- 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: Does everyone now understand why Bonnette and Miles are against permanents?
Posted on 11/20/12 at 10:27 am to crimsonsaint
Posted on 11/20/12 at 10:27 am to crimsonsaint
quote:
Before Saban, UT had beaten UA the last 10 out of 12 games.
This is where the major difference is.
The coaching in this league back then was nowhere near the level it is now. Spurrier, Fulmer were the beast coaches at the time and it was everybody else.
Please quit trying to convince yourself that your precious overrated rival will somehow get to where it used to be, even with a good hire.
2
Posted on 11/20/12 at 10:31 am to SBC
quote:
zero margin for error like our friends in Tuscaloosa do
Agree. Don't understand it and don't understand why Bama wasn't moved over to the East, leaving Missouri to the West.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 10:42 am to c on z
quote:quote:This is where the major difference is.
Before Saban, UT had beaten UA the last 10 out of 12 games.
quote:
Please quit trying to convince yourself that your precious overrated rival will somehow get to where it used to be, even with a good hire.
Saban's not going to live forever. Neither will Miles. There's always drop offs when coaches get replaced. Had Kiffen stayed at UT they might be pretty good right now. Don't know why you'd think UT will never be good again.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 10:58 am to crimsonsaint
quote:
Saban's not going to live forever. Neither will Miles. There's always drop offs when coaches get replaced. Had Kiffen stayed at UT they might be pretty good right now. Don't know why you'd think UT will never be good again.
With all the recruiting improprieties Kiffen and his staff had at UT? He isn't exactly lighting it up at USCw with the stockpile of 4 and 5* players he has brought in there, and yeah, even with the NCAA limiting schollies he has a shite ton of talent to put on the field.
TN likely produces ~ 14 major college players annually and has to raid GA and other southern states plus CA to bring in enough quality players to compete at a high level. With recruiting competition greatly increased combined with the conference-wide coaching improvements I don't see UT ever being the juggernaut they once were....but odder shite has happened.
This post was edited on 11/20/12 at 10:59 am
Posted on 11/20/12 at 10:58 am to 3xlsugrad
quote:
If we hadn't played like crap against UF and managed to win, the strong schedule helps us. I like the stronger schedule. We just need to be better prepared than we were for the first half of the season. It's hard to go undefeated regardless of the schedule when you don't play well. I would rather lose to UF than UK.
As a season ticket holder, I agree with you and I would prefer to PAY for good games. As a fan of LSU football, I want a fair opportunity to make it to the NC game. Us playing UF & UGA vs. Bama playing UT and Mizzu isn't providing the same test for both teams. They like the "eyeball test" because your coach can drastically influence the results. Polls are all about hype and I too believed that Bama was the clear #1...until they played LSU & aTm.
It's comical to watch these inbread Gump's making excuses when LSU keeps getting the tougher schedule. If the scenario were reversed, they would absolutely be complaining. What sucks is that at the end of the season, it doesn't really matter that we played #1, #2, and #3. It's all about wins and losses...and a biased "eyeball test".
Posted on 11/20/12 at 11:09 am to crimsonsaint
The current approach is a travesty of scheduling.
There needs to be a MATHEMATICAL approach not a GOOD OL BOY approach.
Nobody outside those two states sees Alabama/Tenn or Georgia/ Auburn as anything special.
I want to play ALL the teams from the East on a regular, rotating basis.
It puts all teams on an equal footing in the conference.
Every four year scholarship player should experience EVERY SEC stadium at least once in their career.
Every single other conference has since this as SELF-EVIDENT and neccesary for conference COHESION since conference expansion started.
It boggles the mind that the SEC is playing grab-arse on this and that the member-schools give "most-favored" status to some schools and not others.
Everybody should play everybody on the other side in the shortest possible time, PERIOD.
There needs to be a MATHEMATICAL approach not a GOOD OL BOY approach.
Nobody outside those two states sees Alabama/Tenn or Georgia/ Auburn as anything special.
I want to play ALL the teams from the East on a regular, rotating basis.
It puts all teams on an equal footing in the conference.
Every four year scholarship player should experience EVERY SEC stadium at least once in their career.
Every single other conference has since this as SELF-EVIDENT and neccesary for conference COHESION since conference expansion started.
It boggles the mind that the SEC is playing grab-arse on this and that the member-schools give "most-favored" status to some schools and not others.
Everybody should play everybody on the other side in the shortest possible time, PERIOD.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 11:10 am to SL Tiger
Only reason I am against the permanent opponent is because with the expansion, we will only play at tenn or at Georgia or at mizz once every 10 years. That's just dumb. It's like they aren't even in our conference anymore.
If bama and tenn want yo keep their permanent rivalry, then fine, keep it. But there is no reason whatsoever that the rest of the teams should have to do it too.
If bama and tenn want yo keep their permanent rivalry, then fine, keep it. But there is no reason whatsoever that the rest of the teams should have to do it too.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 11:26 am to noonan
quote:
If bama and tenn want yo keep their permanent rivalry, then fine, keep it.
That requires that Tenn/Bama/Auburn/Georgia be in the same division. Which is NOT feasible.
So just keep it SIMPLE.
Require all teams to do a MATHEMATICAL ROTATION.
Like EVERY other conference.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 11:33 am to SBC
quote:
They realize that the unbalanced schedule can cost LSU a chance at a BCSNC and it will happen this year.
