- 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: USC is "back"
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:02 pm to Zamoro10
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:02 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
11 split-titles (1954, 1957, 1965, 1970, 1973, 1974, 1978, 1990, 1991, 1997, 2003
73 and 78 are my favorites. The way some LSU fans bitch about 2003, image what they'd be like if we had beaten USC and split the title with them, like Notre Dame in 73 and USC in 78 did with Alabama. ND beat them in the fricking Sugar Bowl and USC beat them in Birmingham
1
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:04 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
Exactly!
Correct. USC was going to take any title they could get, since they got bested by Golden Bear football that year and failed to make the BCS national title game.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:06 pm to TigerBait2008
quote:
AP means shite, and both using illegal players..like i said..
The AP does mean "shite."
Bush wasn't ineligible until Dec 04.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:06 pm to Rocket
Rocket & USC fans: 
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:07 pm to bisonduck
To be fair, rocket is a dipshit.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:07 pm to LSUintheNW
quote:
Pretty dumb considering we aren't some mid grade program that isn't a great destination for elite football players.
at the time i could kind of see it. LSU was a next tier program in 2003. A lot of us never thought we'd win a MNC. But a 2nd title and a then other BCS CG appearance after 11 weeks at #1 in both polls later, we are established as a top program. We are not an afterthought. Split titles were relatively common in CFB, its no big deal. There isn't anyone associated with USC that didn't want to play us in the Sugar Bowl that year. Blame the system, not USC.
This post was edited on 8/22/12 at 4:09 pm
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:08 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
7 in a row. And USC has been 15-6 against Top 10 opponents the last 10 years whether in conference or out of conference. To say overrated is intellectual dishonest.
Wasn't the 05 one vacated?
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:09 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Miami, Nebraska, Michigan, USC, Bama, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Texas, Washington all have split titles in their history.
LSU is an ELITE program now, its time to stop crying about a split title from almost 10 fricking years ago.
No split titles here.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:09 pm to LSUintheNW
quote:
To be fair, rocket is a dipshit.
Just stop feeding the troll.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:09 pm to H-Town Tiger
I know how the polls worked back then (at least for the Bama/ND split) and Bama was awarded the AP before the Sugar Bowl.
But these are titles any fan (if they were being honest) should sort of hide and not trumpet.
I really really do hate the BCS...mostly because of the computers and the changing formulas and lack of transparency but I don't kid myself in some glorious past. CFB has always been effed up in naming a champion...ergo the MNC.
I don't know...I guess we'll always argue to some degree...I just regret that the BCS seemed to put sole emphasis on the BCS title when before (since winning the NC was often out of your hands (like it sometimes still is today) it was simply icing on the cake after the goal of winning your conference.
But these are titles any fan (if they were being honest) should sort of hide and not trumpet.
I really really do hate the BCS...mostly because of the computers and the changing formulas and lack of transparency but I don't kid myself in some glorious past. CFB has always been effed up in naming a champion...ergo the MNC.
I don't know...I guess we'll always argue to some degree...I just regret that the BCS seemed to put sole emphasis on the BCS title when before (since winning the NC was often out of your hands (like it sometimes still is today) it was simply icing on the cake after the goal of winning your conference.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:10 pm to TruLsu
quote:
I feel so out of place defending USC
I love you man.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:11 pm to bisonduck
I'll never respond to him but I get it. Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:11 pm to bisonduck
quote:
To be fair, rocket is a dipshit.
Just stop feeding the troll.
Who???
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:12 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
LSU was a next tier program in 2003. A lot of us never thought we'd win a MNC.
Yeah...and from what I've read on here, I can understand that. It had been so long since LSU won a NC and the fans wanted to revel in the accolades and thought the split took away some of the glory. So the hatred stems from memory...but you know what...
That wasn't some one-shot deal...LSU turned the corner for good and became a dominant dominant program. No reason not to simply look forward.
This post was edited on 8/22/12 at 4:13 pm
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:12 pm to CajunFootball
quote:
Weak Defense? Only against the SEC, but then they're still pretty decent.
45th in scoring defense last season, 54th in total defense. Which isn't very good for an elite team.
SC had a top 20 defense in 2009, and #1 in 2008. They've taken a leap backwards defensively. And they've lost three starters on the d-line to graduation plus an incoming starter to injury.
USC is one of the small handful of greatest programs of all-time. They are the elite of the elite, historically. They are not currently at that level again. So, no, they aren't back yet. I think last season was a bit of a false spring.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:14 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
Trojan Ace
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:14 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Blame the system, not USC.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:15 pm to Baloo
Baloo:
It had everything to do with scheme, and not athletes.
Look for that to change significantly this year.
We'll give up some big plays, but the overall effect we'll make our pass D, especially pass efficiency D, much much better.
It had everything to do with scheme, and not athletes.
Look for that to change significantly this year.
We'll give up some big plays, but the overall effect we'll make our pass D, especially pass efficiency D, much much better.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:16 pm to Baloo
quote:
They are the elite of the elite, historically. They are not currently at that level again.
I don't think any SC fan will tell you last year's team was at any PC level.
USC should be very very good...around where they finished last year in the polls...around Top 5-6...with some luck, who knows?
I ranked them #4 in our TD preseason ballot which felt about right considering they finished #5 and should be slightly improved only because we hope there won't be growing pains like last year.
Posted on 8/22/12 at 4:17 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
I just regret that the BCS seemed to put sole emphasis on the BCS title when before (since winning the NC was often out of your hands (like it sometimes still is today) it was simply icing on the cake after the goal of winning your conference.
A million times this. I don't think people truly get how radical the Bama national title is. It is the first national title won by a team that failed to win its conference title since the 1930s. That is an epic sea change.
I have FAR more bad blood towards Bama than USC, as at least SC fans have been honest about the system sucking instead of trying to talk in terms of "deserve". Besides, they did deserve to be in the game. Everyone's beef in 2003 is with Oklahoma. Another team that failed to win its conference, mind you. This is a feature, not a bug, of the BCS.
Page 3 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News