- 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: LSU football should go back to a first game lightweight.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:12 am to DeafJam73
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:12 am to DeafJam73
quote:
Doesn’t really matter to me.
I can't stand the rent-a-win games
quote:
Either the coaching staff did their job well enough to prepare the team to play well or they didn’t.
this
0
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:13 am to LSURulzSEC
quote:Ahh, I have a short memory… now I understand why so many “want to go back to” opening against a cupcake
2020 Miss State L
2021 UCLA L
2022 Florida State L
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:16 am to LSUBlitzkrieg
quote:
Dude, we were terrible in 2021. I don't think it mattered when we played UCLA.
I said this game was a concern before we played them. I expected a slow start and a comeback 2nd half. I was wrong about the comeback. That being said, the following:
-Cross country
-They had a game under their belt
-Coach O’s complacency
-UCLA being than people thought
ALL were factors in that loss imho.
This post was edited on 7/23/23 at 9:18 am
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:21 am to Who_Dat_Tiger
quote:
2020 Miss State L
2021 UCLA L
2022 Florida State L
Damn, I must have repressed those memories.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:46 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Yes, it does.
Losing a competitive game against a non conference opponent in the first game of the season doesn't hurt your chances of getting in the playoffs.
If you don't win your conference, you have to finish probably Top 10; or say 10-2. Now, the fact that you don't win your conference means... you lost conference games.
Well, better not lose more than one, since you already dropped a game.
Look at this (SI playoff projections, since 2014)
LINK
Notice, Penn State is in the field 5 times now. In reality, they didn't make it once. They did win the Big 10 once in reality, but that OOC loss to Pitt knocked them out. But the other times, they didn't win the Big 10, but were tooling along at 10-2, and made it in.
I'd say this new system rewards the good teams that have safe schedules. Win your OOC games, lose twice in conference, you make it every year if you're a name and you are in the SEC or Big 10. You don't get a bye, but you're in. If you lose an OOC game, you better win that conference title, or at least go through the conference regular season undefeated.
You'll note LSU only gets in twice, same as Ole Miss; while Wisconsin gets in 3 times, Penn State as mentioned 5 times.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 11:39 am to LSUBlitzkrieg
quote:
2007 VaTech
wasn't the opener, we opened with Va Tech in 2002 & lost
Posted on 7/23/23 at 12:38 pm to SelaTiger
quote:
It does seem like high risk low reward,
but I like playing a decent team to start it off.
It’s a win win for fans all over the country
LSU’s Brand will continue to grow
And a two loss LSU team will make a 12 team playoff every year
Posted on 7/23/23 at 12:52 pm to BordyLSU
And just WHO is responsible at LSU for negotiating game contracts [which would inexplicably allow season opening opponents to add their own season openers ?]
Posted on 7/23/23 at 12:56 pm to McMahonnequin
quote:
Nothing gets the juices flowing quite like Arkansas Pine Bluff at home in 96 degree weather labor day weekend
The juices better be flowing for everyone when you’re trying to win a natty
Posted on 7/23/23 at 1:13 pm to tickfawtiger
quote:
And just WHO is responsible at LSU for negotiating game contracts [which would inexplicably allow season opening opponents to add their own season openers ?]
Difference is the game contract for one of the season opening "Kick-Off" classics or "neutral site" season opening games (which pay extremely well) is with a company and not with the other school that will be your opponent. It is not an agreement between the participating schools.
The UCLA home and away is a different animal, that is a contract between the two schools' Athletic Departments to participate in a home and away series with each other.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 3:06 pm to Curtis Lowe
So, you believe two schools are unable to reach a contractual agreement that PRE-CLUDES either from addding another opponent AFTER said contract is signed ??? Do you not think LSU/Verge Ausberry blundered not once but TWICE in a row with the UCLA and FSU games ??
Posted on 7/23/23 at 6:42 pm to lsuag88
And be just like cowardly Alabama? No.
