Started By
Message
re: Texas A&M vs lsu 74-72
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:33 pm to PensaTigers
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:33 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
You seem to forget I destroy your argument with every post.
This one will be very easy.
No. I've never felt refs were paid to throw a game against lsu, ever. I also haven't complained about refs against a single game against Bama. Surprised? I clearly stated what I felt his motivation was, so here's my question.
Why do you have reading comprehension problems? Is it because you're carrying two debates at once and half assing this one with unintelligent drivel to drag it out or are you a complete moron?
Another victory post; you have an innate need to declare your victory in every single post you make. That is a common issue with morons because it makes them feel like, if they say it, people will believe them.
Please tell me again why the referees of the game decided that the children were going to get hurt because they were tired but chose to let A&M have the victory and not LSU?
Or am I not even on the right track? Maybe the right track is that the FInAL referee that stole the game from LSU was old and, according to you, he looked irritated and you can read souls and knew what he felt.
I guess I should just come right out and ask you, for the record, why the refs cheated LSU out of their victory that you say LSU rightfully won at least 3 times before the final whistle was blown.
Thanks for any explanations that seem logical.
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 11:35 pm
1
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:38 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
It seems you've been stomped so hard in this debate that you do whatever does online, switch gears and pretend you've been trolling all along and you aren't a complete idiot after all.
Bit of a coward, aren't ya? Why do you care what these morons think of you? I mean hell, I'm over here talking like a nerd because I couldn't care less what a forum board full of dumbasses think. It's just been a lot of fun putting you idiots in your place while I pass time at work.
Stop worrying about being exposed as the idiot you are, you'll never have to face any of these people anyways man, Jesus lol.
Now this is the 10th post in a row where you have preemptively declared yourself the winner. Good job. You are very convincing.
What was the referees name that took it upon himself to cruelly take away LSU's rightful victory?
Do you think if he worked out he would have been in better shape and maybe that would have allowed LSU to win because he wouldn't have wanted the game to end?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:44 pm to Bamax
Lol yeah I'm done feeding a troll with long winded responses. I keep pointing out how I'm destroying you to rub it in, it's sad that my motivation is too complex to ascertain.
Went w the home team who hasn't beaten the away team 7 times. Maybe didn't even care who won, just decided that he was ending it then and there since Texas was taking into an 8th overtime and the longest game in college football history.
The second question has been answered already. Fix your reading comprehension skills.
Went w the home team who hasn't beaten the away team 7 times. Maybe didn't even care who won, just decided that he was ending it then and there since Texas was taking into an 8th overtime and the longest game in college football history.
The second question has been answered already. Fix your reading comprehension skills.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:46 pm to Bamax
Dunno and dunno, great question ;)
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:47 pm to TigerLunatik
quote:
Key word, now.
I'm going to sum up the rest of your ridiculousness in this manner, if you are going to say Tulane and LSU are rivals, then you are going to have to say LSU and Bama are rivals. Tulane has only beaten LSU 4 times in the last 70 years, they are in a 2nd rate conference and have been an afterthought as a program for the last 3 or 4 decades. You're comparing them to teams that have won multiple national championships since then and that play each other every single season. By comparison LSU beat Bama less than 10 years ago. You have lost your mind. There is no need to debate this any further. Unless you're trolling, you should be really embarrassed.
For the 10th time, playing a team every season does not equal rivalry. You seem kind of stuck on that point.
I'm not saying LSU and Tulane are rivals; I'm saying Tulane is the only rival LSU has ever had and that rivalry did not end in 1969.
Also, Alabama and LSU have never been rivals and never will be due to any number of factors that have been somewhat discussed here.
quote:
quote:
Do you think it's time for the Alabama vs. LSU games to end?
They're in the same division in the same conference you dumbass. It's not a possibiltiy.
But, should the games end due to LSU's inability to provide any type of worthy competition to Alabama over the decades?
Is it fair for a nationally renowned and decorated team like Alabama to abuse a team like LSU simply for the fun of it?
I don't think it's very funny what Alabama has done to Vanderbilt and the Mississippi teams over time, or to LSU.
Should lesser teams that never have and never will provide competition to teams like the Alabama's, Ohio States, Notre Dames, etc...have those matches ended for the good of the lesser teams?
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 11:53 pm
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:51 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
Lol yeah I'm done feeding a troll with long winded responses. I keep pointing out how I'm destroying you to rub it in, it's sad that my motivation is too complex to ascertain.
