re: Orgeron did better in his first season than Saban did in his 3rd?

quote:

---

what universe is 9-4 a disastrous season?

---

show me where i said it was a disasterous season?

ive labeled it as a season that got the last coach fired.
we played the easiest schedule O will ever have at lsu and he lost 4 games.

whats really sad is that a 4 loss season is the pinnacle of O's head coaching career.

quote:

---

coach) and then goes 9-4 (with going 6-2 in his own conference after barely winning over 50% in the last 22 conference games [those same teams that fired their coaches])? 

---

again, this past season was the worst sec since early 2000's

3 of our 6 sec wins combined for 3 sec wins.

i find it really funny how you used to bash 3 loss seasons under miles but yiu sure gargle on O's nuts when he loses 4 games.

just go ahead and admit youre perfectly fine with losing 4 games as long as miles isnt the coach.

you and your ilk cant claim that miles was the only thing holding lsu back from winning titles and then say a 4 loss season is ok for a 1st year coach.

you and your ilk swore this was a ready made title contending roster/program.

and O believed it too.

quote:

---

it wasn't miles first season, it was his 12th season and the team was on a strong downward trend.

---

Well in that case , you’re gonna be waiting a long time, because O isn’t gonna get a 12th season here. If things go south enough quickly, he’s not gonna finish his 2nd season here.

Also, serious LOL at “strong downward trend”.

quote:

---

He had gone 4-5 over his last 9 games.

---

Random cherry picked stat #1 to support your argument. Why 9 games? Why not 19 games? Why not 29 games?

quote:

---

In the SEC he had gone 12-10 over his last 22 SEC games and 2-4 in his last 6 SEC games.

---

Random cherry picked stat #2 and #3. Why 22 games ? Why 6 games ?

What was the rest of the rest of the SEC teams conference record during that 22 game span? Would it shock you if I told you LSU had the 3rd best record of any SEC team in that span?

quote:

---

The main thing was nothing was changing. He was still sticking to the same ole stuff with the same people. The game had been changing and he wasn't changing with it.

---

Oh the irony. After the 2014 season, Miles was forced to shake things up due to some departures on his staff.
In January 2015 , Miles hired a new defensive line coach. His name? Ed Orgeron.

“Just go ahead and admit that you are pectfectly fine with losing four games as long as miles is not the coach.”

That’s the really amusing part about this. Four losses and nine wins, the high watermark for one coach, is acceptable, but for another coach who took LSU to 2 national championship games, a 10 win average for 11 yrs isn’t. Honestly, the most retarded logic around.

quote:

---

ere at LSU it appears that Orgeron was a better coach in his very first (9-4) season here at LSU than Saban was in his 3rd (8-5) season at LSU

---

And their 2nd recruiting classes, Nick Saban's was ranked number 2 that ended up winning a National Championship. Where was Ed Orgeron's ranked?

Stop comparing Ed Orgeron with Nick Saban. There is no comparison.

seems like you keep arguing that Miles shouldn't have been fired. But the fact is whether you, or I or anyone else, likes it or not, he has already been fired and we are not hiring him back.

Also you don't like that Orgeron was hired or not, despite his qualifications and his bad record at Ole Miss, he is the new HC.

so I don't know why you keep arguing these things.

NOw we are just at a point where we watch and see how it plays out. Nobody is going to fire a first year HC, after the decision to hire him in the first place has already been made, after his first year. Especially one who went 9-4.

We can all keep arguing for the entertainment, more fun than talking about the spring game. But all this is already set in stone.

I guess I don't understand "troll" as used here. Boxcar Willie is a regular poster with a factual post. What is a troll

quote:

---

No..no....you don't get to recant now. You've stated yourself that he was slipping and that it was time to 

---

no shite. but 10-3 every year should be the floor at lsu with maybe a few 4 loss seasons.thats not good enough imo.

quote:

---

It's a logical conclusion that his records would have dropped to 8/9 wins a season...with maybe the occasional 10-win campaign being the outlier. 

---

bullshite

10 win seasons in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2015 had the mcneese game not been cancelled.
the fact that you think 10 win seasons would be the outlier just proves your bias towards miles

quote:

---

He was 19-10 (.655) his last 2+ seasons. NOTHING indicates he would have recovered from this downward trend and would have begun to win 10 games a year once more. 

---

you mean like 2008 & 2009?
it had literally happened before in his tenure and you say NOTHING INDICATES?holy shite.

quote:

---

For once, you can't provide facts to support anything to the contrary

---

except im providing facts that point to miles recovering from a couple down turn seasons in 2008 and 2009.

youre ignoring the fact that he had 10 wins every year since 2011 except 2014.

10 wins every year isnt good enough for a program that wants to win titles.


that was literally your argument anytime anyone brought up 10 wins at lsu

quote:

---

except im providing facts that point to miles recovering from a couple down turn seasons in 2008 and 2009.

---

you're not proving shite. you can't even admit the man was done and wasn't going to recover. NOTHING indicates things we're going to change...NOTHING. You can't provide even one reliable indicator to prove otherwise.

I don't care what happened in 08/09.... that was before Miles lost his nutsack and started eating grass and talking gibberish.

We were going the wrong direction period and that kind of mojo doesn't usually turn around by itself...no matter how much you wanted it to.

Just the archaic offense alone was going to preclude us from winning 10 again.

its really amazing the goalposts moving to shite on miles.


for 5 years you said miles winning 10 games wasnt enough and was underachiveing but now you say he couldnt win 10 games after winning 10 games 5 out of the last 6 years he coached.

just admit your ok with 10 wins as long as its not miles and you now have to act like winning 10 games was beyond miles' reach.

quote:

---

somewhere along the line you've confused the definition of speculation with facts. 

---

its a fact that miles had already recovered from a 5 and 4 loss season

quote:

---

You're speculating.....nothing more.... and acting as if it is a fact. 

---

its a fact that MILES had already done what youre saying he couldnt do.

THATS PROOF THAT MILES CAN RECOVER FROM 5 LOSS SEASONS.
youre the only one speculating with zero evidence. just you.

quote:

---

What happened in 2008/09 has NOTHING to do with what was going on when your boy got shitcanned. 

---

what? no shite.

you said there is no evidence that miles could recover from 1 5 loss season to begin winning 10 games again. except he had already done it at lsu.

its like you think im saying if miles kept winning 10 games he shouldve been retained. we all agree winning 10 games IS NOT enough given the talent at lsu and competing for titles.

you said for 5 years that miles winning 10 games wasnt enough and now youre saying he could never win 10 games.

quote:

---

10...weigh it. Any other coach posts that record over 2+ seasons...you've would be in your grave right now from a massive coronary.

---

we lost 5 games in 2008 and 4 in 2009

which is less than 5 in 2014 and 3 in 2015


and he turned it around.


im not saying he wouldve turned it around but to say there is zero evidence is bullshite. he had already proven he could do it lsu.


how does winning 10 games in 5 of his last 6 seasons = not being able to win 10 games


you should really stick to your initial stance that winning 10 games isnt enough




youre basically saying," i dont care that you beat that team in oct. there is zero evidence that you can beat them this weekend"

youre claiming there is zero evidence that something can occur when its already occurred once