Started By
Message
re: Would Mizzou have won their 2 div titles if they were in the west?
Posted on 6/17/20 at 7:09 am to SammyTiger
Posted on 6/17/20 at 7:09 am to SammyTiger
Auburn was better than LSU and they beat Bama far and square
I mean 2013 Auburn should’ve lost to a Georgia team (y’all lost to btw) that we stomped. 2013 LSU also lost to Ole Miss, another team we stomped
Auburn deserved the 2013 SEC Title. The SEC was stacked that year, I’d rate the teams Auburn, Bama, Missouri, Carolina, LSU.
I mean 2013 Auburn should’ve lost to a Georgia team (y’all lost to btw) that we stomped. 2013 LSU also lost to Ole Miss, another team we stomped
Auburn deserved the 2013 SEC Title. The SEC was stacked that year, I’d rate the teams Auburn, Bama, Missouri, Carolina, LSU.
This post was edited on 6/17/20 at 7:12 am
3
Posted on 6/17/20 at 8:28 am to MizzouTrue
quote:
Auburn was better than LSU and they beat Bama far and square
They won all their games fair and square.
They were just lucky as shite.
And LSU beat them by two scores.
Posted on 6/18/20 at 7:09 am to MizzouTrue
quote:
Auburn deserved the 2013 SEC Title. The SEC was stacked that year, I’d rate the teams Auburn, Bama, Missouri, Carolina, LSU.
Odd. The AP voters thought differently. We finished 4th and y'all finished 5th. We also beat that arse.
Posted on 6/18/20 at 8:24 am to MizzouTrue
quote:
Auburn was better than LSU and they beat Bama far and square
I mean 2013 Auburn should’ve lost to a Georgia team (y’all lost to btw) that we stomped. 2013 LSU also lost to Ole Miss, another team we stomped
So the transitive property of Missouri beating UGA by 15 means they are better than LSU because UGA beat LSU by 3. Who can argue with that?
Oh wait, the transitive property of LSU beating Auburn by 14, who then beat Missouri by 17 says you're full of shite.
Solid work, and also the exact reason why using the transitive property is never a good idea.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News