Went w the home team who hasn't beaten the away team 7 times. Maybe didn't even care who won, just decided that he was ending it then and there since Texas was taking into an 8th overtime and the longest game in college football history.
The second question has been answered already. Fix your reading comprehension skills.
Okay, so again you state that you are winning but this time you say you are tired of winning so you are going to quit.
Is that what happened to LSU? Were they tired of winning against A&M and just decided to quit? Maybe? Or, I guess you are going to stick with the MuH RefS line.
That's okay, you hang in there and keep on winning and maybe, if the right referees are in the game, LSU might start winning too.
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 11:52 pm
Posted on 3/20/19 at 11:58 pm to PensaTigers
quote:
Dunno and dunno, great question ;)
So you don't know the name of the ref that illegally stole LSU's victory . You also don't know if the ref worked out if that would have allowed him to have more stamina and not just give the game to A&M because he was tired.
What exactly do you know other than the fact that LSU won the game at least 3 times, as you say, prior to the final whistle?
This post was edited on 3/21/19 at 12:00 am
Posted on 3/21/19 at 12:05 am to Bamax
Nope. Greedy defended his guy perfectly. Both offenses were driving at will albeit a missed pass here and there (from both teams). Defenses were too worn out to stay on receivers or get in the backfield. Both teams qbs stood in the pocket all day. Great question, thanks for asking!
Posted on 3/21/19 at 12:24 am to PensaTigers
quote:
Nope. Greedy defended his guy perfectly. Both offenses were driving at will albeit a missed pass here and there (from both teams). Defenses were too worn out to stay on receivers or get in the backfield. Both teams qbs stood in the pocket all day. Great question, thanks for asking!
What does any of that have to do with the refs that decided neither team would be allowed to continue and gave A&M the victory, just because?
Posted on 3/21/19 at 12:38 am to Bamax
quote:
For the 10th time, playing a team every season does not equal rivalry.
This is exactly what you said...
quote:
Rivals are built up over time, not because a coach left the NFL to coach a college team. Just as Tulane wasn't competitive with LSU for a long, long time, they were still LSU's rival until 2009
So are Rivals built up by playing each other often or not?
You also said...
quote:
For 80% of it's existence as a football team, LSU was basically Alabama's homecoming game.
Tulane beat LSU four times in 70 years. You're using one set of criteria to prove your argument with LSU and Bama while completely ignoring the same set of criteria with LSU and Tulane.
quote:
But, should the games end due to LSU's inability to provide any type of worthy competition to Alabama over the decades?
Is it fair for a nationally renowned and decorated team like Alabama to abuse a team like LSU simply for the fun of it?
LSU won two national championships in the 2000s and you're acting like we're Louisiana Tech.
quote:
I don't think it's very funny what Alabama has done to Vanderbilt and the Mississippi teams over time, or to LSU.
You're really going full retard. You've compared LSU/Tulane to Ohio State/Michigan and now you're comparing Vandy, Mississippi State and Ole Miss to LSU. Ole Miss and Vandy haven't even made it to the SECCG yet. LSU has been there 5 times and won 4.
Another tidbit is that LSU has won 3 national championships in the past 70 years while Tulane has only beaten LSU 4 times in that spam. By your own logic of Bama scheduling LSU for homecoming, that isn't a rivalry. You're saying that since they beat us 3 times in a 4 year span in the early 80s (30 years) then that's ok, but since LSU hasn't beaten Bama in 9 years then they shouldn't play anymore.
I'm not sure how I past over this gem....
quote:
I propose that Alabama may need to end their games against LSU due to lack of competition.
This could be done in the same manner as LSU liquidated Tulane from their schedule and for the same reasons. Alabama doesn't have to follow SEC rules so, that should not be an obstacle as far as the SEC is concerned.
LSU is WAY more competitive with Bama than Tulane is with LSU over thepast 70 years. LSU was able to stop playing Tulane because Tulane left the conference. Bama can't just stop playing LSU because they're in the same division. You've really gone off the rails here.
We aren't talking Ga Tech and UGA or South Carolina and Clemson or even Florida State and Florida. Tulane isn't in a P5 conference and they weren't in a BCS conference. This is a big of an apples and oranges comparison as I've seen in a long time.
Posted on 3/21/19 at 1:07 am to TigerLunatik
quote:
For the 10th time, playing a team every season does not equal rivalry.
That is not exactly what I said or what you quoted. I said teams do not have to play every season to be rivals. I also stated that rivalries are built up over time. In this, I meant over time with "competitive" play. LSU has not provided this to Alabama, not just in the last 10 years but, over time LSU has not provided good competition to Alabama.
