Started By
Message
re: 2003 LSU Vs. Arkansas - a review
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:40 pm to relentlsspursuit
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:40 pm to relentlsspursuit
Same coaches, same players, basically everything is the same between the 2003 game and this year's game.
Good analysis.
Good analysis.
1
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:40 pm to elposter
quote:
Did you write this? Holy shite. You even specified the damn time of the 2003 game.
Ha ha. I was going to put 1:30 because that is the time the game always is, but when I looked at the schedule (because I forgot the score) it said 1:40 so I put it.
FYI the LSU vs. Arky game (since it's almost always Friday after Thanksgiving, is practically always at 1:30 if I'm not mistaken....which I may be.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:41 pm to TheCheshireHog
quote:
comparing Petrino vs Miles history as opposed to you comparing Nutt vs Saban.
Still both are equally dumb....not one of those men has ever suited up in pads for either team.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:42 pm to relentlsspursuit
quote:
No it doesn't. But if they're so obsessed with past history of playing LSU close, I figured we'd continue the review of "past history" to the parts they'd just as easily forget.
WE'RE obsessed with past history? Last time I checked every LSU fan instantly defaults to how many more football championships they have won than us anytime they feel challenged. Oh, the irony.
We are looking ahead to the future, not the past.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:45 pm to Ham Malone
quote:
Same coaches, same players, basically everything is the same between the 2003 game and this year's game.
Please learn to read. I never said "Because we won in 2003 we will win in 2011." I simply revisited that year and the circumstances surrounding the game.
That is different than saying "We've (Arky) played LSU close the last 3 years therefore we're going to play you close this year!"
The 2003 game has nothing to do with this game...but neither does last year's game. I think the result will be similar to 2003 but that result has nothing to do with the 2003 game.
Same as someone saying "I think it will be close." That's OK to say, but makes no sense when you say "It'll be close BECAUSE it was close last year."
Most of the time (not all) games are close because the two teams playing are close in regards to overall quality as a team. This year, I believe LSU, overall, is a much more quality team just like in 2003. There's always anomalies and anything could happen, but I think LSU wins by more than 2 scores.
This post was edited on 11/15/11 at 2:49 pm
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:46 pm to relentlsspursuit
Besides, I'm bored and writing something was more interesting than sitting here til 5.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:49 pm to relentlsspursuit
quote:
Same as someone saying "I think it will be close." That's OK to say, but makes no sense when you say "It'll be close BECAUSE it was close last year."
yeah...last year it wasn't close...
The previous 5 were pretty close however
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:50 pm to relentlsspursuit
quote:
Please learn to read. I never said "Because we won in 2003 we will win in 2011." I simply revisited that year and the circumstances surrounding the game.
Ummmm actually you did.
Your original post:
quote:
Arky fans, you love to discuss the past few years. You love to say how in 2010 you beat us in Little Rock, how in 2009 it took OT for us to beat you in BR, etc. etc. ad nauseum. You tout your record this year, etc. etc. But this year will be a repeat of 2003. An Arkansas team which beat up on a pathetic UT team and has barely squeaked by cellar dweller teams will meet a similar fate as in 2003.
Are you going to tell me to learn to read as well?
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:52 pm to LsuTool
quote:
meh, LSU beating Ark this year doesn't have much to do with 2003, IMO.
No more than Arkansas winning last year. Both teams are better than last year IMO. Should be a good battle.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:54 pm to RANDY44
quote:
Both teams are better than last year IMO
You are the first LSU poster to ever say we are better than last year...
What is your basis other than our ranking?
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:56 pm to bpfergu
quote:
Are you going to tell me to learn to read as well?
Yes...
quote:
But this year will be a repeat of 2003.
That does not say "Because 2003 was a blowout, 2011 will be a blowout." But it does say "This year will be a blowout, just like 2003 was a blowout. Those are 2 different things.
"Because Girl A is pretty, Girl B will be pretty" is not equal to "Girl B is pretty, she looks just like Girl A."
Posted on 11/15/11 at 2:57 pm to RANDY44
"yeah...last year it wasn't close...
The previous 5 were pretty close however"
Last year was close and even if Hatcher tries to throw the game again this year we still will beat your arse.
I remember 2003, and yes everyone is different, the feelings of the 2 teams were similar.
Arky = Red headed step child
The previous 5 were pretty close however"
Last year was close and even if Hatcher tries to throw the game again this year we still will beat your arse.
I remember 2003, and yes everyone is different, the feelings of the 2 teams were similar.
Arky = Red headed step child
This post was edited on 11/15/11 at 2:58 pm
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:00 pm to relentlsspursuit
Hey, from 1909 to 1911 we beat you guys a cumulative 78-0. Does that help us win this game this year?
