- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: When did LSU fans become so invested in MBB??
Posted on 3/17/25 at 4:57 pm to lsufball19
Posted on 3/17/25 at 4:57 pm to lsufball19
quote:
He was pretty much owned by Nate Oats at Alabama.
He was 2-5 vs Oats. However, outside of one outlier blowout, the average margin of defeat in 4 of the 5 losses was less than 3 points. I wouldn't exactly say that is being "owned". Wade's last regular season victory at LSU was a win over Alabama.
quote:
He was owned by Bruce Pearl,
He was 2-3 vs. Pearl with all three losses coming on the road
The only program that consistently gave him trouble was Florida. Then again, he beat Florida is his "worst" season (subsequent to his first year)
quote:
And if you really look at it, his teams got progressively worse each year. He won the SEC in his second year, then finished 2nd, then 3rd, and then 5th his last season
You forgot to include the caveat that in that "worse" 21-22 season LSU was also a 6th seed in the NCAA Tournament.
quote:
That's still completely fine for a program like LSU, but it's like people think we would be what Auburn and Alabama are had Wade not been fired. Where is the proof that Wade is on the same level as Pearl or Oats?
The question that can't be answered is how would he have performed in this transfer era of college basketball? The only season that he coached at LSU where the freedom of transfer rules were in full effect (remember, they were initially introduced as a temporary response to the pandemic situation) was 21-22, which was really the first season players fully took advantage of rules. In that year Adam Miller was lost for the year before the season started. Pinson was lost late in the Tenn game at a time LSU was 14-1, coming off a victory vs. Kentucky, which limited him the rest of the way. Eason went from a largely unheralded 6th man at Cincinnati to an All SEC player and NBA first rounder. It was also the first season Wade showed he could put out a team who played elite defense (LSU was the No. 1 defensive team in the nation for much of the season)
He had a highly ranked signing class lined up going into the off-season, and given what he's done at McNeese through the portal, I suspect he would have utilized it well that offseason. Then it all ended.
No one can say for certain LSU would be on the level of Alabama or Auburn had Wade not been fired. But it is clear they were FAR closer to that level under Wade than at any point in the three decades prior when LSU basketball was just as apt to finish last in the SEC as they were to reach the NCAA Tournament. And I suspect if you had to bet on Wade or "the field" (i.e. other realistic candidates for the job. Not pie-in-the sky BS like Billy Donovan, or Scott Drew, etc) as to who would be the guy to get LSU to a championship level program the odds would greatly favor Wade.
Is there a HC out there who can make LSU a perennial championship contender and make everyone forget about Wade? Probably. But history says it's unlikely LSU finds that guy any time soon...which is why many fans want Wade back. He was closer than anyone before him, and the first attempt to try to get back to that level has been an unmitigated disaster. In an industry where every coaching hire comes with a large helping of the unknown, Wade at LSU was more of a "known commodity" than anyone else potentially on the market.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 5:22 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
LSU basketball has always been, at best, a lower half of the conference program that occasionally goes on a run.
This is what happens when an old person like me reads a post by someone younger.
Hey, there was actual life on earth before you learned to post on forums.
You have no idea what LSU basketball was like in the 70s and 80s.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 5:26 pm to public_enemy
By your measurements, Scott should not have invested in the Women’s basketball team. Made it to a couple final fours. Never had a Natty. Periods of success and periods of failure. Same with gymnastics, but they were never as good as either the men’s or women’s basketball teams historically speaking.
And none of those programs make ANY money and are probably a bigger drain on the athletic department than baseball.
For him to have invested that much $ in women’s basketball, which was about as good historically as the men’s team, is borderline inexcusable! Especially while ignoring the only other $ making sport!
And none of those programs make ANY money and are probably a bigger drain on the athletic department than baseball.
For him to have invested that much $ in women’s basketball, which was about as good historically as the men’s team, is borderline inexcusable! Especially while ignoring the only other $ making sport!
This post was edited on 3/17/25 at 5:43 pm
Posted on 3/17/25 at 5:45 pm to Smokin Joe Dumas
Let me know when the Kim Mulkey, a Louisiana native and proven national championship winner, is as easy to snag for men’s bb. Woodward hired a unicorn. Most of those guys wanna coach at a blue blood, something we can’t offer.
God you guys are insufferable
God you guys are insufferable
This post was edited on 3/17/25 at 5:49 pm
Posted on 3/17/25 at 5:48 pm to lsufball19
Nice cherry picking job. Leave out the 80's and don't signify the final four run in '04 or any reg season championships. You're not a tiger fan get out of here.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 5:51 pm to LSUFanHouston
I’ve always been a fan of all LSU teams, but when the administration dicks us around with one of the big 3: Football, Men’s Bball and Baseball, it tends to piss people off.
If a sport loses money every year (every other LSU team) it’s not part of the big 3 no matter how much success they have.
If a sport loses money every year (every other LSU team) it’s not part of the big 3 no matter how much success they have.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 5:51 pm to Kid Ray
The 80s were 50 years ago man.