As an example, Alabama has not played Auburn every season but, they are one of Alabama's rivals.
Why? Because they play tough against Alabama and give fans of both teams something to cheer for and look forward to. This isn't the case with LSU. LSU is, in relation to Alabama, about on the same level as Vanderbilt or the Mississippi teams and these teams aren't rivals of Alabama either.
Not at all. Tulane was LSU's rival due to being in close proximity to each other and early competitiveness before LSU came to dominate the series.
Also, as stated, the difference between the way LSU did Tulane is not that much different than the way Alabama has done LSU but, that doesn't make it a rivalry.
Just beating a team to death doesn't equate to a rivalry either.
Exactly, in relation to Alabama, LSU is absolutely not any better than Vandy or Mississippi State or Ole Miss. I'm saying that perhaps Alabama shouldn't play LSU any longer because they suck total arse in the history of our games together. I really don't care what LSU has accomplished vs. other teams or in other games.
Incorrect and dishonest. I never said Alabama should not play LSU due to the last 9 years. I've stated clearly that LSU's whole body of work against Alabama is not much better than Tulane's against LSU. That is why the game should probably be discontinued. It's pointless to beat a person that is already down; it takes a psychopathic personality to do that.
That's just the thing though. LSU is not much better at all against Alabama than Tulane was against LSU; I've already provided the stats on that.
Alabama is (53-25-5) against LSU
LSU is (69-22-7) against Tulane
It just gets boring playing LSU season after season, decade after decade, knowing they aren't ever going to do anything but still having to go through the routine.
I don't know, I guess we just kind of feel about LSU like LSU felt about Tulane.
For the 10th time, playing a team every season does not equal rivalry.
quote:
This is exactly what you said...
quote:
Rivals are built up over time, not because a coach left the NFL to coach a college team. Just as Tulane wasn't competitive with LSU for a long, long time, they were still LSU's rival until 2009
So are Rivals built up by playing each other often or not?
That is not exactly what I said or what you quoted. I said teams do not have to play every season to be rivals. I also stated that rivalries are built up over time. In this, I meant over time with "competitive" play. LSU has not provided this to Alabama, not just in the last 10 years but, over time LSU has not provided good competition to Alabama.
As an example, Alabama has not played Auburn every season but, they are one of Alabama's rivals.
Why? Because they play tough against Alabama and give fans of both teams something to cheer for and look forward to. This isn't the case with LSU. LSU is, in relation to Alabama, about on the same level as Vanderbilt or the Mississippi teams and these teams aren't rivals of Alabama either.
quote:
You also said...
quote:
For 80% of it's existence as a football team, LSU was basically Alabama's homecoming game.
Tulane beat LSU four times in 70 years. You're using one set of criteria to prove your argument with LSU and Bama while completely ignoring the same set of criteria with LSU and Tulane.
Not at all. Tulane was LSU's rival due to being in close proximity to each other and early competitiveness before LSU came to dominate the series.
Also, as stated, the difference between the way LSU did Tulane is not that much different than the way Alabama has done LSU but, that doesn't make it a rivalry.
Just beating a team to death doesn't equate to a rivalry either.
quote:
quote:
But, should the games end due to LSU's inability to provide any type of worthy competition to Alabama over the decades?
Is it fair for a nationally renowned and decorated team like Alabama to abuse a team like LSU simply for the fun of it?
LSU won two national championships in the 2000s and you're acting like we're Louisiana Tech.
quote:
I don't think it's very funny what Alabama has done to Vanderbilt and the Mississippi teams over time, or to LSU.
You're really going full retard. You've compared LSU/Tulane to Ohio State/Michigan and now you're comparing Vandy, Mississippi State and Ole Miss to LSU. Ole Miss and Vandy haven't even made it to the SECCG yet. LSU has been there 5 times and won 4.
Exactly, in relation to Alabama, LSU is absolutely not any better than Vandy or Mississippi State or Ole Miss. I'm saying that perhaps Alabama shouldn't play LSU any longer because they suck total arse in the history of our games together. I really don't care what LSU has accomplished vs. other teams or in other games.
quote:
Another tidbit is that LSU has won 3 national championships in the past 70 years while Tulane has only beaten LSU 4 times in that spam. By your own logic of Bama scheduling LSU for homecoming, that isn't a rivalry. You're saying that since they beat us 3 times in a 4 year span in the early 80s (30 years) then that's ok, but since LSU hasn't beaten Bama in 9 years then they shouldn't play anymore.
