Started By
Message
re: SEC Football Programs ranked by total number of wins
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:03 am to RB10
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:03 am to RB10
quote:
1961-1970: 6th
1971-1980: 14th
1981-1990: 24th
1991-2000: 42nd
Average: 17th
"Decent"
Notice a trend that stopped in 2000? From 1971 - 2000 the average was 27th. Yes, "Decent" (which might be generous considering the average wasn't even in the top 25). Your program was in a 30 year long period of mediocrity that showed no signs of stopping. In fact, it was getting progressively worse by the decade.
My point, which you seem to want to take only as an insult (though it isn't intended as such) is that for a very large chunk of LSU's history you were "decent". That changed in 2000 and now the program is considered among the elite.
1
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:08 am to bamasgot13
quote:
1971 - 2000
quote:
My point, which you seem to want to take only as an insult (though it isn't intended as such) is that for a very large chunk of LSU's history you were "decent".
So now you've gone from all-time, to pre-2000, to 1971-2000 to try and make your point.
With each post, and obligatory movement of the goalposts, apparently, you look less and less intelligent.
Please stop.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:17 am to RB10
quote:
So now you've gone from all-time, to pre-2000, to 1971-2000 to try and make your point.
No. All time LSU is a good program. That All-Time includes everything post 2000. My original point was that prior to 2000 LSU was a decent program. You certainly weren't trending to remain that way though.
quote:
With each post, and obligatory movement of the goalposts
Not moving the goalposts. Just used the data you shared in response to your comments. As a refresher from ONE page over, you posted this:
quote:
LSU Team Rankings:
1941-1950: 8th
1951-1960: 9th
1961-1970: 6th
1971-1980: 14th
1981-1990: 24th
1991-2000: 42nd
Average: 17th
So yeah. 17th is pretty "decent". It's certainly not elite, which is where LSU has been since 2000.
I'm not gonna ball wash your program. You guys weren't good for 30 freaking years.
You can't be that bad for that long and people not see it.
You HAD to have a massive change of program direction in order to not become MSU and, fortunately, you did. It just so happens that massive change of direction arrived in 2000 and has been maintained since then.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:20 am to bamasgot13
You're totally right. Let's just forget the fact that there used to be as little as 1 or 2 games played In a year. Why don't you retry that and come back with average win % per year so that your argument can actually have some merit.
ETA: People have called out your dumbassery. That's on me for not reading past that.
ETA: People have called out your dumbassery. That's on me for not reading past that.
This post was edited on 3/31/16 at 11:22 am
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:23 am to bamasgot13
quote:
No. All time LSU is a good program. That All-Time includes everything post 2000. My original point was that prior to 2000 LSU was a decent program. You certainly weren't trending to remain that way though.
Ok, I'm going to make this as simple as I can for you.....
Prior to 2000, LSU was not just a decent program. 1869-2000
LSU: 9th
quote:
So yeah. 17th is pretty "decent". It's certainly not elite, which is where LSU has been since 2000.
See above. Not 17th. 9th.
quote:
I'm not gonna ball wash your program. You guys weren't good for 30 freaking years.
Top 20, over the course of 2 decades is now "not good".......
quote:
You HAD to have a massive change of program direction in order to not become MSU and, fortunately, you did. It just so happens that massive change of direction arrived in 2000 and has been maintained since then.
So, you're just doubling down on stupid with each post then.
Carry on.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:24 am to Dixie Normus
quote:
You're totally right. Let's just forget the fact that there used to be as little as 1 or 2 games played In a year.
LSU started playing 9 games in 1913.
From 1913-1939 LSU ranked 24th overall for wins, with 149.
Everyone played limited amount of games prior to 1913, not just LSU.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:32 am to Dixie Normus
quote:
People have called out your dumbassery
people have disagreed with my opinion (almost all of which being LSU fans). There is a difference in having different opinions and "dumbassery". It's ok for us to disagree.
I'll expand on the point Hawgeye made on page two by adding to the picture. He shared from 1941 - 2000. I'll share from 1921 - 2015 for greater perspective.
quote:
LSU Team Rankings:
1921-1930: 95th
1931-1940: 16th
1941-1950: 8th
1951-1960: 9th
1961-1970: 6th
1971-1980: 14th
1981-1990: 24th
1991-2000: 42nd
2000-2010: 3rd
2011-2015: 8th
Average from 1921-2015: 23rd
Average since 2000: 6th. You have one other stretch (for 10 years, not 16) equaling that level of success. You have zero other stretches equaling the success you achieved from 2000-2010.
We've looked at 10 blocks of time. 9 of which are decade long chunks, and one of which covers only the most recent 5 years. In 5 of those chunks (2 of which are post 2000), you average being ranked 7th best program in country.
In the other 5 chunks (all of which are pre 2000), you average being ranked the 38th best program in country.
we can continue to go round and round on this all day. I'll not change your opinion that LSU was good prior to 2000, and you'll not change my opinion that LSU's history prior to 2000 was not close to what it has been since. Best for all to just move on probably.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:33 am to Hawgeye
He was using aggregate win totals for a 20 year period in which teams play a variable number of games before a season was defined and also compared those aggregates to teams who had been playing football for longer.
Equity in judgement is difficult to achieve when there was such a variable period of time.
Equity in judgement is difficult to achieve when there was such a variable period of time.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:33 am to bamasgot13
Seriously man, how many times are you going to change the timeframe in order to make your point look less ignorant?
This post was edited on 3/31/16 at 11:35 am
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:35 am to bamasgot13
quote:
bamasgot13
SEC Football Programs ranked by total number of wins by bamasgot13
quote:770 wins for LSU since the year 2000. Pretty impressive.
