- 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 12:56 pm to bfniii
Posted on 9/25/09 at 12:56 pm to bfniii
Fellas, we argue intangibles until we are blue in the face.
Will they play loose because they are now underdogs again? Maybe. Maybe not.
One can't assume they will. Highly ranked teams that take losses many times tank the season.
It is also possible that Ole Miss is just a bad football team. That makes LSU's road even easier.
Bottom line, you can't spin a loss. It's never a good thing. Now, how bad it is may be debatable.
In the end, there is only one tangible thing that cannot be disputed. A loss by an SEC western division foe against an SEC eastern division team, is a good thing for rankings.
Ole Miss has a very easy schedule compared to LSU. LSU now has more margin for error. That is a good thing.
Will they play loose because they are now underdogs again? Maybe. Maybe not.
One can't assume they will. Highly ranked teams that take losses many times tank the season.
It is also possible that Ole Miss is just a bad football team. That makes LSU's road even easier.
Bottom line, you can't spin a loss. It's never a good thing. Now, how bad it is may be debatable.
In the end, there is only one tangible thing that cannot be disputed. A loss by an SEC western division foe against an SEC eastern division team, is a good thing for rankings.
Ole Miss has a very easy schedule compared to LSU. LSU now has more margin for error. That is a good thing.
0
Posted on 9/25/09 at 12:57 pm to bfniii
quote:LSU winning it's division, and hence, the SEC (a possibility because we have to win our division in order to get to the SECCG in the first place) completely outweighs the fantasy football mentality that you apply to the argument.
this couldn't be more false. lsu's body of work is DIRECTLY determined by the quality of it's opponents. when ole miss loses to unranked south carolina, lsu's sos is reduced thus affecting lsu's "fate".
In fact, I think you're just arguing the point incessantly to try to 'win' in theory, when in reality you already know what the real answer is.
The coaches and players surely want their opponents to lose, to clear the path for them to make it to the championship game, so your point is moot.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:07 pm to ForeLSU
quote:
Cinci, by chance are you related the TheDoc
Who's TheDoc?
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:07 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:i'm not sure why this isn't getting across but i'm not saying the two are mutually exclusive like you are accusing me of. i'm saying lsu can do BOTH; win the division and beat an ole miss team that beat s.car. both are possible. it has to do with the fact that ole miss lost to scar instead of ark (a team in our division who already has a loss). and, that would be better than winning the division and beating an ole miss team that lost to unranked south carolina who we don't play
LSU winning it's division, and hence, the SEC (a possibility because we have to win our division in order to get to the SECCG in the first place) completely outweighs the fantasy football mentality that you apply to the argument.
also, it's not fantasy. every week of every season a team's body of work is determined by the quality of their opponents. in fact, that's exactly how sos is determined.
This post was edited on 9/25/09 at 1:09 pm
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:08 pm to Jaydeaux
gee that was too bad old ms lost. i live in ms and it was so sad going to the gym this am and seeing all my old miss friends. NOT, geaux to hell old mrs and cock a doodle doo
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:08 pm to SouGent
quote:
If you people are going to be so ridiculously anal about strength of schedule at this early point in the season, then shouldn't we be just as worried about UW, ULL and Vanderbilt winning all of their games from here on out?
BINGO you got it
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:10 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
bfniii, it's also not a theory that I could win the lottery today and be a rich millionaire by tommorrow. It's not a theory, there's a real chance it could happen in the real world of possibilities, (however small it is, that it could happen) and we all know that would be the best possible scenario, however unlikely it is.
That's kinda the same thing your saying with your Best possible scenario. We all know it's not a theory, it could in fact happen, but the overwhelming odds are it's not!!
Therefore, In the world of who I pull for each week, I'm not willing to wait until LSU loses and then reavulate the whole scenario because by then it might be too late. I'm obviously gonna pull for LSU to win every game they play, meanwhile hoping for a few upsets by west teams.
Historically, that's the best way for LSU to be the most successful, and until LSU gets royally screwed like Auburn did, I'll take my chances.
