- 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: Question about the 2012 LSU Football team
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:08 pm to EZE Tiger Fan
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:08 pm to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
Yes, a team that didn't win their division, their conference, and lost their biggest game AT HOME was the true champion.
Yes...they were
They beat the snot out of LSU
1
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:10 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Oklahoma was probably as good as Arkansas
Please..they lost to texas tech and baylor
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:11 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
A number of "best teams in the country" over the years didn't win the national championship because they didn't earn their way into the game.
I'm waiting for the list
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:19 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
I'm waiting for the list
Possible candidates (remember we'll never know for sure because they weren't given the chance they didn't earn):
Miami 2000
Oregon 2001
Georgia 2002
USC 2003
Auburn 2004
Penn State 2005
LSU 2006
Georgia 2007
USC 2007
Texas 2008
That's just off the top of my head.
This post was edited on 6/13/12 at 3:19 pm
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:28 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
They lost to iowa state...Iowa state
They also pistol whipped Baylor and thumped OU (a former #1) to win their conference. Bama didn't even win their division.
And according to the Anderson-Hester computer poll, leading into the bowls Okie had 3 wins versus then current top-10 teams and 5 wins versus then current top-25 teams, whereas Bama had 1 and 2 such wins.
LINK
Little facts like these used to matter.
quote:
Why did oklahoma state deserve to be ranked ahead of one loss stanford who lost to a good USC team and beat a pretty good oregon team?
See above. And for the sake of this argument tell me how they were ranked as low as 6th by some voters? And I guess the relentless media drumbeat of "Bama is best" had nothing to do with those inexplicable votes, huh?
quote:
You can say they didn't deserve to be there all you want, but it is obvious the voters got it right and the best team in the country played for and won the national championship
You won so you deserved to be there, huh? Gotta love the circular logic. And you can say you deserved it all you want. Why is there talk of a playoff-type system if the voters got it so right last year?
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:35 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
A number of "best teams in the country" over the years didn't win the national championship because they didn't earn their way into the game. It's a lot easier when you don't have to.
Exactly. That's the whole fallacy of lazily substituting the "eyeball test" in lieu of more in-depth analysis.
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:43 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Oklahoma was probably as good as Arkansas
Please..they lost to texas tech and baylor
So? They pass the eyeball test. What you do on the field doesn't matter. Remember?
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:47 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
So? They pass the eyeball test. What you do on the field doesn't matter. Remember?
Passed who's eyeball test? They were preseason number 1 and that's their only claim to fame. They looked like a team of adolescent girls against oklahoma state. Texas tech was a horrible horrible football team and baylor was a 2 man band.
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:51 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Possible candidates (remember we'll never know for sure because they weren't given the chance they didn't earn):
Miami 2000
Oregon 2001
Georgia 2002
USC 2003
Auburn 2004
Penn State 2005
LSU 2006
Georgia 2007
USC 2007
Texas 2008
Auburn is the only team on that list with an argument and SC earned a share in '03. The national champion was a better team in every year you listed. 2005 penn state you have to be shitting me. They were the best team in the country ahead of texas lead vince young and bush lead usc? I didn't ask you to list 3-5 from the past decade I asked for a list of "best team in the country" (your words) that didn't win the national title. Auburn is the only one with a logical debate there
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:52 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Riseupfromtherubble
You can try to justify it all you want. You didn't earn your way into the game. You didn't deserve to be there. Like any team in any game on any given day sometimes can, you managed, in one game, to have a great night and win. Getting to the game is 90% of winning the NC. When you get an auto bid, you skip the hardest part. If they give LSU an auto-bid into the NC game every year, I guarantee we'll win more NCs that any other team in the country. But it doesn't work that way...
...unless you're Alabama and your coach whines and begs for something you didn't earn. But then, claiming bullshite national championships is an Alabama specialty, like the ones you "earned" in 1973 and 1978 by losing to Notre Dame and USC.
This post was edited on 6/13/12 at 3:54 pm
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:56 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Auburn is the only team on that list with an argument and SC earned a share in '03. The national champion was a better team in every year you listed.
Your subjective opinion. They are all "possible" candidates for "best team in the country". Every one is every bit as legitimate as Alabama was in December 2011.
quote:
Auburn is the only one with a logical debate there
Texas 2008? They beat OU as bad as Florida did. And they sure as hell didn't lose to Ole Miss...at home.
Posted on 6/13/12 at 3:59 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Passed who's eyeball test? They were preseason number 1 and that's their only claim to fame. They looked like a team of adolescent girls against oklahoma state. Texas tech was a horrible horrible football team and baylor was a 2 man band.
Performance on the field = diddly
Eyeball test = the only relevant factor
If you don't agree with those two statements, you can't even think of saying Alabama is a legit NC in 2011.
And against common opponents with Arkie:
OU 41, A&M 25
Arkie 42, A&M 38
OU 58, K-State 17
Arkie 29, K-State 16
This post was edited on 6/13/12 at 4:02 pm
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:00 pm to Thunder Tiger
quote:
Why is there talk of a playoff-type system if the voters got it so right last year?
Because the rest of the country is fed up with the SEC running shite and will do whatever it takes to end the streak. That's why the 4 conference champions is being pushed so hard.
Last year a playoff would have consisted of lsu, oklahoma state (no conf champ game) oregon, and clemson.
It's nothing more than an attempt to dethrone the SEC by any means necessary. The best teams should play regardless whether it's the best 2 or best 16. I don't know why that's so hard to accept
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:02 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Performance on the field = diddly
Eyeball test = the only relevant factor
Performance on the field= eyeball test
quote:
you can't even think of saying Alabama is a legit NC in 2011.
I love good debate..but come on man, they skulldrug what many were calling the best team in the modern era
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:04 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
And against common opponents with Arkie:
OU 41, A&M 25
Arkie 42, A&M 38
OU 58, K-State 17
Arkie 29, K-State 16
LSU and Georgia beat auburn by the same margin, does LSU=Georgia? That's a weak argument
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:05 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
The best teams should play regardless whether it's the best 2 or best 16. I don't know why that's so hard to accept
Because your (or anybody's) stupid-arse subjective "eye test" should not trump actual performance on the field.
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:06 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
LSU and Georgia beat auburn by the same margin, does LSU=Georgia? That's a weak argument
It's relevant, not determinative. The point is that OU was AT LEAST close to being as good as Arkansas (which is what I claimed to begin with), and OSU's win over OU was FAR more impressive than your win over an injury-plagued Arkie team. And, more importantly, it wasn't their only win over a ranked opponent going into the bowls.
This post was edited on 6/13/12 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:08 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Because your (or anybody's) stupid-arse subjective "eye test" should not trump actual performance on the field.
Oklahoma ST. lost to a horrible team, alabama did not
You act as though a 3 loss alabama squad was out in over osu, they had the same record, when that happens subjectivity is all you have to go by
This post was edited on 6/13/12 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:08 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
they skulldrug what many were calling the best team in the modern era
No, at the time of the "eye test" they had LOST to that team. At home.
Posted on 6/13/12 at 4:11 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
You act as though a 3 loss alabama squad was out in over osu, they had the same record, when that happens subjectivity is all you have to go by
Well, since Boise State also had the same record, and since they also beat the crap out of everybody except the team that beat them, and since strength of schedule is completely and utterly meaningless, my "eye test" says Boise State was the best team in the country. Makes just as much sense as saying Alabama.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News