LSU commitment makes me laugh

[rolltideface]

This is nothing major or a big deal at all but i just thought that after listening to his statements- this one was most telling.......

At Buford, you don’t play four quarters,” said Johnson, alluding to the Class AA champion Wolves’ propensity to blow out overmatched opponents and then play reserves for long stretches. “I wanted to feel what the other teams feel when they played us. I want to be the underdog every now and then.”

Well, get used to that underdog role sir- your coach is Les Miles!!!! :biggrin:

 

[nathan]

I can see where that would be frustrating for a player. Not as frustrating as getting blown out, but that's not what he means by "feel what the other teams feel" right? Or maybe it is? Losing is good for the soul too. Nah, he just wants to play more (more spotlight, more stats, more fun, more chances to go pro). I can understand that too.

I agree about the underdog role- he'll get to see that side of things a few times.

 

[Fishhead]

This is nothing major or a big deal at all but i just thought that after listening to his statements- this one was most telling.......

At Buford, you don’t play four quarters,” said Johnson, alluding to the Class AA champion Wolves’ propensity to blow out overmatched opponents and then play reserves for long stretches. “I wanted to feel what the other teams feel when they played us. I want to be the underdog every now and then.”

Well, get used to that underdog role sir- your coach is Les Miles!!!! :biggrin:

This quote makes me laugh. LSU is hardly a common underdog. The last time they were an underdog, they won by 5 TDs.

 

[kfo9494]

LSU is going to have a very good football team in 2009. So do not think they are going to be weak in the run for the SEC west. Their schedule might be their downfall. They have Georgia, Bama and Ole Miss on the road with Florida at home.
>

If they would have had a QB last year, then they would have beat us.

 

[Aledinho]

I think he was commenting on the strength of the SEC. Underdog or Overdog, most games will be hard fought into at least the third quarter.

 

[TideEngineer08]

LSU is going to have a very good football team in 2009. So do not think they are going to be weak in the run for the SEC west. Their schedule might be their downfall. They have Georgia, Bama and Ole Miss on the road with Florida at home.
>

If they would have had a QB last year, then they would have beat us.

Perhaps. I believe we bumbled away a fair amount of opportunities as well. JPW's celebration and penalty after the first TD almost directly led to LSU's ensuing 14 points.

 

[Jay Hughes]

If they would have had a QB last year, then they would have beat us.

Pure speculation and not FACT!

I sure love that word "if".

"If" we would have scored a couple more TDs, we would have beat Florida! You crack me up!

RTR!!!!!

 

[Fishhead]

LSU is going to have a very good football team in 2009. So do not think they are going to be weak in the run for the SEC west. Their schedule might be their downfall. They have Georgia, Bama and Ole Miss on the road with Florida at home.
>

If they would have had a QB last year, then they would have beat us.

...If ifs and buts were candy and nuts...
BUT, your point is our QB gift wrapped points for you guys, and you're right. Another QB might have done the same...but Lee made a habit of it last season. Of course, Flynn threw 3 picks in '07 against Bama...and if not for Hester, one of those was a pick 6.
-
Still, no matter what, anyone with common sense knows that...whether it's because of Saban or Miles...LSU is one of the top 5 programs this decade. They continue the incredible recruiting and winning that Saban started. To say Johnson better get used to being an underdog at LSU is laughable. That's like saying UF, tOSU, USC, OU, or TX need to get used to being an underdog. Rarely happens. However, when they are underdogs, I like their chances.

 

[LSU63]

Well, get used to that underdog role sir- your coach is Les Miles!!!! :biggrin:

I agree about the underdog role- he'll get to see that side of things a few times.

Nothing like a little smack talk and overconfidence to while away the summer days!

Really though, no season ever turns out quite like predicted. Very few expected LSU to go 8-5 or the Tide to go 12-2. I looking at the schedule, I think Bama is at worse a 10-2 team. The defense will be stout, how the QB plays will be key. The schedule is tougher at LSU, and we have more questions than Bama, (new DC, QB situtation). But I'm optimistic.

And of course, injuries and how the ball bounces will have an outcome, because the difference between winning and losing in the SEC is razor thin.

 

[BamaInBham]

LSU is going to have a very good football team in 2009. So do not think they are going to be weak in the run for the SEC west. Their schedule might be their downfall. They have Georgia, Bama and Ole Miss on the road with Florida at home.
>

If they would have had a QB last year, then they would have beat us.