If anything, SOS has done nothing but been HUGE for LSU. I know you two SOS fanatics remember 2003 and staying up till 4 am making sure Notre Dame lost to Hawaii giving us just enough SOS to beat out USC.
How about 2007 when the Virginia Tech blowout catipulted us into the game.
If anything we've been more than fortunate with SOS over the years, it's proven to be one of the biggest assets we had in getting our crystals
That's kinda the same thing your saying with your Best possible scenario. We all know it's not a theory, it could in fact happen, but the overwhelming odds are it's not!!
Therefore, In the world of who I pull for each week, I'm not willing to wait until LSU loses and then reavulate the whole scenario because by then it might be too late. I'm obviously gonna pull for LSU to win every game they play, meanwhile hoping for a few upsets by west teams.
Historically, that's the best way for LSU to be the most successful, and until LSU gets royally screwed like Auburn did, I'll take my chances.
If anything, SOS has done nothing but been HUGE for LSU. I know you two SOS fanatics remember 2003 and staying up till 4 am making sure Notre Dame lost to Hawaii giving us just enough SOS to beat out USC.
How about 2007 when the Virginia Tech blowout catipulted us into the game.
If anything we've been more than fortunate with SOS over the years, it's proven to be one of the biggest assets we had in getting our crystals
This post was edited on 9/25/09 at 1:17 pm
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:19 pm to Cinci Tiger
I hope that someone else hasn't already said this, but here is my 2 cents.
We have to play at georgia, florida, auburn (in consecutive games), at alabama, at ole miss and finally arkansas (a game that we haven't won in 3 years). Taking all of those games into account, and taking your purple and gold glasses off, do you really think it is very logical to say that LSU is going to win all of those games? No. If they do then we don't really have to worry about strength of schedule becuase we will be in the national championship game. HOwever, i would be absolutely thrilled if we only lost 1 of those games. Heck, i am sure any of those teams would be thrilled to only lose 1 of those games. Now, having said that, if we were to only lose 1 of those games, then we might need someone in our division to lose more than 1 game. Since we only play teams in our division 1 time, we need them to lose to someone else. If that is the case, why not south carolina? By the time we play ole miss, if they were to win the rest of their games until then, they will be ranked high again. So, if we beat them, that will look really good to voters and also be good for us to make it to the SECCG. My point is that it is highly unlikely that any team from our division goes undefeated in conference play this year, so, unless we beat both alabama and ole miss, we are going to need them to lose another game. IMO this loss does nothing but help our chances at making it to the conference championship game.
We have to play at georgia, florida, auburn (in consecutive games), at alabama, at ole miss and finally arkansas (a game that we haven't won in 3 years). Taking all of those games into account, and taking your purple and gold glasses off, do you really think it is very logical to say that LSU is going to win all of those games? No. If they do then we don't really have to worry about strength of schedule becuase we will be in the national championship game. HOwever, i would be absolutely thrilled if we only lost 1 of those games. Heck, i am sure any of those teams would be thrilled to only lose 1 of those games. Now, having said that, if we were to only lose 1 of those games, then we might need someone in our division to lose more than 1 game. Since we only play teams in our division 1 time, we need them to lose to someone else. If that is the case, why not south carolina? By the time we play ole miss, if they were to win the rest of their games until then, they will be ranked high again. So, if we beat them, that will look really good to voters and also be good for us to make it to the SECCG. My point is that it is highly unlikely that any team from our division goes undefeated in conference play this year, so, unless we beat both alabama and ole miss, we are going to need them to lose another game. IMO this loss does nothing but help our chances at making it to the conference championship game.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:29 pm to bfniii
Your argument is only valid if we win the West. The loss to scar by Ole Miss may be the difference between winning the West and not. The question is not: what's better, Ole Miss losing to scar or Ark. Statement presented was: Ole Miss losing is not good for LSU. That's simply not true.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:31 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
Ole Miss losing is not good for LSU. That's simply not true.
