the SouthEast per capita and per talent.
Thus, recruiting agencies are more inclined to pump up local guys in Ca, than to get on a plane which cost money vs. drive to a local High School.
And, it very well may be combination of both.
Bottom-line, I agree...they continue to underachieve.
Let's see over this time frame we have the best record over any team in the nation playing the strongest schedule of any team on that list over the time fram listed (Sagarin), won an AP NC and a bcs NC, won the PAC-10 every season etc.
Also keep in mind that we did not lose a game by more than a TD at all during the past 6 years. I don't quite think that is underachieving.
Posted on 7/28/08 at 7:16 pm to BhamTigah
quote:
5-year Average Stars Recruiting Rankings (all 119 teams)
I wonder how much it would change if you calculated by adding total stars for each year and dividing by total recruits over the five years, thus giving equal value to each recruit. Using the current methodology, recruits in smaller classes receive more weighting than recruits in larger classes.
Not complaining, just a point of discussion.
Great work.
What would be better is to only count those that actually qualified and made it to the team.
The best way for now is to take the avg. star ranking on everyone's current 85 scholarship players.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News