- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
LSU all-time record vs the pac-10?
Posted on 8/11/09 at 11:55 am
Posted on 8/11/09 at 11:55 am
if not available, the last 10-20yrs vs the PAC-10 will work also.
3
Posted on 8/11/09 at 11:58 am to lsu xman
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:00 pm to WM88
wow, that 18-1 vs. the ACC is pretty impressive.
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:01 pm to lsu xman
14 -2 ? 14-3 ?
Lost to USC 1979
lost to Stanford (sun Bowl)
Someone else ?
Lost to USC 1979
lost to Stanford (sun Bowl)
Someone else ?
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:01 pm to WM88
11-2 all-time.
9-0 vs the PAC-10 since 1980.
9-0 vs the PAC-10 since 1980.
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:09 pm to lsu xman
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:11 pm to lsu xman
I can't believe we haven't played the Big 12 but twice since the Old Southwest Conference days, OU in the Sugar and Texas in the Cotton. We need to schedule more non conference games against them. I wouldn't mind playing OSU, A&M, and Nebraska in a home and home. We are 0-5-1 against Nebraska. That needs to change
This post was edited on 8/11/09 at 12:27 pm
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:12 pm to thunderbird1100
Now you'll have to schedule one of the teams in the top tier of the conference... Hopefully UW's return game will show you what it looks like...
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:14 pm to Run DMC
we use to play A&M a lot. maybe A&M was not in the big12 back then. this was when they had bucky richardson.
This post was edited on 8/11/09 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:21 pm to LawDawg1
quote:
Now you'll have to schedule one of the teams in the top tier of the conference... Hopefully UW's return game will show you what it looks like...
I think all college football fans would like to see the Pac 10 become a more competitive conference. Certainly hasn't been that way for some time.
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:37 pm to wilfont
Pac 10 is more competitive than you think. You just need to take a more objective look at it and get outside of your SEC and media mindset.
Scheduling a Pac 10 team that isn't one of the bottom 3 of the conference might also change your way of thinking too. Sorry, scheduling UW after its past 6 years and scheduling ASU or Arizona isn't it.
Hopefully, UW will rise back to its rightful place and you'll see it for yourself. You might not like it...
Pac 10 takes a beating because before SC's rise to prominence, the Pac 10 had extreme parity where there was a different conference champ every year. Before SC's dominance, take a look:
1990 Washington (11)
1991 Washington (12)
1992 Stanford (11)
*Washington (13)
1993 Arizona (1)
*UCLA (15)
USC (30)
1994 Oregon (5)
1995 *USC (31)
Washington (14)
1996 Arizona State (2)
1997 UCLA (16)
*Washington State (3)
1998 UCLA (17)
1999 Stanford (12)
2000 Oregon (6)
Oregon State (5)
*Washington (15)
2001 Oregon (7)
2002 USC (32)
*Washington State (4)
From 1990 - 2002, every team except Cal won a conference championship. There were some very good teams in there too... but no consistent team (like present day SC) which gives the appearance of a dominating presence. During this time, it seemed the Pac 10 required a senior QB to win the conference. Parity ruled the day and the champion lost its crown the next year or so...
Now, SC is simply a man among boys but the Pac 10 remains competitive. Cal, Oregon, and even Oregon State have shown up.
Scheduling a Pac 10 team that isn't one of the bottom 3 of the conference might also change your way of thinking too. Sorry, scheduling UW after its past 6 years and scheduling ASU or Arizona isn't it.
Hopefully, UW will rise back to its rightful place and you'll see it for yourself. You might not like it...
Pac 10 takes a beating because before SC's rise to prominence, the Pac 10 had extreme parity where there was a different conference champ every year. Before SC's dominance, take a look:
1990 Washington (11)
1991 Washington (12)
1992 Stanford (11)
*Washington (13)
1993 Arizona (1)
*UCLA (15)
USC (30)
1994 Oregon (5)
1995 *USC (31)
Washington (14)
1996 Arizona State (2)
1997 UCLA (16)
*Washington State (3)
1998 UCLA (17)
1999 Stanford (12)
2000 Oregon (6)
Oregon State (5)
*Washington (15)
2001 Oregon (7)
2002 USC (32)
*Washington State (4)
From 1990 - 2002, every team except Cal won a conference championship. There were some very good teams in there too... but no consistent team (like present day SC) which gives the appearance of a dominating presence. During this time, it seemed the Pac 10 required a senior QB to win the conference. Parity ruled the day and the champion lost its crown the next year or so...
Now, SC is simply a man among boys but the Pac 10 remains competitive. Cal, Oregon, and even Oregon State have shown up.
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:44 pm to LawDawg1
Pac-10 = 
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:48 pm to LawDawg1
Arizona State and Oregon State were bowl teams from the years we played them in 2005 and 2006. If you don't schedule USC in the P10 right now you're rolling the dice because no one else is really consistently good.
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:50 pm to LawDawg1
The thing about parity is, all the teams can suck equally and boom! You've achieved parity. UW, Wash St, Stanford, UCLA, Az all are bottom tier teams. Az St & Oregon St are next to bottom tier teams and Oregon & Cal are average, decent teams. Makes for an easy run for USC each & every year.
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:53 pm to RelocatedPelican
Dude, seriously, reverse the trend of getting your asses run over by the Mountain West collectively and then come back and talk to us about how good the PAC10 is.
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:55 pm to RelocatedPelican
quote:
Az St & Oregon St are next to bottom tier teams and Oregon & Cal are average, decent teams. Makes for an easy run for USC each & every year.
Funny how everyone always ranks Oregon State lower this decade/recently than they actually are. OSU is the #3 team in the P10 this decade and they are ahead of #4 Cal by quite a bit.
LINK
Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:57 pm to RelocatedPelican
quote:
Oregon St are next to bottom tier teams
OSU has won 28 games in 3 years and 3 straight bowl games.Posted on 8/11/09 at 12:57 pm to thunderbird1100
Yes, the Sun Bowl is worth mentioning.
This post was edited on 8/11/09 at 12:58 pm
Posted on 8/11/09 at 1:01 pm to extremetigerfanatic
quote:
Dude, seriously, reverse the trend of getting your asses run over by the Mountain West collectively and then come back and talk to us about how good the PAC10 is.
yet the Pac-10 has a winning record against the SEC and every other BCS conference since 2000
Posted on 8/11/09 at 1:09 pm to usc6158
quote:
yet the Pac-10 has a winning record against the SEC and every other BCS conference since 2000
Doesn't mean much as some OOC games can just be huge mismatches.
LSU-Washington
Oregon-Mississippi State
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News