Not necessarily. Bama played one of its worst games of the year. Bama gave LSU more points than Lee gave Bama: Alexander's 7, fumble that turned into a 1 play drive for TD, JPW's gaffe, 60% Cody (probably should not have played), Tiffin missed chip shot FG to win the game. Bama was the better team apart from Lee - far better coached.

 

[BamasTide]

LSU is one of the top 5 programs this decade[/B]. They continue the incredible recruiting and winning that Saban started. To say Johnson better get used to being an underdog at LSU is laughable. That's like saying UF, tOSU, USC, OU, or TX need to get used to being an underdog. Rarely happens. However, when they are underdogs, I like their chances.

I also have Florida, Ohio State, Southern Cal, Oklahoma, and Texas as my top five this decade............So LSU might be a top ten team this decade.

 

[TideEngineer08]

I also have Florida, Ohio State, Southern Cal, Oklahoma, and Texas as my top five this decade............So LSU might be a top ten team this decade.

Not that I'm one to take up for rivals, but LSU has won two national championships this decade.

That is more than Ohio State, USC, Oklahoma, or Texas. They also have a better bowl record than Ohio State or Oklahoma.

I'd say LSU is at least 3rd on the list of teams for this decade but more like 2nd. And I don't care that they lost 2 games in '07 or 1 game in '03. They got the crystal footballs, and that's all that matters.

 

[Fishhead]

Not that I'm one to take up for rivals, but LSU has one two national championships this decade.

That is more than Ohio State, USC, Oklahoma, or Texas. They also have a better bowl record than Ohio State or Oklahoma.

I'd say LSU is at least 3rd on the list of teams for this decade but more like 2nd. And I don't care that they lost 2 games in '07 or 1 game in '03. They got the crystal footballs, and that's all that matters.

What he said. Period.

And FWIW, the LSU bowl record in the past 4 seasons is #1. Yes I know there may be others who have won 4 straight...but nobody has done so MORE convincingly. I am not one to argue Miles is a better coach than Saban...however the man can win a bowl game in statement like fashion.

 

[TideEngineer08]

What he said. Period.

And FWIW, the LSU bowl record in the past 4 seasons is #1. Yes I know there may be others who have won 4 straight...but nobody has done so MORE convincingly. I am not one to argue Miles is a better coach than Saban...however the man can win a bowl game in statement like fashion.

The only other team I could think to put in front of LSU was Florida, because they've won 2 NCs as well and more recently than LSU. Their bowl record isn't as stellar, but I have to give more weight to the ultimate prize.

USC would be third, because they play inferior competition each year and still manage to lose games they shouldn't.

Maybe Texas is 4th. Their NC is more recent than Oklahoma's or Ohio State's.

And OU and OSU can tie for 5th since their bowl record is extremely inept since their last NC's, which were at the beginning of the decade.

 

[BamasTide]

Im sorry but simply put none of those teams have lost more games this decade than LSU. So if success is measured by winning we should start by counting games won shouldn't we. Plus, I'm pretty sure none of the others in this decade have had a losing conference record (3-5). Great they won a couple of national titles now they have 3. No one on that list has less than that. Also, this year will be counted in this decade I don't see them having a better team than any of the other 5, but I guess we will see.

 

[BamaInBham]

Impossible to keep LSU out of top 5, top 3 really.

IMO:

UF/LSU/USC number 1-3 no order

The only reason I put USC with UF and LSU is that they will play anyone anywhere and almost always beat the top teams. Only boredom and Carroll cause them to lose a shocker or 2 each year. LSU and UF have 3 SECCs and 2 NCs in the decade and LSU has 3 more wins, LSU 4-0 in BCS bowls, UF 3-1, LSU 7-2 bowls overall (both losses were Saban's, though in 1 they were heavily overmatched, the other a fluke), UF 4-5. IMO, LSU has wasted a lot of talent (see '05, '06), but LSU has had more success in the 00's than UF. In fact a good case can be made that they are the team of the 00's at least at this point, though I'm sure it will be given to USC or UF if UF wins the NC this year. The perception that they are declining a tad (8-5 last year and further removed from Saban) and that Miles is the coach causes them to unfairly lose some of their deserved luster.

OU/UTx/OSU number 4-6 no order

 

[TommyMac]

I also have Florida, Ohio State, Southern Cal, Oklahoma, and Texas as my top five this decade............So LSU might be a top ten team this decade.

To include them over LSU is laughable. Actually, Texas and Oklahoma are stretches too.

 

[red55]

Im sorry but simply put none of those teams have lost more games this decade than LSU.

