Started By
Message
Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:09 pm to Stonehog
quote:
If not for Newton Arkansas would have faced SC in the championship game and would have won the SEC.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Bama was ahead of y'all in 2010 BCS polls? Three way tie breaker between lsu, bama, and Arkansas goes to the highest bcs ranked...
Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:12 pm to chalupa
Wouldn't have been a tie because Bama and LSU would have been 6-2 SEC while Arkansas would have been 7-1. Of course, had Newton not been at Auburn, Bama and LSU would have probably beat them too and it would be a tie.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:14 pm to ztucke2
that makes waaay too much sense, edit that
Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:14 pm to ztucke2
pretty good for a lower "teer" program 

Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:22 pm to sugatowng
Gotcha, I was confused. I forgot we were hypothetically speaking about arky beating auburn.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:23 pm to sugatowng
Somehow I knew this thread would turn into a flame war. Call it a sixth sense?

Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:42 pm to ztucke2
quote:
Somehow I knew this thread would turn into a flame war. Call it a sixth sense?
The SEC rant is one huge flame fest.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 6:51 pm to chalupa
quote:
The SEC rant is one huge flame fest.
It's the off-season. What did you expect?
The time between the Super Bowl and March Madness is the slowest part of the year for sports in general.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 7:03 pm to CrimsonChin
I don't see their D being as dominant as last year, maybe close to the same, but definitely not better statistically. They lose some bad LBs, but will their new LBs be developed to the point that they can play in the SEC? They'll always have a good D-Line.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 10:25 pm to Stonehog
quote:
If not for Newton Arkansas would have faced SC in the championship game and would have won the SEC.

Neither Bama or LSU would have lost to Auburn that year either and with a 3 way tie Bama would have been SEC and National Champs.
This post was edited on 3/6/12 at 10:30 pm
Posted on 3/6/12 at 10:29 pm to CrimsonChin
quote:
LSU doesn't just look unbeatable but actually may be unbeatable.
Idk about all that but here's a fun fact....
4 out of the last 5 national champs have had first year starters at QB (including the last 3). So all this talk about Mett (and LSU) having problems because he's a first year starter in the SEC doesn't seem to make much sense.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 10:29 pm to chalupa
quote:
quote:
If not for Newton Arkansas would have faced SC in the championship game and would have won the SEC.
If not for Karnell Hatcher, LSU would have taken care of Ohio State in the Sugar Bowl.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 10:39 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
I don't see their D being as dominant as last year, maybe close to the same, but definitely not better statistically.
I think they will be better statistically just because the schedule will be easier and instead of Oregon and West Virginia, they will be playing Idaho and Towson and the like. However, I think the secondary takes a small step back by losing Claiborne, and the LB's take a small step forward. D-line and Special Teams will be as good as ever. Probably not as good as last year's team but absolutely talented enough to win it all next year.
Posted on 3/7/12 at 12:29 am to RB10
quote:
4 out of the last 5 national champs have had first year starters at QB (including the last 3).
That's true I guess - really only Cam Newton was a game changer among the last few QBs of BCS NCG winners... of course LSU of last year shows that you can lose it if your QB is not even average
Posted on 3/7/12 at 1:06 am to CrimsonChin
No.
Lost their best WR.
Their LB's are meh.
Lost their best CB.
Lost their best WR.
Their LB's are meh.
Lost their best CB.
Popular
Back to top