We talk about winning the last three of four because it is RELEVANT and many players from those teams are still ON the teams. 2003 is no more relevant than 1909-1911.
We talk about winning the last three of four because it is RELEVANT and many players from those teams are still ON the teams. 2003 is no more relevant than 1909-1911.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:00 pm to relentlsspursuit
quote:
relentlsspursuit
Not playing the semantics game with you, sorry.
You created this thread with the intention of trying to develop some sort of passive pattern between 2003 and 2011, and concluded that the results would be similar. That is clear as day.
You have no justification for this beyond said imaginary pattern that you concocted in your head.
Dumb thread is dumb.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:02 pm to NWLATigerFan12
It appears you may be the dumbass.
You de realize that there is a difference between saying 8 years ago and 8 seasons ago, right ?
To put it more bluntly, Nov 25, 2011 is 8 years from Nov 28, 2003. Not 9, but 8. (technically 7 years 362 days, but you get the point I think)
You de realize that there is a difference between saying 8 years ago and 8 seasons ago, right ?
To put it more bluntly, Nov 25, 2011 is 8 years from Nov 28, 2003. Not 9, but 8. (technically 7 years 362 days, but you get the point I think)
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:06 pm to bpfergu
That's not what I did.
I simply restated what happened in 2003 and said this year the result will be the same.
It is possible to review history for similar situations in order to make a comparison without claiming that because something happened previously it will happen again.
I simply restated what happened in 2003 and said this year the result will be the same.
It is possible to review history for similar situations in order to make a comparison without claiming that because something happened previously it will happen again.
This post was edited on 11/15/11 at 3:14 pm
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:08 pm to relentlsspursuit
Yes, but what you are forgetting is 1993...huh? right? Yeah...we won in 1993...woo pig...right guys? (as I hold my hand up and no one gives me any love)
You are a fricking moron. 2003? GTFO
You are a fricking moron. 2003? GTFO
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:10 pm to sugatowng
quote:
You are the first LSU poster to ever say we are better than last year...
What is your basis other than our ranking?
From what I've seen, the o-line is improved, Wilson is less inclined to force a bad throw than Mallet, and the defense just appears to be a bit stouter than last year IMO. The irony is, LSU's improvements virtually mirror those of the Hawgs; Much-improved o-line(in spite of losing a 3-year starter for the whole season), more consistant QB play, (only 3 picks, 2nd in efficiency) and a stouter defense,(in spite of losing 4 starters to the pros, including the nations best defender). LSU's depth, as it has in every game this year, will likely be enough for the Tigers to prevail in a very good game in Death Valley.
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:18 pm to LOCO5150
quote:
You are a fng moron. 2003? GTFO
<sigh>
Remember that big snow 8 years ago. I have a feeling it will snow again like that this year too!
vs
Because it snowed a lot 8 years ago, we will have a big snow this year.
There is a difference in those statements. Now, let's apply this to this thread.
"Remember 8 years ago when LSU beat an "On a Roll" Arky team 55-24. I predict a similar outcome this year."
=/=
"Because it was a blowout in 2003 it will be a blowout in 2011"
"Because last 3 years have been close, this game will be close."
I'm not sure why this is hard for you to understand/grasp. Come down to Louisiana and get a real education! (I kid!)
This post was edited on 11/15/11 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 11/15/11 at 3:21 pm to RANDY44
quote:
From what I've seen, the o-line is improved, Wilson is less inclined to force a bad throw than Mallet, and the defense just appears to be a bit stouter than last year IMO. The irony is, LSU's improvements virtually mirror those of the Hawgs; Much-improved o-line(in spite of losing a 3-year starter for the whole season), more consistant QB play, (only 3 picks, 2nd in efficiency) and a stouter defense,(in spite of losing 4 starters to the pros, including the nations best defender). LSU's depth, as it has in every game this year, will likely be enough for the Tigers to prevail in a very good game in Death Valley.
Thank you for a fair post. This is reasoning as some people clearly can't accomplish.
LSU has a great team. Nobody is denying that. AR is NOT the same team that played AL...we have come a long way. Ole Miss and Vandy? You can't imagine how much that helped these younger guys develop. It's always good to have some close games like this to show you how missing your assignments and not doing your part can cost you the game. These types of games put a spotlight on your weaknesses and show what needs to be worked on in practice. We still won despite two shitty games. We now have had several come from behind victories this season. If we do happen to be down in the half you better believe that they will have those players pumped up to go in the second half just as they did at A&M.
It will, as always, be a good game. Thank you for the intelligent post.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News