Incorrect and dishonest. I never said Alabama should not play LSU due to the last 9 years. I've stated clearly that LSU's whole body of work against Alabama is not much better than Tulane's against LSU. That is why the game should probably be discontinued. It's pointless to beat a person that is already down; it takes a psychopathic personality to do that.
quote:
I'm not sure how I past over this gem....
quote:
I propose that Alabama may need to end their games against LSU due to lack of competition.
This could be done in the same manner as LSU liquidated Tulane from their schedule and for the same reasons. Alabama doesn't have to follow SEC rules so, that should not be an obstacle as far as the SEC is concerned.
LSU is WAY more competitive with Bama than Tulane is with LSU over thepast 70 years. LSU was able to stop playing Tulane because Tulane left the conference. Bama can't just stop playing LSU because they're in the same division. You've really gone off the rails here.
That's just the thing though. LSU is not much better at all against Alabama than Tulane was against LSU; I've already provided the stats on that.
Alabama is (53-25-5) against LSU
LSU is (69-22-7) against Tulane
quote:
We aren't talking Ga Tech and UGA or South Carolina and Clemson or even Florida State and Florida. Tulane isn't in a P5 conference and they weren't in a BCS conference. This is a big of an apples and oranges comparison as I've seen in a long time.
It just gets boring playing LSU season after season, decade after decade, knowing they aren't ever going to do anything but still having to go through the routine.
I don't know, I guess we just kind of feel about LSU like LSU felt about Tulane.
Posted on 3/21/19 at 1:22 am to Bamax
quote:
That is not exactly what I said or what you quoted.
bullshite. You specifcally said...
quote:
Rivals are built up over time
quote:
I also stated that rivalries are built up over time. In this, I meant over time with "competitive" play. LSU has not provided this to Alabama, not just in the last 10 years but, over time LSU has not provided good competition to Alabama.
No shite. But you aren't applying this "competitive" play to Tulane in relation to LSU. You're being beyond hypocritical to the point of stupidity.
quote:
As an example, Alabama has not played Auburn every season but, they are one of Alabama's rivals.
Why? Because they play tough against Alabama and give fans of both teams something to cheer for and look forward to.
Again you're using one set of criteria to prove the point you're trying to make and then not applying that same criteria to the other point you're trying to make. LSU and Tulane hasn't been competitive for over 70 years.
quote:
LSU is, in relation to Alabama, about on the same level as Vanderbilt or the Mississippi teams and these teams aren't rivals of Alabama either.
This is just dumb.
quote:
Tulane was LSU's rival due to being in close proximity to each other and early competitiveness before LSU came to dominate the series.
70 years. It hasn't been "competitive play" (as you're using in your other argument) for 70 years.
quote:
I guess we just kind of feel about LSU like LSU felt about Tulane.
Except LSU is 1000x the program that Tulane is. You're just not very good at this. I can't remember the last time I encountered someone on this site that was as hypocrtitical as you've been in this thread.
Posted on 3/21/19 at 1:50 am to TigerLunatik
quote:
quote:
That is not exactly what I said or what you quoted.
bullshite. You specifcally said...
quote:
Rivals are built up over time
Correct. If the two teams are evenly matched or happen to be in the same state. Alabama has played Ole Miss for a very long time but, no rivalry. Understand?
quote:
quote:
I also stated that rivalries are built up over time. In this, I meant over time with "competitive" play. LSU has not provided this to Alabama, not just in the last 10 years but, over time LSU has not provided good competition to Alabama.
No shite. But you aren't applying this "competitive" play to Tulane in relation to LSU. You're being beyond hypocritical to the point of stupidity.
Not at all. Tulane, whether you realize this or not, was a natural rival to LSU simply due to being in-state and being in the same conference for a number of years. Their respective fans discussed the games at work, at home, in grocery stores, at gas stations, etc... There was common cause between them. None of this ever applied to Alabama and LSU.
You know, kind of like South Carolina and Clemson are rivals but aren't in the same conference.
quote:
quote:
As an example, Alabama has not played Auburn every season but, they are one of Alabama's rivals.
Why? Because they play tough against Alabama and give fans of both teams something to cheer for and look forward to.
Again you're using one set of criteria to prove the point you're trying to make and then not applying that same criteria to the other point you're trying to make. LSU and Tulane hasn't been competitive for over 70 years.