Actually some have. LSU and Florida trail in total wins because they play in the SEC which has 6 contenders year-in and year-out.

"simply put" total wins:

1. Oklahoma = 102-19 for .843
2. Texas = 96-18 for .842
3. USC = 93-22 for .808
4. Ohio St. = 91-23 for .798
5. LSU = 90-27 for .769
6. Florida = 87-29 for .750
7. Miami = 83-29 for .741

"simply put" bowl wins:

1. LSU = 7-2 for .777
2. Texas = 62 for .750
3. USC = 6-2 for .750
4. Miami = 6-3 for .666
5. Oklahoma = 4-5 for .444
6. Florida = 4-5 for .444
7. Ohio State = 4-5 . 444

"simply put" BCS bowl wins

1. LSU = 4-0 for 1.000
2. Texas = 3-0 for 1.000
3. USC = 6-1 for .857
4. Florida = 4-1 for .800
5. Miami = 3-1 for .750
6. Ohio State = 4-3 for .571
7. Oklahoma = 2-5 for .286

"simply put" BCS National Championships

1. LSU = 2-0 for 1.000
2. Florida = 2-0 for 1.000
3. Texas = 1-0 for 1.000
4. Miami = 1-1 for .500
5. USC = 1-1 for .500
6. Ohio State = 1-2 for .333
7. Oklahoma = 1-3 for .250

 

[BamaInBham]

Actually some have. LSU and Florida trail in total wins because they play in the SEC which has 6 contenders year-in and year-out.

"simply put" total wins:

1. Oklahoma = 102-19 for .843
2. Texas = 96-18 for .842
3. USC = 93-22 for .808
4. Ohio St. = 91-23 for .798
5. LSU = 90-27 for .769
6. Florida = 87-29 for .750
7. Miami = 83-29 for .741

"simply put" bowl wins:

1. LSU = 7-2 for .777
2. Texas = 62 for .750
3. USC = 6-2 for .750
4. Miami = 6-3 for .666
5. Oklahoma = 4-5 for .444
6. Florida = 4-5 for .444
7. Ohio State = 4-5 . 444

"simply put" BCS bowl wins

1. LSU = 4-0 for 1.000
2. Texas = 3-0 for 1.000
3. USC = 6-1 for .857
4. Florida = 4-1 for .800
5. Miami = 3-1 for .750
6. Ohio State = 4-3 for .571
7. Oklahoma = 2-5 for .286

"simply put" BCS National Championships

1. LSU = 2-0 for 1.000
2. Florida = 2-0 for 1.000
3. Texas = 1-0 for 1.000
4. Miami = 1-1 for .500
5. USC = 1-1 for .500
6. Ohio State = 1-2 for .333
7. Oklahoma = 1-3 for .250

Great job. As I had posted earlier, a strong case could be made for LSU to be number 1 at this point, though they will never get it unless they won the NC this year. They have charisma too.

Another interesting point shown by your numbers: the myth that there will never be dominant teams like the 60s, 70s with Bama, OU, Neb, et al., is debunked. Note that of the 18 appearances in the BCS Champ game, 16 are from the 7 you list, the other 2 not being slouches: Neb and FSU. The more things change, the more they remain the same; just a few new faces. Bama is reclaiming a spot, Neb is trying, Miami is gone, LSU has likely slipped though not necessarily gone, OSU is like Neb of the 80s and early 90s, etc.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Great job. As I had posted earlier, a strong case could be made for LSU to be number 1 at this point, though they will never get it unless they won the NC this year. They have charisma too.

Another interesting point shown by your numbers: the myth that there will never be dominant teams like the 60s, 70s with Bama, OU, Neb, et al., is debunked. Note that of the 18 appearances in the BCS Champ game, 16 are from the 7 you list, the other 2 not being slouches: Neb and FSU. The more things change, the more they remain the same; just a few new faces. Bama is reclaiming a spot, Neb is trying, Miami is gone, LSU has likely slipped though not necessarily gone, OSU is like Neb of the 80s and early 90s, etc.

Yes I have thought this for some time. It is still very much possible to win at a high level for a sustained period of time. Perhaps not as much in the SEC, because it is so competitive. But even in the SEC, its possible to win 9 or 10 games a year. LSU has done it now for almost a decade. Florida and Georgia are awful close. Heck, even Auburn had a nice 5 year or so run. Alabama can do it again, its just that someone will have to take a step back. Looks like it'll be Auburn. Nothing makes me happier.