+1
I cant believe anyone thinks a division rival losing to a nondivision team hurts LSU.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:33 pm to bfniii
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/2/22 at 8:05 pm
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:33 pm to CalLSU
Well said.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 1:36 pm to AlxTgr
LSU needs to win the West first and foremost, and if LSU takes care of bizness SOS won't be a concern.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 2:14 pm to Cinci Tiger
quote:
If you people are going to be so ridiculously anal about strength of schedule at this early point in the season, then shouldn't we be just as worried about UW, ULL and Vanderbilt winning all of their games from here on out?
quote:
BINGO you got it
The point being that over the course of an entire season any single loss by one of LSU's 12 (or 13) opponents would be insignificant compared to other factors.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 2:17 pm to SouGent
The only SEC opponent losses that would hurt LSU would be non conference.
UCLA beats Tennessee.
That hurts because it makes the conference seem weak. If a big boy loses in conference it makes the conference look stronger.
UCLA beats Tennessee.
That hurts because it makes the conference seem weak. If a big boy loses in conference it makes the conference look stronger.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 2:19 pm to bigbowe80
quote:there's a real chance what could happen?
there's a real chance it could happen
quote:what could happen? i'm not following
We all know it's not a theory, it could in fact happen, but the overwhelming odds are it's not!!
quote:wait for what? we're talking about whether it was better for ole miss to have lost last night or not. i've listed several reasons why it was better for them to have won
I'm not willing to wait until LSU loses and then reavulate the whole scenario
quote:too late for what? each week a team re-evaluates what they need for the best possible scenario.
because by then it might be too late
Posted on 9/25/09 at 2:28 pm to CalLSU
quote:because that's not AS GOOD as someone in our division which helps increase lsu's lead in the standings. the reason: we play both opponents. we get the increased lead AND we don't take a hit in SOS.
Since we only play teams in our division 1 time, we need them to lose to someone else. If that is the case, why not south carolina?
quote:but not nearly as good as if they hadn't lost to an unranked team we don't play
By the time we play ole miss, if they were to win the rest of their games until then, they will be ranked high again. So, if we beat them, that will look really good to voters and also be good for us to make it to the SECCG
quote:regardless, that's what will help lsu THE MOST. therefore, why pull for something else? when lsu loses, then re-evaluate who needs to lose to whom to help lsu.
My point is that it is highly unlikely that any team from our division goes undefeated in conference play this year
as far as the comment someone made about "it might be too late then", it's irrelevant. lsu's first priority is to take care of it's own business. if we can't, then we want all our opponents to be ranked as highly as possible. '06 is an example. while we couldn't win the west, our sos got us in the sugar bowl over sec runner up ark. therefore, we were pulling for teams that we played to beat teams we didn't play in order for that to happen.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 2:35 pm to AlxTgr
quote:no, it's valid for the football team at this point in this season as a whole. not just for one particular scenario.
Your argument is only valid if we win the West
quote:in the end, you might be right. but as of right now, we want all our opponents to be ranked as high as possible and still give us a chance to win the west. BOTH are possible. the former is diminished when ole miss loses to unranked teams we don't play. that's not what is best for lsu.
The loss to scar by Ole Miss may be the difference between winning the West and not
quote:why is that NOT the question?
The question is not: what's better
quote:the only two reasons i've seen presented were:
Ole Miss losing is not good for LSU. That's simply not true.
1. it puts "doubt" in ole miss' mind. therefore, they will be easier to beat. scar had just lost to georgia but they beat ole miss so the doubt theory is out the window.
2. lsu's division foes need to lose so lsu can go to atl. again, BOTH lsu's opponents can win against east opponents AND lsu can win the west. as of right now, that's the best thing for lsu. if lsu loses, then the situation changes.
Posted on 9/25/09 at 2:38 pm to biglego
quote:i can't believe i've listed several reasons justifying it and yet unsubstantiated comments like this are still being made
I cant believe anyone thinks a division rival losing to a nondivision team hurts LSU
Posted on 9/25/09 at 2:48 pm to bfniii
quote:
quote:
The question is not: what's better
why is that NOT the question?
Read the thread title!
It's amazing someone as good with poll stuff can't see your error. It's been pointed out at least 10 times. Do you not understand what losing the West means? Right, rankings and who beat whom mean didly.
Page 9 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News