Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:11 am to Korin
quote:
"It's preposterous! Outrageous! Rabble rabble!"
So. You are upset?
This post was edited on 5/18/18 at 8:16 am
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:14 am to apiratelifeforme
quote:
UT has a winning record against UGA
UT has a better all time winning % than UGA
UT has more National Championships than UGA
UT has more conference championships than UGA
UT has more all time wins than UGA
UT has more all-americans than UGA
UT has more NFL draft picks than UGA
UT has more weeks in the AP poll than UGA
UT has more weeks at #1 than UGA
Dude. I said Tenessee was ahead of Georgia! What do you want from me?
I argued for Tennessee deserving to be 2nd.
This post was edited on 5/18/18 at 8:40 am
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:15 am to Dawgfanman
UGA is behind LSU
1. Bama
2. UT(by a bees dick though)
3. LSu (by a bees dick over UGA)
4. UGA
1. Bama
2. UT(by a bees dick though)
3. LSu (by a bees dick over UGA)
4. UGA
This post was edited on 5/18/18 at 8:20 am
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:21 am to lsupride87
quote:
UGA is behind LSU
It's a similar situation to UGA vs UF. UGA has the edge on LSU on MOST on-field things (more wins, better win %, more SEC titles, more bowl games, better bowl win %) while LSU has the edge in the ancillary things (weeks ranked, draft picks, all americans, etc).
What I can see giving LSU the slight edge is the national titles at 3 to 2.
UGA/LSU/UF/AU are all so, so very close to each other it could only take one big season for one to separate. For instance if we won the title last year I dont' think there's any doubt we would be the top of that group of 4.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:22 am to WG_Dawg
quote:It is 4 to 2 according to the NCAA
What I can see giving LSU the slight edge is the national titles at 3 to 2.
quote:I wouldnt considered weeks ranked and weeks at number 1 ancillary
while LSU has the edge in the ancillary things (weeks ranked
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:32 am to lsupride87
quote:
It is 4 to 2 according to the NCAA
58, 03, 07 right? I thought that was generally agreed upon, what am I missing? If you want to count any 'ol poll that has you #1 like bama does we could claim 5, but we generally just land on 2.
quote:
I wouldnt considered weeks ranked and weeks at number 1 ancillary
It's a poll..essentially a popularity contest. SEC titles, wins, bowl games...those are things that aren't subjective and not open to debate.
Again though, you can split hairs however. I agree that LSU probably has a SLIGHT edge over UGA, simply on the back of 1 more title.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:49 am to WG_Dawg
I’m not arguing for it, but if I had to guess it would be 1908.
“Point per minute” team. More points than minutes played. Certainly a great LSU team from before anyone knew what the HMS Titanic was.
“Point per minute” team. More points than minutes played. Certainly a great LSU team from before anyone knew what the HMS Titanic was.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 8:55 am to TFS4E
I don’t care because it happened before my paw paw was born, but 1908 is recognized by every source besides Lsu
Posted on 5/18/18 at 12:02 pm to lsupride87
Most UGA fans would trade their history with any of the teams that have won a recent title. Living through a championship season is the goal of every fan
Posted on 5/18/18 at 12:27 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
UGA/LSU/UF/AU are all so, so very close to each other
Posted on 5/18/18 at 12:30 pm to Korin
quote:
UGA/LSU/UF/AU are all so, so very close to each other
why is that popcorn worthy?
Posted on 5/18/18 at 12:31 pm to Pdubntrub
quote:
Most UGA fans would trade their history with any of the teams that have won a recent title.
our entire history? Not a chance. A title is a title is a title, it doesn't matter if it was won 5 months ago or 5 years ago or 50 years ago, they still all count the same.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 1:05 pm to WG_Dawg
Not to me. I'd rather my team win 10 while I'm alive than 15 before I was born
Posted on 5/18/18 at 1:05 pm to Pdubntrub
It's cute, he thinks a title that was retroactively claimed over 40 years later is the same as winning the BCS or CFP.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 1:06 pm to Korin
quote:
It's cute, he thinks a title that was retroactively claimed over 40 years later is the same as winning the BCS or CFP.
so your 96 title doesn't count? Interesting take. Also we only claim 2 that we have a legit claim to, we could easily claim 3 more but we realize those are dubious so we do the right thing and just "recognize" the season but don't call them titles.
This post was edited on 5/18/18 at 1:09 pm
Posted on 5/18/18 at 1:09 pm to WG_Dawg
Unfortunately it counts. They beat us bad that night. Wuerful and Spurrier were magic
Posted on 5/18/18 at 1:11 pm to Pdubntrub
yeah obviously it counts. Korin was loosely trying to claim that all titles prior to 1998 are somehow less valid than ones after.
Hear that? Your 93 and 99 titles are now questionable. Sorry dude.
Hear that? Your 93 and 99 titles are now questionable. Sorry dude.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 1:13 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
so your 96 title doesn't count?
That's the system you agreed to play under.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 1:14 pm to Pdubntrub
quote:
Unfortunately it counts. They beat us bad that night. Wuerful and Spurrier were magic
The difference was Spurrier FINALLY putting Wuerffel in the shotgun after he got destroyed in the first FSU game.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News