Yes, but it was still a rivalry and that rivalry did not end until 2009, when the series of games was ended.
quote:
quote:
LSU is, in relation to Alabama, about on the same level as Vanderbilt or the Mississippi teams and these teams aren't rivals of Alabama either.
This is just dumb.
Not really. Many Alabama fans see LSU as a weak sister, minus the Saban years and just a few years of the Miles era. That doesn't make a rivalry, bro.
quote:
quote:
Tulane was LSU's rival due to being in close proximity to each other and early competitiveness before LSU came to dominate the series.
70 years. It hasn't been "competitive play" (as you're using in your other argument) for 70 years.
I'm not using only one criteria for what composes a rivalry, as there are many things involved.
quote:
quote:
I guess we just kind of feel about LSU like LSU felt about Tulane.
Except LSU is 1000x the program that Tulane is. You're just not very good at this. I can't remember the last time I encountered someone on this site that was as hypocrtitical as you've been in this thread.
But not 1000 times the program when it comes to games played against Alabama, as they are perennial losers in that regard for a little over 120 years.
Posted on 3/21/19 at 4:19 am to WilliamTaylor21
quote:
This post was edited on 3/21/19 at 4:20 am
Posted on 3/21/19 at 5:00 am to Bamax
quote:
OP is a cousin of Tua and more Alabama than you are Clemson.
Yep, REAUX TIDE!!!! And I'm Jimbo's third cousin twice removed on his mom's side of her uncle's divorce.
Posted on 3/21/19 at 5:15 am to Bamax
:rotflmao: :rotflmao:
Posted on 3/21/19 at 7:15 am to Ted2010
quote:
Score 72 and still lose? At least they didn't give that coach an extension.
We can go a few more! 72 and still lose and still earn a berth to a BCS bowl (over aTm) and finished the final polls ranked higher than aTm.
Not only is it very rare for aTm to beat LSU in football, but when they do, LSU gets treated as if the game was never played. #owned
Posted on 3/21/19 at 7:32 am to Bamax
quote:
If the two teams are evenly matched or happen to be in the same state.
Simply being in the same state doesn't make a rivalry if one team only wins 4 times in 70 years.
quote:
Tulane, whether you realize this or not, was a natural rival to LSU simply due to being in-state and being in the same conference for a number of years.
They haven't been in the same conference since 1966. That's over 50 years. This is a non-issue now. By comparison LSU has played Bama more times since 1950 than they've played Tulane and LSU has one 5 times as many games vs Bama than Tulane has vs LSU. LSU has been in the same conference as Bama for a longer period of time than they were with Tulane.
quote:
Their respective fans discussed the games at work, at home, in grocery stores, at gas stations, etc... There was common cause between them. None of this ever applied to Alabama and LSU.
Please tell me you're joking. LSU fans seem to be obsessed with Bama and have been for quite some time. I promise you that people talk about this game year round all over the place. Another strike against your argument.
quote:
You know, kind of like South Carolina and Clemson are rivals but aren't in the same conference.
Already been addressed. Clemson is in another competitive conference and has been competitive in the series. Neither team has won only 4 times in the last 70 years. You've been the one stressing competitiveness except in the one the rivalry you're trying to manufacture.
quote:
it was still a rivalry and that rivalry did not end until 2009, when the series of games was ended.
Maybe LSU and Tulane were rivals in the 60s, maybe even in the 70s, but not in my lifetime. When I was a kid in the 80s they weren't considered a rivalry to us.
quote:
Many Alabama fans see LSU as a weak sister, minus the Saban years and just a few years of the Miles era. That doesn't make a rivalry, bro.
Again for about the one hundredth time, this is exactly how LSU fans feel about Tulane and have for my 44 years walking the planet Tulane is an afterthought. As I've been telling you, every single thing you're applying to LSU from a Bama perspective is the same if not more so how LSU feels about Tulane. Also again, I don't think LSU is a rival to Bama. I'm simply using your logic to show you how ludicrous what you're saying about Tulane is.
quote:
But not 1000 times the program when it comes to games played against Alabama, as they are perennial losers in that regard for a little over 120 years.
AND TULANE IS A PERRINIAL LOSER TO LSU FOR THE PAST 70 YEARS STRAIGHT!!
LSU has been WAY more competitive with Bama than Tulane has been with LSU dumbass.
Posted on 3/21/19 at 7:37 am to Shadowlink
quote:
I think it's Hawaiian for 2nd place in the Heisman vote.
No one remembers second place.
He might not even make it to New York this year.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News