Started By
Message
re: Les Miles on schedule disadvantage
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:01 pm to NATidefan
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:01 pm to NATidefan
quote:
Your welcome, so quit bitching. Schedules rotate, teams get better and worse. In the long run its fair and all works out.
You bet your arse we will find something to bitch about next year too.
1
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:01 pm to joeyb147
quote:
He didn't exactly have the best record against the Zooker.
Well perhaps Zook wasn't the coach the entire time from 2000-2004, but during that time LSU went 2-3 against Florida, and we even lost to them during our championship run (AT HOME).
Yeah, Saban got owned by Florida while at LSU.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:01 pm to Adam Banks
quote:
Thank you Problem is these two years are hand picked.
Nope, not exactly. See my bridge schedule isn't random thread.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:02 pm to Adam Banks
quote:
The fact you are trying to use State in your argument is telling.
Fine. Take them out. I just gave you a list of ranked teams we beat. Continue to parse words all you want. Nothing is going to change the fact that Alabama is the 13-1 national champs and LSU is the 10-3 Capital One Bowl losers. Only LSU fans could somehow derail this thread into an argument that the same team who just lost to Clemson should have been the national champs.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:03 pm to Adam Banks
quote:
You bet your arse we will find something to bitch about next year too
I'd bet my house on it.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:04 pm to PortCityTiger82
Like moths to a flame. 
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:04 pm to TxTiger82
quote:
Because LSU was garbage in 2012. I said it. Its true. Championship teams don't play like arse on the road. They just don't.
Or at home, but Bama is the champ. Georgia won the East after losing to USCe on the road. Beat bama and they are the champs.
Did Alabama have an easier schedule? Yes.
Does LSU or A&M have any excuse for losing games? No.
Did Bama prove they belonged in the SECCG? Yes.
An argument could be made that Florida, A&M, LSU, USCe, and Georgia all were pretty much evenly matched teams. It sucks that Bama got the break, but frick Tennessee. They're supposed to be good. frick Missouri for shitting the bed and getting injuries.
The main point, however, is LSU had a chance to prove it all on the field and failed. LSU had a chance to prove their worth and beat the (seemingly) #1 East team (UF) and failed. LSU had the opportunity to beat Bama and take their place in the SECCG, but failed. So, complaining about the schedule does nothing. Failing to beat Florida and Bama negates all arguments when Bama beats Georgia in the SECCG.
That's it.
Giving Bama a harder scheduled does nothing for LSU but cool some jealousy. A&M has a really good shot at the SECCG this year. I don't want to even imagine the shite-storm that will cause if it happens, but LSU has a chance to stop it ON THE FIELD. Prove you are the baddest motherfrickers on the block. Hell, give us your schedule. We welcome it. We want to prove that we are the bad-asses. LSU fans should own it.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:05 pm to TxTiger82
quote:
Despite the fact that LSU wasn't championship material, I would still like to see a more equitable distribution of difficult opponents. If you don't, then you are in favor of an unequal playing field, and that basically make you dumb.
I am in favor or rotation, which is what has happened and will happen
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:07 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Or at home
LSU was good at home last year. That much is not in question.
quote:
Bama is the champ
Clearly this is also not in question. Thanks for stating the obvious.
quote:
Did Alabama have an easier schedule? Yes.
And there you go.
quote:
Giving Bama a harder scheduled does nothing for LSU but cool some jealousy
This is a dumb argument, quite frankly. If you put FLorida on Bama's schedule every year, you increase the odds that they lose another game every year quite a bit. If you can't see that, I don't know what to tell you.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:07 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Well, why didn't LSU beat Bama and Florida?
For the same reason that A&M didn't beat LSU or Florida, Alabama didn't beat A&M, Georgia didn't beat South Carolina, Florida didn't beat Georgia, etc. Because when you play top-tier teams, sometimes you lose. If you were LSU or Alabama last year, you lost half the time (2-2 for LSU, 1-1 for Bama). That's why having to play only two of them when the other one has to play four is such a HUGE advantage.
