Started By
Message

re: "If USC wants an SEC grudge match, LSU is in the market..."

Posted on 7/18/10 at 4:33 am to
Posted by Suck Out West
Phoenix, AZ
Member since Dec 2006
5932 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 4:33 am to
quote:

And in the last 10 years LSU has gone to ASU, AZ, Virginia Tech, Auburn, Arkansas, Washington, & a neutral site game vs UNC. West Virginia next year....etc. That's 3 games east of the Mississippi, not one.

Well don't think because LSU has a better record against the competition that this is something that is reflective of the entire conference.

If you look at the major conferences, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, and Pac 10 and look at who the teams have played and how they fared you will be surprised. Count all the losses no matter what conference they play but only count "quality wins". Quality wins would be measured against teams in the top 5 conferences.

I think the best 3 teams in the SEC over the last 10 years has been Florida, Tennessee and LSU. These teams have either won or tied for first and second in the entire conference the most. Florida has won or finished second 6 times. Tennessee 4 times and LSU 3 times.. Even Auburn has finished 3 times as well.

Florida has an 8-5 record with wins and losses against Florida State and Miami. These are the only teams they play.

Tennessee has a 3-7 record with wins against Notre Dame and Cal but losses to Miami, Notre Dame, Cal, twice to UCLA and Wyoming..

LSU has probably the best record of anyone. They are 6-1 with wins against Va tech, Arizona twice, Oregon State, Washington, and ASU. They lost to Va tech as well.

if you add all 3 of these teams up you have a 17-13 record. That is a 56.7 winning percentage.

Now if you go to the Pac 10, things might surprise you. In the last 10 years SC has won or finished second in the league 7 times. Oregon has done this 5 times and Oregon State has done this 3 times.

SC has a 21-4 record over the last 10 years with wins against Penn State, Colorado twice, Auburn twice, Arkansas twice, Notre Dame 8 times, Virginia Tech, Nebraska twice, Ohio State twice. They have lost to Kansas State twice and Notre Dame twice.

Oregon has a 7-7 record. The have wins against Michigan twice, Mississippi State twice, Oklahoma, and Purdue twice. They have lost to Wisconsin twice, Utah, Oklahoma, Indiana, and Boise State twice.

Sadly Oregon State is only 1-8. The have a win against Penn State but have lost to Fresno State twice, LSU, Louisville, Cincinnati twice Utah, Penn State.

The top three teams against other top conferences are 29-19. This makes for a 60.4 winning percentage...

If you add in one more team for each conference that would be Auburn for the SEC and they have gone 2-6 against top conferences. Wins against Kansas State and Washington STate but losses to USC twice, Georgia TEch twice, USF and West Virginia.

That would change the record from 17-13 to 19-19 which is a 500 winning percentage.

Add the next pac 10 team and that would be Washington State. Wazzu's record is 2-11. They have wins against Colorado and Baylor but losses to Idaho, Ohio State, Notre Dame twice, Colorado, Auburn, Wisconsin, Oklahoma State, Baylor and Hawaii twice. This changes the winning percentage from 29-19 to 31-30. This winning percentage is 50.8 percent.

8 out of the 12 SEC teams have finished tied for first or second in the last 12 years. Yet 9 out of 10 pac ten teams have finished tied for first or second over the last 10 years. One could make a case that the Pac 10 is more balanced.

If you look at the bottom of the conferences over the last 10 years...Vanderbilt has finished or second to last 6 times. The second worst team is Kentucky at 4 times.

In the Pac 10, Washington has finished last or second to last 4 times with Cal 3 times (tied with Wazzu). But since Wazzu is so up and down and I have used them as one of the top 4 teams, I shall use Cal for arguments sake.

Vandy's record using the same criteria as above is 5-12. They have wins against Duke and Wake Forest. They have losses against Miami Ohio, Middle Tenn twice, TCU, Navy twice, Rutgers, Michigan, Wake Forest twice and Duke.