Posted on 7/24/23 at 12:00 am to tickfawtiger
quote:
So, you believe two schools are unable to reach a contractual agreement that PRE-CLUDES either from addding another opponent AFTER said contract is signed ??? Do you not think LSU/Verge Ausberry blundered not once but TWICE in a row with the UCLA and FSU games ??
Did you not read what he wrote or are you just bad at reading comprehension? Which part of the contract not being between the two participating schools did you not understand? Also, it would be helpful if you could provide any evidence at all of any school including the provision you are suggesting in a game contract.
Posted on 7/24/23 at 12:18 am to lsuag88
Duquesne should become a week 0 rivalry for the Tigers. I don't think they would mind coming to Tiger Stadium each year, and get a good payout, unlike one SOB instate school.
Posted on 7/24/23 at 7:19 am to BordyLSU
Exactly, cant go into that first game against a team that has played a week zero game. As long as that doesnt happen again Im good with it.
Posted on 7/25/23 at 10:41 am to tickfawtiger
quote:
So, you believe two schools are unable to reach a contractual agreement that PRE-CLUDES either from addding another opponent AFTER said contract is signed ???
Please note the following:
1. Both LSU and FSU have signed contracts with the entity that sponsors the "Kick-Off Classis" and not with each other.
2. The entity that runs the "Kick-Off Classic" is responsible for payment of appearance fees and expenses to each of the schools, responsible for the rental of the stadium, responsible for payment of staffing for the event and responsible for all other costs associated with the event. A large percentage of the appearance fees collected by the school (over 90%) falls straight to the bottom line. Neither school is on the hook for the cost of staging the event, they just profit from the appearance at said event.
3. The likelihood that the entity that runs the "Kick-Off Classic" wanting to get involved with negotiations that not only complicate two teams getting signed to appear, but also negotiating how those teams' Athletic Department can conduct its own business outside of an appearance at the entity's event is non-existent.
4. So in these kinds of scenarios, no I do not believe that your preclusion clause would ever appear in the contract.
Now let's look at the home and home contract with LSU and UCLA; please note the following:
1. The return game in Baton Rouge is not the first game of the season for either of the two teams. LSU opens that season against USC in Las Vegas at the Vegas Kick-off Classic.
2. The return game is not until September 21, 2024, that would mean LSU would not be able to play the first three weeks of the season had they been foolish enough to contractually obligate themselves to a no games before the home and home.
3. It is hard enough to get contracts signed for home and home series with major conference opponents as it is, trying to add clauses that effect how another school's athletic department conducts its business would make it a non-starter. Too many moving parts in these contracts as is and the people in control would not foolishly complicate issues.
4. So no, I do not believe that such verbiage would ever be negotiated into a home and home contract.
quote:
Do you not think LSU/Verge Ausberry blundered not once but TWICE in a row with the UCLA and FSU games ??
No. One of the games it is totally out of his control and the other would have caused a clusterfrick of a season with LSU not being able to play for the first three weeks of the season in 2024.
Posted on 7/25/23 at 11:04 am to SelaTiger
It doesn't have to be a power house. I remember back in the day playing Colorado. Maybe play NC State or NM State. Doesn't have to be Miss Pine Bluff.
Posted on 7/25/23 at 11:14 am to tarzana
quote:Duquesne would only qualify to schedule a week 0 game if they have an away game scheduled with Hawaii in the same season. Away games at Hawaii is the key to week 0 games eligibility.
Duquesne should become a week 0 rivalry for the Tigers. I don't think they would mind coming to Tiger Stadium each year, and get a good payout, unlike one SOB instate school.
Posted on 7/25/23 at 1:29 pm to lsuag88
quote:Personally, I don't want ANY cupcakes on the schedule. Now that the playoff will be 12 teams, loading up on 3-4 guaranteed wins against cupcakes shouldn't be necessary.
LSU football should go back to a first game lightweight.
Nobody likes cupcake OOC games. Get rid of them, and play decent Power5 OOC teams - like FSU this year.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News