Minew

The bookies posting here are correct. All the current, updated odds, LSU is the pick followed by Bama, OK. St., and OK.

In terms of work on the field, I'd still say LSU has the most to do of any of those to win out. However, it's possible that LSU could lose a game, either AR or the SECCG, and still go to the BCSCG. In particular, if LSU loses only the SECCG game, I don't see how they could be ranked behind the other 1-loss teams b/c they will have more wins and will have beaten two of them (UA and UO).

To win the nat'l championship:

LSU has to beat Ole Miss, Arkansas, Georgia and the #2 team in the country

UA has to beat GA Southern, Auburn, and the #2 team in the country

OU has to beat Baylor, Iowa State, OK. St. and the #2 team in the country.

Though it controls its own destiny, LSU has the most difficult path. It has to beat 3 top 10 teams, OU has to beat 2, and Bama 1. OU probably edges Bama on odds b/c of the additional events necessary for Bama to make the BCS final.

While I'll concede that any "best stretch" should include an national or even conference championship, one could argue that last weekend's game came close. For degree of difficulty and dominance, this is pretty impressive for a 10 game stretch:

10 victories
9 BCS conference teams
7 ranked teams
6 SEC teams
6 road games
5 road games against ranked opponents
#14 average rank of ranked opponents
24 pts. avg margin of victory
2 top 3 opponents
1 Cotton Bowl win
1 Game of the Century win


#17 Texas A&M 41-24

#3 Oregon 40-27

Northwestern State 49-3

#25 Mississippi State 19-6

#16 West Virginia 47-21

Kentucky 35-7

#17 Florida 41-11

Tennessee 38-7

#20 Auburn 45-10

#2 Alabama 9-6 OT

That said, LSU will have to be almost as impressive to finish with a nat'l championship. Over a 5-game stretch they will have to beat all 5 teams, 4 BCS conference teams, 3 SEC teams, another top-20 opponent (SEC Champ.), another top-10 team (AR), and another #2 team, with 3 of the 5 games away from home. There's a long way to go but if they get there, it will be one of the most impressive runs in the history of college football.

DiNardo may have been an awful coach but he was a good recruiter. He began the run of top recruiting classes that has not abated since. Before DiNardo, LSU routinely lost the top recruits in the state to other programs, especially recruits from New Orleans. DiNardo changed that and LSU has benefitted from it ever since. Remember, Saban won his first SEC title and Sugar Bowl with DiNardo's players.

Don't get me wrong. I was glad to see DiNardo go. I was at his last game, a humiliating loss to Houston in which Tepper's defense was at its lowest ebb. But he did not leave the cupboard bare.

SEC: LSU 2nd in football players graduating
Oct. 27, 2011, 6:17 a.m. CDT
The Advocate

BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — LSU posted the second-highest graduation rate in the Southeastern Conference in football. That's according to the NCAA's Graduation Success Rate data released this week.

LSU football's Graduation Success Rate, or GSR, of 77 trails only Vanderbilt's mark of 86. The only other SEC football program with a GSR above 70 is Florida at 76.

The LSU football program has shown improvement with each year's report, going from 51 in 2006 and 2007 to 54 in 2008, 60 in 2009 and 67 in 2010.

In the other two revenue-producing sports, men's basketball ranked fifth in the SEC and the baseball team scored ninth. But LSU spokesman Herb Vincent tells The Advocate (LINK ) both of those sports still saw significant gains from five years ago.



LINK

commemorating his 100th win at UGA, I think

LINK

edit: excuse me, Shepard

Les Miles IS L.S.U. Football

I agree. Tolliver is under radar b/c of the QB play during his tenure. After measurements and workouts he'll be in the second round, maybe even late 1st.

Thanks for your interest Josh.

Lee hasn't had that particular pressure this year. What pressure he has had, he has handled, except perhaps early in the TN game. I am simply suggesting that he may be more relaxed and comfortable because he does not bear the weight of the position alone, as he did in '08. It could also be that he is more mature and versed in the offense after two years.

These days, I don't think anyone believes that a two quarterback system is ideal. That is not to say that there aren't certain situations where it's the best choice. Given the abilities, histories, and personalities of our two guys, this may be one of those situations. After last week's result, doing something totally different would be the risker choice, in my opinion. If you can get that kind of production out of the QB position, frankly the best in a couple of years, I'm not sure why you go in a different direction next week.

That's just my opinion, of course, and I don't really care who the QBs or coaches are as long as we win all of our games (and stay clean w/ the NCAA, the law, and on the report cards). I just thought it was interesting to note that the 2QB system might just be "a feature, not a bug" in this case.