And one fluke year in the final 4.
Modern history is what matters
And one fluke year in the final 4.
Modern history is what matters
Posted on 3/17/25 at 6:03 pm to public_enemy
quote:By 50, do you mean 36?
The 80s were 50 years ago man.
I started LSU in 1989. Shaq started in 1989. Chris Jackson started in 1988. When did you attend LSU?
quote:Nah, to you, frick basketball is what matters. Sorry you are 5'6 and 1/4" and got posterized with junk in your face in 8th grade and decided basketball isn't you thing.
Modern history is what matters
Posted on 3/17/25 at 6:19 pm to drizztiger
Ah, I see we’re unfamiliar with exaggeration. It’s okay, I’ll be sure to be very literal with you from now on.
No, LSU’s said frick basketball. I just agree with them because we aren’t competitive compared to established and successful programs and instead enjoy them focusing on Football and Baseball.
A lot of projection there bud.
I do enjoy the sport of basketball and regularly watch, just actual competitive teams who play the game well, unlike our tigers
No, LSU’s said frick basketball. I just agree with them because we aren’t competitive compared to established and successful programs and instead enjoy them focusing on Football and Baseball.
A lot of projection there bud.
I do enjoy the sport of basketball and regularly watch, just actual competitive teams who play the game well, unlike our tigers
Posted on 3/17/25 at 6:29 pm to public_enemy
quote:That's fine. No worries there.
Ah, I see we’re unfamiliar with exaggeration. It’s okay, I’ll be sure to be very literal with you from now on.
quote:You seem to ignore that LSU MBB actually profits, except a "yay!" for the $$$.
No, LSU’s said frick basketball. I just agree with them because we aren’t competitive compared to established and successful programs and instead enjoy them focusing on Football and Baseball.
We also can never be competitive, because we've never been consistently competitive. So therefore, history does matter, but you turn around when I brought up Gonzaga, and say history doesn't matter. --- Only modern history, because things can't change. I understand even more now.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 6:30 pm to public_enemy
quote:
Ah, I see we’re unfamiliar with exaggeration. It’s okay, I’ll be sure to be very literal with you from now on.
Exaggerating to try to win an argument/disagreement means you have already lost it.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:10 pm to Blutarsky
quote:Did you notice he avoided my question of when he attended LSU?
Exaggerating to try to win an argument/disagreement means you have already lost it.
That is not the beginning or ending of fandom, don't get me wrong. Fans come from all places in life.
But this dude... if he wouldn't have replied to me again, I have zero cares.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:19 pm to Kid Ray
quote:
Leave out the 80's and don't signify the final four run in '04 or any reg season championships. You're not a tiger fan get out of here.
I literally listed every season and how they finished since 93. If you’ll see, the good finishes were listed along with the bad. That’s the exact opposite of cherry picking. That’s giving you all the data. You can analyze it how you want but it doesn’t look like a program that has been consistently good or even average in a long time
In the history of LSU basketball, we had about 15 years of good consistent winning. I’m 40 and barely caught the tail end of that in my memory. I’m sorry if that reality bothers you. But no one in 2025 cares how good Dale Brown was 35 years ago.
This post was edited on 3/17/25 at 7:24 pm
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:23 pm to drizztiger
I said modern history matters. Please keep up
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:25 pm to public_enemy
quote:
LSU has never been a serious MBB team
There was nothing bigger than lsu vs Kentucky in early 80s to mid 90s. We camped out for days to be in that dome. We judged the game by how many days before it you had to camp out. I was there.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:25 pm to drizztiger
I’m not sure when me attending LSU has any relevance to the conversation. Seems a bit odd honestly.
You seem to enjoy replying to me, as we’ve kept up the banter most of the day.
You still seem confused on the fact that while LSU basketball may provide a profit to the university, it’s not a draw for fans because the product is awful, as usual.
You seem to enjoy replying to me, as we’ve kept up the banter most of the day.
You still seem confused on the fact that while LSU basketball may provide a profit to the university, it’s not a draw for fans because the product is awful, as usual.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:26 pm to LSU Neil
Nice, early 80s to mid 90s. How many natties did we win? Why aren’t we considered an elite basketball university?
What about say, this century?
What about say, this century?
This post was edited on 3/17/25 at 7:27 pm
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:27 pm to public_enemy
quote:
I’m not sure when me attending LSU has any relevance to the conversation. Seems a bit odd honestly.
It has everything to do with the conversation. You said early on that lsu had NEVER been relevant. You obviously were not here in the 80s or 90s. If you were, you’d know this is a false statement.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:28 pm to LSU Neil
Relevancy in a sport is directly tied to national championships. You’d think a relevant team would have at least one.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 7:28 pm to public_enemy
Didn’t say a thing about a natty. You said “relevant”. It was pretty relevant then. Go argue with yourself. You are a retard.
Popular
Back to top


0





