re: The lack of a running game versus Auburn. LSU fans.

quote:

---

Good to see everyone thinks LSU "beat" themselves to only win by 2 with no credit going to Auburn.

---

quote:

---

Well, a few of you said Auburn played "inspired" or we "showed up". I think "inspired" means we played above our ability, while "showed up" means we played the way we are capable of playing. I hope it's the latter.

---

Dan, I'm trying to work with you here - there was some uncomfortable chatter from posters, including, most disturbingly for you, a few Auburn fans. I asked point blank: "Either beating Auburn in Jordan-Hare is a challenge and doing so is worthy of accolades, or it isn't, and therefore a problem if it was difficult to win by 2 points. Which is it?"

In my earlier post when I described what happened, from a score standpoint, and indicated the play of the game, minus those two fumbles, was more consistent with a 20-3 score. The play was, and had that been the final score, people would not be as dismissive.

We won despite our poor execution and yes, despite Auburn's great defensive play. Auburn, conversely kept the game close by exploiting our mistakes/turnovers/penalties... ALL of that is part of football. Auburn's offense played much worse than LSU's offense, but scored the same points. Football is about points.

Had we lost, with a nearly identical box score, I would not be here arguing that we actually won (for which fans of another school located in Alabama are famous), when we lost. Coincidentally, as their coach once said after a miracle ending to a Kentucky game, "Do you think you beat them, or did you just win a football game?"

I think we beat Auburn AND won the football game - we just didn't win the football game by very much.