In the 2012 regular season, of the six SEC teams that won 10 or more games, only one of them had a winning record against the others collectively. Florida went 3-1 vs. LSU, South Carolina, A&M and Georgia. LSU went 2-2, Alabama went 1-1, Georgia went 1-1, A&M went 1-2 and South Carolina went 1-2.
So, we're talking about competition that only ONE out of SIX top-15 SEC teams could post a winning record against, and it somehow confuses you that playing four games against this competition while your other division rival only plays two is patently ridiculous and unfair?
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:08 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
I am in favor or rotation, which is what has happened and will happen
Well LSU has gotten slapped across the face by the "rotation" for three years in a row now. When does the rotation favor us? Bear in mind we played one of the most difficult schedules in CFB history in 2011, and will do so again in 2013.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:10 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Because when you play top-tier teams, sometimes you lose.
Exactly. Kaiser and NYCAuburn are promoting a tautological argument. "Well, you lost so you wouldn't have won anyways."
Makes zero sense.
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:11 pm to TxTiger82
quote:
Well LSU has gotten slapped across the face by the "rotation" for three years in a row now
you played UK, Vandy and UT in the past three years
quote:you also played one of the easiest sec schedules of the past 20 years
? Bear in mind we played one of the most difficult schedules in CFB history in 2011
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:13 pm to TxTiger82
quote:
Exactly. Kaiser and NYCAuburn are promoting a tautological argument. "Well, you lost so you wouldn't have won anyways."
pot meet fricking kettle
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:13 pm to TxTiger82
How about taking a map of the Southeastern US with the locations of the SEC schools on it and divide East vs. West geographically while considering "traditional" rivalries? That would result in the following:
SEC East:
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Alabama
Auburn
SEC West:
Arkansas
Vanderbilt
LSU
MS State
Ole Miss
TX A&M
Missouri
Vanderbilt
teams moved in bold
This allows:
The "big 4" to play each other every year; a stated pre-requisite.
These games would count as Division games so they will mean just that bit extra.
Moving to a 9 team schedule would allow SEC to maximize the number of SEC schools through their stadiums which would over time result in the most equitable schedules.
What are objective arguments against this?
SEC East:
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Alabama
Auburn
SEC West:
Arkansas
Vanderbilt
LSU
MS State
Ole Miss
TX A&M
Missouri
Vanderbilt
teams moved in bold
This allows:
The "big 4" to play each other every year; a stated pre-requisite.
These games would count as Division games so they will mean just that bit extra.
Moving to a 9 team schedule would allow SEC to maximize the number of SEC schools through their stadiums which would over time result in the most equitable schedules.
What are objective arguments against this?
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:14 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
In the 2012 regular season, of the six SEC teams that won 10 or more games, only one of them had a winning record against the others collectively. Florida went 3-1 vs. LSU, South Carolina, A&M and Georgia. LSU went 2-2, Alabama went 1-1, Georgia went 1-1, A&M went 1-2 and South Carolina went 1-2.
First, Bama went 2-1 (Georgia, and they went 1-2).
Second, LSU still had to beat Alabama to make it matter. If LSU has one loss and Alabama is undefeated, and LSU wins, guess who goes to the SECCG. It doesn't matter. The road to Atlanta ran through Tuscaloosa, as long as you don't lose more than 1 game.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:15 pm to frankenfish
I think everyone wants a 9 game slate, except the coaches (minus Saban).
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:15 pm to NATidefan
quote:
Schedules rotate, teams get better and worse. In the long run its fair and all works out
What's the long run? The only time it's been relevant is since we started having divisions. That was 21 seasons ago. Florida has dominated the East in ridiculously overwhelming fashion over that time. 21 years isn't the long run yet?
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:16 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
pot meet fricking kettle
I am not the one making an illogical argument. As I said, I am making a process-based argument. Let's make the scheduling rotation a little more fair by getting rid of the "permanent" rivalries.
That argument is not based on whether LSU won or lost anything. You, on the other hand, seem to be promoting some strange ex post facto tautology - "Oh but Bama is the best anyways so its all for naught."
Great. Take Bama's dick out of your mouth when you get a chance, bro.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 12:16 pm to frankenfish
quote:
What are objective arguments against this?
schedule inequalities
Page 17 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News