610 wins in the first 107 years of your program (5.7/year). 160 wins since 2000 (average of 10/year). 21% of all wins from the history of your program come from that 16 year stretch (13% of your history). To argue that LSU was some incredible program prior to 2000 is to live in LA and wear P&G glasses. Decent program? I guess, if you consider less than 6 wins per year on average to be "decent". But LSU since 2000 is a completely different animal than at any other point in your history.
So, the following magically 'never happened' I guess ????????????:
Winning percentage - team (NATIONALLY):
1931 - 1940:
8 Texas A&M
12 Alabama
13 Tennessee
16 Louisiana St.
18 Tulane
30 Arkansas
1941 - 1950:
6 Alabama
7 Tennessee
8 Louisiana St.
9 Georgia Tech
10 Georgia
18 Tulane
20 Texas A&M
1951 - 1960:
4 Mississippi
8 Tennessee
9 Louisiana St.
10 Auburn
24 Arkansas
25 Alabama
1961 - 1970:
2 Alabama
6 Louisiana St.
9 Arkansas
11 Mississippi
14 Tennessee
15 Missouri
1971 - 1980:
1 Alabama
10 Georgia
11 Arkansas
14 Louisiana St.
17 Missouri
18 Texas A&M
20 Auburn
1981 - 1990:
9 Auburn
14 Georgia
16 Alabama
18 Tennessee
20 Florida
24 Louisiana St.* (Includes 4 losing years)
29 Texas A&M
1991 - 2000:
3 Florida
6 Tennessee
12 Alabama
24 Georgia
25 Texas A&M
28 Auburn
40 Mississippi St
42 Louisiana St.*
45 Mississippi
*The 1990s was the only sub .500 decade in LSU history (54-58), but this included 27 wins and 3 straight bowl victories from 1995-1997.
2001 - 2010:
2 Florida
3 Louisiana St. (62 wins after 2004)
6 Auburn
7 Georgia
11 Alabama
14 Tennessee
17 Arkansas
20 South Carolina
Regardless of what you say, LSU is STILL 12TH all-time nationally in number of NCAA victories, (a few behind #11 UGA), and closing in on #3 in SEC history.
BTW, from 1893-1930, many of those seasons were just 5 or 6 games, or less.
We did manage to win a Southern Conference Title in 1908, however.
If you remember college programs only played 10 games until the mid 70s, and 11 games until the 2000s.
This post was edited on 3/31/16 at 11:44 am
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:39 am to RB10
quote:
Ok, I'm going to make this as simple as I can for you...
Great. Could you also try to at least be accurate?
quote:
Prior to 2000, LSU was not just a decent program. 1869-2000
LSU: 9th
The link you provided does not say 9th. It says 10th. Minor detail, but when making an argument, it is important to at least get the facts of your own case correct.
quote:
So, you're just doubling down on stupid with each post then.
Again with the name calling? Interesting tact. We have a difference of opinion. That's all. I've not insulted your family, your intellect, your professional abilities, or anything of real substance here, bruh. Let's relax on taking this so seriously that it results in name calling and intellect questioning. Again, it's a difference of opinion.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:42 am to bamasgot13
13 I don't think you or your posts are 'stupid', just an opinion.
I posted above your post some national winning percentages from the 1930s to now that may be of interest to you though.
Cheers brother
I posted above your post some national winning percentages from the 1930s to now that may be of interest to you though.
Cheers brother
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:42 am to RB10
quote:
Seriously man, how many times are you going to change the timeframe
I expanded it to include your BEST years of program history.
quote:
ignorant
You need to relax, dude. It's just people discussing football on a message board. It's not that serious that you should stoop to this. Unless, of course, LSU football is your life and this is the norm response for you when anyone dares to question its historical greatness.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:44 am to bamasgot13
quote:
The link you provided does not say 9th. It says 10th. Minor detail, but when making an argument, it is important to at least get the facts of your own case correct.
Oh man, I said 9th rather than 10th. I guess that makes you look like less of a dumbass......
Nope, it doesn't. Sorry.
quote:
Again with the name calling? Interesting tact. We have a difference of opinion. That's all. I've not insulted your family, your intellect, your professional abilities, or anything of real substance here, bruh. Let's relax on taking this so seriously that it results in name calling and intellect questioning. Again, it's a difference of opinion.
You've had to move the goalposts so many times I'm not even sure where they are now.
Just move along man. Your opinion was shown to be moronic. Mine was backed up by facts.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:45 am to bamasgot13
quote:
610 wins in the first 107 years of your program (5.7/year).
powerhouse
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:45 am to bamasgot13
Ah the ole "I'm wrong so I'm just going to attack your level of interest argument." Highly effective in these parts.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:46 am to bamasgot13
quote:
I expanded it to include your BEST years of program history.
You haven't expanded anything.
Your original argument was "pre-2000". You've gone from that to 1971-2000 and then to 1931-2000 to try and make that original statement less ignorant.
quote:
You need to relax, dude. It's just people discussing football on a message board. It's not that serious that you should stoop to this.
Ignorant means uninformed. It's actually a perfect word to describe you in this instance.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:47 am to Hawgeye
Not sure how far up we would move, but UF didn't start playing football until 1906, the schools ahead of us began in the early 1890's.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:49 am to bgator85
quote:
UF didn't start playing football until 1906
Alabama won 35 games from 1892 - 1905
Posted on 3/31/16 at 11:49 am to Dixie Normus
quote:
Ah the ole "I'm wrong so I'm just going to attack your level of interest argument." Highly effective in these parts.
The two minutes of research it took to completely dismantle is original, ignorant, point took so much out of me.
I think I'll have to take a nap now.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News