Kentucky has a record of 4-8. However, they have beaten Indiana 4 times. And they have lost to Louisville 6 times, Indiana once and Ohio University once.

So the bottom of your conference is 9-20. This is a winning percentage of 31%..

Washington has a 4-14 record. They have wins against the U (Miami), Colorado, Michigan, and Indiana. They have losses against the U (Miami), Ohio State twice, Fresno State, Notre Dame 4 times, Air Force, Oklahoma twice, BYU, Michigan, and LSU.

California has a 9-9 record. They have wins against Baylor, Michigan State twice,Illinois twice, Minnesota twice, Tennessee, and Maryland. They have losses against Illinois twice, Fresno State, BYU, Kansas State, Utah, Minnesota, Maryland, and Tennessee. Therefore the bottom of the Pac10 is 13-23. This is a 36% winning percentage.

So whether you look at the top or the bottom of the conference you can see that the Pac 10 is just as competitive as the SEC in Out of Conference head to head matches..

How can one make a determination that ONE league is better than the other. Settle it on the field.

The only difference is the PAC 10 doesn't PAD its win loss records. If you take those 6 teams for each conference, you can see that the SEC is 28-39
or a 41.8% winning percentage. The Pac 10 is 44-53 for a 45.4% winning percentage.

The two conferences are really close. What does jump out though is those 6 SEC teams have played 67 games against calibre competition where there is threat of loss. While the 6 Pac Ten teams have played 97 games with a threat of loss.

Again, LSU leads the charge in winning percentage with a 85% winning percentage followed by USC with 84%. But the rest of the conference isn't winning like LSU is....

And if you think I left Alabama out, I didn't. Alabama has won or finished second a total of 2 times in the last 10 years. They also only compile a 3-11 record using the same criteria with winss against Duke, Clemson, and Virginia Tech but the have amassed losses against Southern Miss, UCF, UCLA twice, Oklahoma twice, Hawaii, FSU and Louisiana Monroe...


8 straight losses to the Mountain West. Alot of them blowouts too. Wake me up when the SEC loses 8 straight to any conference. It's also funny how you discounted bowl wins & bowl opponent quality in all that rambling shite.....Have a nice day.
Posted by CostaRicaTiger
Thailand
Member since Aug 2008
321 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 4:35 am to
USC - ANY TIME - ANY WHERE :jump1: :jump2:
Posted by Suck Out West
Phoenix, AZ
Member since Dec 2006
5932 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 4:43 am to
I couldn't agree more. Although the Coluseum & Death Valley would be much more fun.
Posted by CostaRicaTiger
Thailand
Member since Aug 2008
321 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 5:03 am to
Kiffin might agree to a home and home. He has more balls than Carroll. Carroll was smart by staying away from LSU - kind of like Don King making Mike Tyson avoid Evander Holyfield for all those years until after he lost the belt to Buster. As "bad-arse" as Mike Tyson was in his prime, King knew he was no match for Holyfield (in his prime also). Carroll knew USC could never beat LSU and he would never play the Tigers, that's why he shot his mouth off every chance he got about being the best because he knew he'd never have to back it up as long as the Little 10 was "MADE'' to go to the "GRANDADDY on Life Support.'' National Championships (BCS - NOT AP) speak volumes for themselves. SEC Rules - and Mike Slive hired the U.S. versus Slovenia soccer official to officiate SEC games this year to make sure two SEC teams (one from East and one from West) are undefeated going into this year's SEC championship game, which will catapult one into the BCS title game. No wonder everybody hates the SEC now - it's RIGGED!!!! (See last year) Once Slive is put in prison, the SEC can boast being the best. Until then, we can't prove anything anymore because of Slive. The SEC might reel off 10 straight national championships before anybody catches Slive's crookedness.
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216475 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 6:08 am to
quote:

