re: 8 years with Les.....what are your thoughts....

quote:

---

Saban was good, but he was a goddamned prick,

---

I swear I can't understand why LSU fans say this all the time. What, were you gonna go have a beer with him? Was he mean to you? Really, what difference does it make as long as his players play hard for him?

11 pages...who knew?

quote:

---

Oh that's right, I forgot you prescribe to the standards set forth by Mr. Alleva. Wonder what Saban would say if his AD patted him on the back after not winning it all and said "that's ok, winning championships is not what it is all about".

---

Wow. Still can't believe Alleva said that. One of the biggest PR mistakes I have ever heard. Mind numbing...

quote:

---

Actually, the 1/9 rematch was precedented. The 1996 season number 1 Florida lost the last regular season game to number 2 FSU. The Bowl Coalition was in effect then. No, it wasn't 1 vs 2 going into the bowls but a rematch in a bowl did happen and the winner was going to be the national champ.

---

It was unprecedented in the BCS era, which you know is what I meant.

Obviously I am aware of 96, but who gives a shite about 96?? Of course the Sugar Bowl picked a rematch, because they were limited as to which teams they could choose. If they could have picked ASU vs. FSU instead they would have done it in a heartbeat.

The BCS was created after 97 to prevent another split title a la Michigan Nebraska when the two best teams couldn't play because of bowl tie ins.

THAT is why the BCS was created, to ensure that the best teams had a chance to compete against each other.

LSU and Alabama had already played. The BCS didn't have to arrange the matchup. Sure, many people thought Alabama was a better team than OSU, hell, most thought they were better than LSU even though they lost to them.

But the BCS's job was to make sure that conference tie ins to bowls didn't prevent a matchup of two powers from other conferences.

The Big 12 deserved to put their best agains the SEC's best, as they had done AT LEAST as much as Bama to earn a chance to play for the title.

The SEC became the best conference by crushing Ohio State in 06 and 07, and beating Oklahoma, Texas, and Oregon after that, not by puffing their chest in conference.

Everyone harps on the SEC 7 straight, but the streak was snapped in 2011 as far as I'm concerned. Who's to say OSU couldn't have beaten LSU?? The SEC did NOT prove it on the field (unless of course you count LSU doing the conferences dirty work by beating the Pac 12 and Big East champs convincingly while Bama played cream puffs).

Again, the BCS was designed to make sure the country got to see the best matchup.

They had already seen LSU Bama, and no one wanted to see it again, which is why the game was a ratings flop.

ESPN sold out to ensure that they'd get a huge playoff contract, and LSU took the fall for it.

The matchup was unprecedented, and undeserved.

quote:

---

Man leave Les alone. I have a friend who is part owner of a pharmacy and he said business is good on the weekends when the Tigers play. Mainly because of the scripts they write for thousands of fans who contemplate jumping off the bridge after the stress he puts them through!

---

LOL. That means I need to go to CVS on a Monday or Tuesday.

with the teams that Miles has put together it has given us a chance to go 9-3 or better every year in the toughest conference in college football along with a chance to beat Bama every year, this is all that needs to be said. for the rantards that expect championships every year it just doesnt happen, but yet you are rantards.

quote:

---

2008 sucked, and I'm not sure I've seen anything like the downward spiral with Lee/Crowton before or since, and the co-DCs was the first real mark against Les IMO. But seeing the way they rallied against #1 Alabama in Tiger Stadium removed any doubts

---

Interesting that everyone harps on the CO-D season. There was no one out there that he wanted. And coaches know what is going on behind the scenes with other programs. So had Les not opted with the Co-D we would not have landed Chief. Les knew Fulmer was on his way out and he knew that Chief would not leave Fulmer.

Also, Les opted for the Co-D in 2008 because we would have been implementing a new Offense (GC ran Jimbo's playbook in 2007) and an entirely new D had he hired from the outside. LM probably felt that this would give the best opportunity for consistency. WE WERE NEVER STAYING WITH A CO-DC set beyond 2008.

On the whole--examining the large events of the LM tenure anyone who knows anything about leading people would be impressed. I find most of those who whine are either childish, ignorant, or just unrealistic. And of course, they certainly could do a better job at leading this program if they were not so busy "ranting"

2005--Katrina
2008--RP dismissed and we start the season w/ no QB
2011--Kragthorpe is diagnosed--we enter 2011 with an ad hoc OC
2012--TM7 gets booted, massive OL injuries, and still no elite OC as LM was probably waiting to see if SK felt he was healthy enough to resume OC duties before making a new hire.

quote:

---

Interesting that everyone harps on the CO-D season. There was no one out there that he wanted. And coaches know what is going on behind the scenes with other programs. So had Les not opted with the Co-D we would not have landed Chief. Les knew Fulmer was on his way out and he knew that Chief would not leave Fulmer.

---

Look, you can tell from my post that I'm one of the biggest Miles supporters and believers out there, but I don't believe it's necessary to rewrite history like that.

I agree that Miles went with the Co-DCs because of the timing being off with Pelini staying for the BCSCG and not being able to focus on a coaching search while we were preparing for a title game. I also agree that it was likely not Miles' long term plan and that it wasn't some idiotic decision doomed to failure.

But to pretend that Miles knew that Chavis would be available the next year, when we had just played Fulmer and UT in the SECCG is just dishonest.

Yes, I think Miles would have looked to make a new hire after 08 unless Mallveto fielded the #1 D or something insane, but even if it was just a stop gap hire, which again I don't think was unreasonable to do at the time, IT WAS A FAILURE. Plain and simple.

It's a mark on Miles' resume for sure, but the swiftness with which he remedied it, and even the manner that he did it helping them find jobs is a gold star on his resume right beside that red mark.

quote:

---

Also, Les opted for the Co-D in 2008 because we would have been implementing a new Offense (GC ran Jimbo's playbook in 2007) and an entirely new D had he hired from the outside. LM probably felt that this would give the best opportunity for consistency.

---

Again, I agree with all of that. It still didn't work.