I agree with your overarching point, but we still could have put ourselves in a position to win the NC by beating Alabama in Tiger Stadium. We didn't. Make no mistake, Alabama is the primary obstacle to achieving a title, not the SEC East. We've effectively lost the last two NC's to Saban and Bama.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 11:45 am to c on z
quote:
Tennessee won't be good again for at least 5 years even if they make a great hire
If there was a definition of pure speculation this would be it. SBC did you think like this last year when UF was a joke? Tenn and FL are on the same magnitude of programs, which is what you consider when you matching up on a Conference level. NOT what is recently with some coach, all it takes is one coach to change everything (see LSU/AL). Playing at Tenn would not be considered an easy task early in the season considering how we were playing. ULL should've beaten UF, even UGA beat them. Why don't you blame Alabama being ranked higher due to them beating us at home after a bye week? Are Florida fans crying b/c UGA's opponent Auburn is taking a dump, and LSU their permanent is a borderline dynasty?
Posted on 11/20/12 at 11:51 am to TigerKnights
quote:
The point is wins/losses matter much more than who you play. LSU loses a close game to Florida on the road and a close game at home to Bama. K St gets blown out by an unranked team. K St stays ahead of LSU.
Playing all cupcakes and one tough team gives you a much better shot. Congrats on the schedule Bama.
where were you in 2007? Thank God we had UF on the schedule, who we can depend on for at least 9 wins annually. Beating Va. Tech also proved to be fruitful when they were ranked 3, were you against playing them ooc too? That was one of the primary drives which enabled us to jump 7 spots.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 11:59 am to SBC
You are correct. UF and LSU are the losers in the current system.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 12:00 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
I want to play ALL the teams from the East on a regular, rotating basis.
You want to play Vandy, Missouri, Kentucky, etc. on regular basis? Why? It'd suit me just fine if Alabama never played those teams again in football.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 12:41 pm to crimsonsaint
It's not that hard to understand.
14 teams.
You play the six teams on your side EVERY year.
You play the seven on the other side on a rotating basis, home and away.
Everybody plays everybody.
No favoritism, no "favored- team status" no "exceptions" no "avoiding".
Just line em up and play em.
Every team exactly the same .
It's just common sense.
I'm amazed that 4 teams continue to demand protection against equitable competition and we all just go along wih it.
14 teams.
You play the six teams on your side EVERY year.
You play the seven on the other side on a rotating basis, home and away.
Everybody plays everybody.
No favoritism, no "favored- team status" no "exceptions" no "avoiding".
Just line em up and play em.
Every team exactly the same .
It's just common sense.
I'm amazed that 4 teams continue to demand protection against equitable competition and we all just go along wih it.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 12:43 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
That requires that Tenn/Bama/Auburn/Georgia be in the same division. Which is NOT feasible.
No it doesn't. Just let those 4 teams keep their permanent rivalry and let the rest of us rotate.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 1:22 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
It's not that hard to understand.
You're right it's not. Alabama's played Tennessee since 1901. We're not giving that up because the SEC decided to add two teams last year. And I know good and well you don't want to play some of those sorry east teams. You just don't want to play UF and that's bottom line.
quote:
I'm amazed that 4 teams continue to demand protection against equitable competition and we all just go along wih it.
How the hell would UA dropping UT for the likes of Vandy, Kentucky, & Missouri be "equitable competition"?
Posted on 11/20/12 at 1:30 pm to crimsonsaint
As a fan i want to see more rotation. Doesnt matter the team because they can be better or worse from one year to the next.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 1:59 pm to The312
quote:
I agree with your overarching point, but we still could have put ourselves in a position to win the NC by beating Alabama in Tiger Stadium. We didn't. Make no mistake, Alabama is the primary obstacle to achieving a title, not the SEC East. We've effectively lost the last two NC's to Saban and Bama.
Funny, Alabama didn't beat us at home last year, played the weakest schedule of any team to make the BCSCG, and still was able to win a title.
Why should LSU have to meet the same standards?
Oh yeah, Bama is a media darling so they can literally get away with murder.
You people here can debate this until you are blue in the face, the fact of the matter is there are different standards for different teams.
Even if you make LSU's schedule easier, LSU will not be granted leeway from the media that Bama gets such as mulligans and "quality losses" and "eyeball tests".
Deal with the double standard and attempt to enjoy the farce that is CFB. I know I do.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 2:00 pm to dgnx6
quote:
As a fan i want to see more rotation. Doesnt matter the team because they can be better or worse from one year to the next.
Exactly. Why does the rest of the conference have to deal with something they don't want just because 4 teams do want it. Again, let them keep their permanent opponent and let the rest of the conference rotate.
Posted on 11/20/12 at 2:12 pm to crimsonsaint
quote:
Tennessee has more SECCs than everyone but Alabama. Before Saban, UT had beaten UA the last 10 out of 12 games. I bet y'all had no problem with UT being UA's permanent cross divisional rival then. And not for nothing but UT's record against LSU is 20-9-3.
Florida didn't win a SECC until 1991. They were chumps before Spurrier got there. So man up and quit whining
And Ole Miss was in the Top 5 regularly back in the 1960's-WTF does 20-30 year old data matter? Didn't you just make a good case for permanent opponents not being fair, one way or the other?
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News