USC - ANY TIME - ANY WHERE


You act like we some kind of SCORE to settle with them. Really, What has USC done to LSU?????????
Posted by CostaRicaTiger
Thailand
Member since Aug 2008
321 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 6:31 am to
You would have to be a Tiger to understand. You would have to listen to Pete Carroll's moaning and groaning about real competition (Notre Dame) - we hung 41 on Notre Dame and held Brady Quinn to 14 points. I give credit to Reggie Bush though. Even before he was drafted by the Saints, he said he was "thankful for everything we won in college, including our one championship.'' Everyone else (Carroll and Leinart) boasts of two championships (ONE BELONGS TO LSU - We aren't sharing since we won it on the field). As the bumper stickers around Baton Rouge read (F.U.S.C.). It's not for a new Catholic School. As soon as the powers-to-be realize how much money could be made off USC-LSU, they will make it happen. Carroll (and the PAC 10) denied LSU a chance at USC and chose Michigan for the Rose Bowl and blew them away. I guess he was scared of JaMarcus Russell, who wasn't that big of a deal until after the Tigers blew out Notre Dame 41-14 in the Sugar Bowl. LSU should have been in the Rose Bowl against USC. Instead, they got a sub-par Michigan team (with 3 or 4 losses) and toasted them. LSU sold 30,000 tickets the first hour for the Rose Bowl, but USC and Pac-10 declined and turned LSU away. Then, the Sugar Bowl made more money with LSU. Tiger Nation was licking our chops to get USC any time, any where - especially at the Rose Bowl. :jump1: :jump2: Some games HAVE TO HAPPEN in our lifetime - THIS IS ONE!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216475 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 6:46 am to
quote:

You would have to be a Tiger to understand




???????? Been one since 1971.


quote:

You would have to listen to Pete Carroll's moaning and groaning about real competition (Notre Dame) - we hung 41 on Notre Dame and held Brady Quinn to 14 points.



USC beat ND 44-24 that year.



quote:

Carroll (and the PAC 10) denied LSU a chance at USC and chose Michigan for the Rose Bowl and blew them away



This was more about tradition than anything else.




quote:

I guess he was scared of JaMarcus Russell, who wasn't that big of a deal until after the Tigers blew out Notre Dame 41-14 in the Sugar Bowl.



I doubt he was scared of JR. Besides Michigan was #3 at the time.


quote:

LSU should have been in the Rose Bowl against USC



Just to prove a point????



quote:

they got a sub-par Michigan team (with 3 or 4 losses



Like I said Mich was #3 in the country at the time at 11-1.



quote:

Tiger Nation was licking our chops to get USC any time, any where - especially at the Rose Bowl.


It would have been nice but tradition outweighs what LSU fans want. And I just don't get why LSU fans are STILL upest about what happened 7 years ago.
Posted by Suck Out West
Phoenix, AZ
Member since Dec 2006
5932 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 6:48 am to
quote:

You act like we some kind of SCORE to settle with them. Really, What has USC done to LSU?????????


USC has done nothing to LSU. But the media has pissed off most LSU fans. The Sporting News cover that said "Forget LSU, USC is #1", the articles about how USC was "the real #1 no matter what happens in the LSU/OSU game", having to share the 2003 NC.
Posted by CostaRicaTiger
Thailand
Member since Aug 2008
321 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 6:53 am to
We should have gotten USC again in the Rose Bowl instead of playing Ohio State for the National Championship. NOBODY can justify LSU jumping seven spots in the polls in the final week (REGARDLESS OF West Virginia and the 3-4 other teams who lost that last weekend). It was fixed to make money for the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl. Who cares about a national championship? BRING ON USC!!!! :beatdeadhorse:
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216475 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 6:54 am to
quote:

But the media has pissed off most LSU fans



So playing USC will settle what?????? Will beating them make you feel better about how the Media treated LSU in 2003???????
Posted by Section28
Right Here
Member since Dec 2004
2133 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:00 am to
quote:

What has USC done to LSU?????????


