- 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
re: Ole Miss losing is not good for LSU.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 9:53 am to GeauxTigerTM
Posted on 9/25/09 at 9:53 am to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
What part of the above statement was unclear
It's more clear than you know
1
Posted on 9/25/09 at 9:56 am to Cinci Tiger
quote:
The SEC always seems to beat up on itself....I heard the announcers stating after the game " Old miss should fall in the polls to 20 or something"
I didn't see a #4 team on the field last night. I am not sure I saw a #20 one. If I did, it sure wasn't Ole Miss.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 9:58 am to inebr8ted tiger
quote:
Ole Miss losing is not good for LSU.
Ole Miss losing is fricking great for LSU
Posted on 9/25/09 at 9:58 am to Cinci Tiger
quote:
It's more clear than you know
Apparantly...since you seemed to get upset by the suggestion that it was nearly impossible to go undefeated in the SEC. It clearly is NEARLY impossible, based on the few teams in the past 30 years that have accomplished this feat.
But hey...thanks for pointing out that AU had gone undefeated. We had all forgotten that.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 9:59 am to inebr8ted tiger
quote:
Ole Miss losing is not good for Ole Miss
fixed
Posted on 9/25/09 at 9:59 am to inebr8ted tiger
Their loss last night will not change their gameplan for us. They are still in it and it would have been a tough game regardless of records.
This was a great for LSU becasue it's one more loss for the team we're directly competing with to win the SEC.
This was a great for LSU becasue it's one more loss for the team we're directly competing with to win the SEC.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:03 am to Ghostfacedistiller
Congatulations!! This post qualifies you for the "Glass is 1/2 Empty Award" given at the end of each season!!
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:04 am to TigerBait1127
quote:
Ole Miss losing is fricking great for LSU
This...and it's not even up for debate.
OOC teams that we play being undefeated is a benefit...if only superfically in terms of national respect and rankings. But it only means something if we're running the table or have few enough losses so that our SOS actually matter.
SECE teams that we play being undefeted cn be a benefit for the above reason.
SECW teams being undefeted when we play them ONLY HELPS is we are undefeated too and plan on staying that way...and it only helps in terms of the above reasons. Since teams RARELY make it through the SEC without a loss, we should want ALL SECW teams to lose a few as insurance.
Goal #1 is get to Atlanta. You get to Atlanta by having the best record in the division. Since it's unlikely that any team make it rhough either division without a loss, it's better to have your direct competition have multiple losses.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:07 am to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
But hey...thanks for pointing out that AU had gone undefeated. We had all forgotten that
Your welcome.
Quiet simply, considering the way the pollsters anoint various underdogs, its just better to beat higher rather than lower ranked teams
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:09 am to inebr8ted tiger
This post was ok, but the thread title ranks up there with one of the dumbest things I've ever read. How the hell did you come up with that conclusion? Why can't it be not good for Auburn? or Miss St? or Tennessee?
Just another panic attempt to try to spread amongst the masses.
Just another panic attempt to try to spread amongst the masses.
This post was edited on 9/25/09 at 10:10 am
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:10 am to BleedPurpleGold
quote:no. that's not what the argument is based on.
The argument against this is assuming we're going undefeated through the season
the idea is that regardless of whether lsu wins or loses, the better the opponent, the more lsu benefits. if lsu wins, all the better.
before each game, no one knows whether lsu will win or lose. but, you want lsu to have the BEST POSSIBLE outcome. that means lsu's opponents having as few losses and highest ranking possible
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:11 am to deSandman
quote:that is absolutely correct and the sec owes a HUGE, HUGE thank you to florida '06 for that.
That, and the SEC Champ has won pretty much every BCSCG since then, so there's a benefit of the doubt for the SEC Champion that wasn't there for Auburn.
of course, lsu '07 helped matters greatly.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:12 am to TigerSpy
quote:that is incorrect. it does matter greatly
If we do what we are supposed to do, it doesn't matter what Ole Miss does.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:14 am to TigerBait1127
quote:hmm. the point is not sinking in. no, it's bad for lsu. lsu doesn't play south carolina, lsu does play ole miss. we want all our opponents to be as highly ranked as possible to strengthen lsu's body of work
Ole Miss losing is fricking great for LSU
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:16 am to inebr8ted tiger
quote:
Ole Miss losing
is always good for LSU. Moron
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:16 am to Cinci Tiger
quote:
Perhaps, you can explain what happened to Auburn a few years back?
1. They started the season ranked behind 2 teams that went undefeated.
2. They played the Citadel
This arguement about everyone needing to be undefeated when we play them is a bit ridiculous. I want LSU to win the SEC, so for that to happen, they need to finish ahead of everyone else in their division. If Ole Miss and Bama feel like losing to a couple of East teams or to Mississippi State, they would be helping our cause immensely. If LSU goes undefeated this year, they will have no problem getting to the NC game, regardless of opponent's records.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:20 am to bfniii
quote:
hmm. the point is not sinking in. no, it's bad for lsu. lsu doesn't play south carolina, lsu does play ole miss. we want all our opponents to be as highly ranked as possible to strengthen lsu's body of work
We get your point, and we think it sucks. Those of us arguing that Ole Miss losing is good for LSU realize that LSU needs to win the SEC West first and foremost, and last night's game helped us out. If your argument is about the BCS, then LSU won't have any problem getting there if they just win all of their games, regardless of where opponents are ranked when we play them.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:20 am to bfniii
quote:
the idea is that regardless of whether lsu wins or loses, the better the opponent, the more lsu benefits. if lsu wins, all the better.
Right, it's good for LSU if we lose to a High ranked opponent....but only in the rankings. Thats still an SEC west loss. Goal #1 for every team is the conference championship game, and considering that goal, Ole Miss losing to USC was good. I guess it's just a matter of where people think the team's 1st goal lies. I think they focus on winning the west first (good that Ole Miss lost), winning the conference 2nd (good that Ole Miss lost), then 3rd getting a shot at the NC (bad, but not a huge deal that Ole Miss lost).
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:20 am to GeauxTigerTM
quote:sos always matters. again, even if lsu does lose, lsu benefits when lsu's opponents are better. it helps lsu's sos which helps lsu get into a better bowl
But it only means something if we're running the table or have few enough losses so that our SOS actually matter.
quote:incorrect for above reason
SECW teams being undefeted when we play them ONLY HELPS is we are undefeated too and plan on staying that way
quote:this is absolutely false. you can get beat highly ranked opponents AND get to atl. again, you want the BEST POSSIBLE scenario for lsu.
Since teams RARELY make it through the SEC without a loss, we should want ALL SECW teams to lose a few as insurance. Since it's unlikely that any team make it rhough either division without a loss, it's better to have your direct competition have multiple losses.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 10:22 am to medtiger
Thanks, You are arguing in favor of the strengh of the two teams which denied Auburn.
Thats all I am doing also. It matters greatly who and how strong the teams are that we defeat.
Thats all I am doing also. It matters greatly who and how strong the teams are that we defeat.
Page 4 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News