re: Mandel: lsu pasting of Washington means nothing

Doesn't matter. We take care of business, and everything else falls into place.

Mandel usually makes good points but in this case he’s way off. LSU was so dominant against Washington, how can that dominance mean so little? LSU did dominate Auburn, but their failure to handle the ball made the score closer than it should have been. To put no value on Wash def. of Stanford makes no sense.

I will say that there are some trends with this team (LSU) that are a bit concerning, particularly the O-Line play. That said, it isn't a mystery why, they lost Faulk and are adjusting. Once the O-Line gets right, and they will, the other offensive flaws will correct themselves.

On the Auburn win, it was a WIN AT AUBURN. No matter how down they are are how strong LSU is, this game is always tight when they play there. Remember 2006? LSU averaged over 36 ppg outside of the Auburn game, but that Auburn game was an ugly 3-7 loss. 2008? 26-21 win for LSU. Stanford would have loved a 12-10 win last night.

On the PAC 12, it is a good league with parity, but there's a reason that when the rankings come out next week, HALF of the top 10 will be SEC schools. Noticed last night that the announcers talked about how teams in the PAC 12 had either size or speed on the D-Line. Most SEC teams have both.

quote:

---

Stanford would have loved a 12-10 win last night.

---

Yep

(probably already said in one way or another, but...) had auburn not lost to..., then the narrowness of our road win over them wouldn't need to be vindicated. so, yes, rankings/perception are all about transitive properties.

UW rules

No one should be surprised by this. The day after we undressed Washington, the ESPN Pac 12 blogger basically did a pre-emptive strike on this. They were in full 'protect the agenda' mode before Washington had even left Baton Rouge.

quote:

---

It's funny how the "myth" of transitive property has not stopped many commentators from readily predicting LSU to be cotton or outback bowl bound (from BCS Champ game a week before) soley because we played or first road test in a very hostile environment which was a night game.

---

Right. The transitive property is a myth, unless it's not. One off game for a team can mean nothing, or everything. It's all speculation.

That being said, I don't have a problem with the article. I do believe that we'll have a better gage of the Tigers when they play in the swamp a week and a day from now.

I think it is fair game when Oregon beats all of these crappy teams from that conference and then the talking heads will start spouting off about how good Oregon is.

True for any other sport that has some sort of playoff system. In the world of subjective rankings of College Football you HAVE to make these types of comparisons.