Nothing...However the debate in the media and amongst fans was very lively and heated during the 7-8 year stretch of time both teams were in the top of the rankings. And a split title would have added to the anticipation of a showdown between the two teams.
A game between the two would have been much anticipated and hyped. It’s too bad it didn’t happen. But now…I think that ship has sailed.

It would still be a good game IMO. Just won’t hold the luster it would have in….say….2006 or so….
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216475 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:02 am to
quote:

We should have gotten USC again in the Rose Bowl instead of playing Ohio State for the National Championship. NOBODY can justify LSU jumping seven spots in the polls in the final week (REGARDLESS OF West Virginia and the 3-4 other teams who lost that last weekend). It was fixed to make money for the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl. Who cares about a national championship? BRING ON USC!!!!



You are just STOOOPID with this comment.
Posted by Suck Out West
Phoenix, AZ
Member since Dec 2006
5932 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:06 am to
quote:

So playing USC will settle what?????? Will beating them make you feel better about how the Media treated LSU in 2003???????


It won't settle anything. But, having to hear about how great USC is all the time living in PAC10 country makes me sick. So, having a chance to kick their arse would be great, that's all.

USC is a great football program. Have they been the best in the last decade when you account for the NFL draft, HS recruiting & conference titles? Yes, but they're not head & shoulders above the rest like some in the media make them out to be. May, Fouts, Herbstreit, Corso, Gotfried, Musbooger and all the other usual suspects act as if it shouldn't even be a contest when USC steps on the field. Then their fans buy into that bullshite from the media and think their team is the GOAT, as if no other team has had similar or even more doiminant runs in history. That's what irritates the shite out of me about USC and why I love whenever they lose.

Athlon magazine has them at #3 in the country! Are you fricking kidding me? A young QB, bad defense and an unproven coach? Overrated.
Posted by Suck Out West
Phoenix, AZ
Member since Dec 2006
5932 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:07 am to
quote:

Who cares about a national championship?

I do.
Posted by CostaRicaTiger
Thailand
Member since Aug 2008
321 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:10 am to
quote:

I don't think this matters to some LSU fans. They have such a jealousy for USC its UNREAL.


dukke v is a closet trojan.
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216475 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:11 am to
quote:

Athlon magazine has them at #3 in the country! Are you fricking kidding me? A young QB, bad defense and an unproven coach? Overrated.



I agree with this. I guess I am just different from you. I don't let what the media says bother me. I know who the better team was in 2003.
Posted by Suck Out West
Phoenix, AZ
Member since Dec 2006
5932 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:20 am to
Their former and current coach, and fans just rub me the wrong way. My hatred for them is slowly moving up to the level of hatred I had for the Spurrier Gators & has surpased my hatred for the Dallas Cowboys. Man, I hate them.
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216475 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:25 am to
quote:

dukke v is a closet trojan.



SERIOUS??? You are a bafoon. For a person that would rather play a meaningless game against USC in the Rose Bowl, compared to playing for a NC you are not much of an LSU fan at all.
Posted by Section28
Right Here
Member since Dec 2004
2133 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:30 am to
quote:

I know who the better team was in 2003.


You know the shame in that year is the Ok was so far ahead in points that after losing to KSU in the Big 12 championship game they still remained #1. I don't think there would have been nearly as much debate if USC and LSU were in the championship that year. And by debate I mean that the AP wouldn't have split the title with Oklahoma. The AP writers could point to Ok not wining their conference championship etc.
And then we could say definitely who the best team in 2003 was…
Don’t get me wrong…I think LSU was the best that year but it sure would have been great to play USC for the title and squash all debate!
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
216475 posts
Posted on 7/18/10 at 7:41 am to
quote:

You know the shame in that year is the Ok was so far ahead in points that after losing to KSU in the Big 12 championship game they still remained #1
They were a dominant team during the reg season. BUT there is NO way they should have stayed at #1 after the arse-pounding they took by KSU.
Jump to page
Page First 8 9 10 11 12 ... 14
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 10 of 14Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram