re: Why did LSU beat A&M but Bama did not?

This really needed to be a thread?

LSU was the better team in all 3 of those games and let one play each keep them from beating both UF and Bama. 9 out of 10 Bama still beats AM but just didn't get it figured out until it was too late.

8 pages

Hey OP, who is Stoops recruiting at Cleveland Heights?

To be honest, it is because LSU has a much better D. They're faster, stronger, and more consistent.

Also, their D Coordinator is the best in the business, while Bama's DC looked completely lost while JFF made him look foolish.

LSU is a better football team, plain and simple.

It was a scheduling conspiracy by the SEC against Bama. THey made em play TAMU immediately after the LSU game.

I agree with the OP, if bama had stuck to the ground game more they had a better shot at winnin. flip side to that though is our secondary is worse than our run game. just a very weird game and comparison overall. interesting to see how the lsu and bama games play out next year.

most of these have been covered already but whatever.

1) the LSU game the week before. no other team bama played was as tough as LSU, and you cannot discount the physical toll this took on the team. this doesn't even take into account the psychological residue the game left. i'll assume that it's pretty hard to keep the next opponent in perspective (despite saban's best brain-programming efforts) when you feel you've managed to beat the toughest opponent on your schedule in such a dramatic fashion (oh hi 20 first quarter aggie points).

2) lack of offensive adjustments by nussmeier.

AJ's relatively stellar performance up to that point was a double-edged sword. pre-A&M he was reliable and/or clutch when it counted, which surely played into the mentality of having him try to win it through the air. A&M going up 20 points early also contributed to a sense of panic and urgency to score as quickly as possible (oh hi there, interceptions).

bama's D did a tremendous job of adjusting after the first quarter, holding A&M to just 9 points and scoreless for 2 quarters. other than the first quarter blitzkrieg, the defense kept the score manageable. if nussmeier had taken this into consideration, he could've switched to the power run game/playaction plan, which i'm sure would've worked out better despite eating up the clock.

unfortunately, when they did break out the rushing game, they got...

3) TJ Yeldon fumbling away what seemed to be a scoring drive. This fumble wasn't what caused bama to lose overall, but i think it can be characterized as the moment any realistic hope of a bama victory vanished into the ether. cue more panic, momentum loss, shift of focus away from the ground game. Despite the first turnover he was involved in being AJ's fault, this turnover pretty much negated Yeldon as a real factor on offense.

4) Johnny Manziel just being Johnny Manziel; A&M taking advantage of the situation as a good team should & playing turnover-free ball. they kept their composure in a hostile environment, which was reflected in only 4 penalties for 26 yards vs 6 penalties for 56 for bama. there are a lot of things bama did/didn't do that cost them the game, but A&M playing the overall better game and creating/cashing in on opportunities was as big a factor as any on this list.

do i think if the schedule was reversed and LSU had to play A&M immediately after they played bama that their result would've been reversed? yeah, probably.

but i also believe that any team having a game like that before A&M would've likely lost as well. beaten up and worn out and having to play the aggies right when they start clicking on all cylinders? i can't see any team in the SEC as a lock in that scenario.

still, that's all "ifs" and "buts". the reality is that LSU beat A&M and bama beat LSU and A&M beat bama. what does this mean, exactly?

my only conclusions are that any top SEC team could beat any other top SEC team on any given day if the stars align just right. college football is crazy.