re: Tiger fans pulling for Notre Dame no matter what need to wake up.

Maybe I'm ignorant, but who is the last good Louisianian that Notre Dame recruited?

quote:

---

Bama's best team got denied a national championship by because Notre Damn TIED Michigan State. LSU got screwed by the polls and media, hence the revenge game when LSU upset the Irish in Tiger Stadium. Fast forward to the late 70's. Another Bama team screwed when #5 Notre Dame beat Earl Campbell and Texas to vault to the national championship while Bama clobbered Ohio State in the Sugar Bowl.

---

Nice selective post here, but You've left out some rather important details. In 66, Notre Dame and Michigan State were ranked #1 and #2 when they played to a tie. Now, I've never understood why if you thought ND and MSU were better than Bama before they played, why if they tied should you now think Bama was better? But if you go with the better record, fine. Bama got hosed. What about 1964? Bama "won" the MNC even though they lost to Texas in the Orange Bowl to finish 10-1, while #2 Arkansas was 11-0 winning the Cotton. But the polls award the MNC before the bowls in 64. The next year the AP decided to name their MNC after the bowls. Bama goes into the bowls 8-1-1 #4, but 1,2 and 3 all lost so Bama winds up with the AP (the media that hates all things SEC according to you) over 10-1 MSU and 10-1 Arkansas. The next year, they went back to naming the MNC before the bowls for a couple of years, before permanently switching in 68. So while Bama, maybe got hosed in 66, they got away with one in 65. That makes them even.

As for 77, you mentioned ND beat Texas and Earl Campbell, but conveniently forgot to mention that Texas was undefeated, 11-0 and ranked #1 and that Notre Dame beat them 38-10. Ohio State who Bama beat was 9-2 ranked #9 going into the bowls. #2 OU and #4 Mich also lost their bowls. So because ND beat #1, you think Bama should move up. Makes sense if you think ballots should be chiseled in stone. But why should beating #1 be less impressive than beating #9? Bama fans point out ND lost to Ole Miss who Bama beat and finished 5-6. Bama lost to Nebraska who finished 9-3 ranked 12. ND beat more teams that finished ranked 4 to 2. Seems to be the objective case favors ND.
The other thing you conveniently left out was 1973. That year (like 2003) there was a split title. 11-0 ND was #1 in the AP, while 11-1 Alabama was #1 in the UPI (coaches) poll. Who did Alabama lose to? That's right, they lost to Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl. They get to claim another National Title because the coaches were still naming a MNC before the bowls. They changed that starting in 1974, I wonder if having their champ lose to the AP champ was a factor?

NOTRE DAME WINNING IN THE 60s and 70s AFFECTS LSU NOT ONE BIT, PERIOD.

LSU is losing more and more of our top recruits to Alabama every year.
They are coming into our back yard and convincing kids to come play for the Tide, and are able to show the rings and boast about the titles.
This DIRECTLY affects LSU football.
If you cannot understand that, you are a freaking moron.
You are willing to root for our most hated rival just because it gives the SEC another title? Just because the conference gets a bigger paycheck? The SEC is raking in MILLIONS of dollars every year off the backs of these kids, the couple extra isnt going to affect LSU football very much. You know what will affect LSU football though? Alabama continuing to be able to get our kids to flip commitments.

quote:

---

really, I thought hating LSU was the cool thing to do if you're a Tiger fan...

---

Nope, it's to hate bama and cry about everything that has to do with them

I just don't think ND can beat Bama. I wish both could somehow lose, but that's not happening.

quote:

---

Pull for whoever you want.

---

DWI

..here's a clue , purplehaze - 'Bama has more built in bias than ANY team in the country. They get the mulligans, they get the do-overs, they get the calls, they get the schedule that nobody thinks makes any difference. I could go on, but i won't. On top of that , they're usually pretty damn good. So, I say : frick 'Bama. Go Irish.

quote:

---

ND winning does nothing but make you old bastards lose sleep.

---

Oh and causes them to talk about the "end of SEC dominance" for 8 months straight.

There is that.

quote:

---

Alabama winning gives them 3 titles in 4 years. You see how the state of Georgia holds on to it's recruits? Alabama will take a massive step into Louisiana if they win this game

---

There really isn't a difference in recruiting pitch between saying "played for the past 3 out of 4" and "won three out of the past 4."

None.

Ideally UGA would have won and beat ND.

That's not in the cards anymore, and you fools want to make a bad situation worse out of spite.

quote:

---

This.

I believe we have a generational difference here.

Older fans know prplhze2000 is correct.

Younger fans never experienced the decades of the media slobbering over average ND teams.

However, younger fans have experienced Bama w Saban.

A simple matter of different life experiences.

---

I was a fan in the 80s and well remember the ND hate prevalent among LSU fans. I hate ND with a passion actually.

I was also a very young thing in the 70s but remember that decent LSU fans also hated Bama and Bear Bryant with a passion. There are very few games whose scores I remember, but young as I was, 20-10 against BAMA is seared into my brain. The 2000s and Saban have intensified that hate.

So all of you 'old folks' can shove it with the 'historically, we hate ND more' crap. My dad and granddad hated both.

And now my dad and I hate Bama so much, we'd pull (as someone in another thread said) for Al Qaeda Tech if they were playing Bama. So, yeah, in that context, I have no issue whatsoever for good old-fashioned ND-hating LSU fans to pull for them over Bama.

GO frickING IRISH.

frick you man. i'm catholic and i like notre dame. and me pulling for them has absoulety no bearing on the outcome of that game. your bias is misplaced.