Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:09 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Whomever wins the SEC West the most over the next 10 years will have precisely DICK to do with how they performed in the past.
Demonstrably false. Statistically recruiting is at least strongly correlated with past success. Since recruiting is just about the most important thing that you do in college football, your bullshite is easily refuted.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:09 pm to wadewilson
quote:
He is right tho. Look how quickly Florida and Tennessee fell off.
Those were extenuating circumstances, but still.
Florida fell off because of Meyer and Tebow and it didnt last long.
you cannot even compare Tennessee to LSU because of the recruiting base in each state. We are on complete ends of the spectrum in that regard.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:10 pm to mrnegative
In order, if for some reason Bama has an off season and doesn't win;
A&M
LSU
Ole Miss
A&M
LSU
Ole Miss
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:12 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Whomever wins the SEC West the most over the next 10 years will have precisely DICK to do with how they performed in the past
So Mississippi State has just as much of a shot as Alabama eh?
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:13 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
In order, if for some reason Bama has what we refer to as 2000-2007;
FIFY
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:15 pm to therick711
Since past performance has no bearing on future performance, I look forward to A&M re-hiring Sherman, Fran, and to keep it fresh, Chan Gailey for all of eternity.
Can you imagine the board meeting? Sorry, Col. Chuck, but I can tell you that the coach's past performance has no bearing on their future performance. Where do you keep getting that horse shite from? Each year is completely independent.
Can you imagine the board meeting? Sorry, Col. Chuck, but I can tell you that the coach's past performance has no bearing on their future performance. Where do you keep getting that horse shite from? Each year is completely independent.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:16 pm to mrnegative
quote:
This is NOT the once in a lifetime OC every LSU fan thinks he is.
Its an improvement from last year. Last year where we were about 64 seconds from winning the west. Again.
quote:
I don't care about past success, and nobody should.
Thats your problem and Vanilla just gave you a pretty good reason as to why the past is relevant.
quote:
With Hill suspended, you won't be able to run your offense on the ground 80% of the time anymore
80%? We didnt do that anyway. Im taking it you havent seen the stable of running backs in BR? If you had, you would know that LSU will be fine and that you need to get your foot out of your mouth. And im fairly certain that Hill will be cleared by gametime so it wont matter anyway.
quote:
mett is not a good qb based on what ive seen of him.
you seen this?
LSU has proven that they dont need a good QB to be succesfull. What were your thoughts on Mauck, Flynn, or JJ???
quote:
You guys are gonna be experiencing a huge drop off in offensive production next year, and any same person should know that
nice. bookmarked
This post was edited on 4/30/13 at 3:35 pm
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:17 pm to spacewrangler
If atm can get by bama this year they might when the next one. But I believe if they have that much success Sumlin may go to the NFL within the next 3 years. Johnny football last year can make a coaching staff look pretty good. Take a look at Cam Newton. Over a 10 year span I will say LSU has more. I think Ole miss will be much improved over the next few years but I don;t think they outright win the west.
Bama 5
LSU 3
aTm 2
Bama 5
LSU 3
aTm 2
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:17 pm to im4LSU
quote:
any same person
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:18 pm to therick711
quote:
Demonstrably false. Statistically recruiting is at least strongly correlated with past success. Since recruiting is just about the most important thing that you do in college football, your bullshite is easily refuted.
You want to argue that A + B = C, but the truth is A + E = C. I agree that recruiting is one of the factors that dictates success, but only ONE of many. It is true that past success is a factor in recruiting, but many times is NOT demonstrable over the course of even a single year.
So if you want to argue that LSU is more talented and thereby will have more success, fine, but you can't project that out over the course of 10 years, given eligibility issues and whatnot.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:19 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
You want to argue that A + B = C, but the truth is A + E = C. I agree that recruiting is one of the factors that dictates success, but only ONE of many. It is true that past success is a factor in recruiting, but many times is NOT demonstrable over the course of even a single year.
So if you want to argue that LSU is more talented and thereby will have more success, fine, but you can't project that out over the course of 10 years, given eligibility issues and whatnot.
You said the past and history has NOTHING to do with future results. You were/are dead wrong. As long as we agree that you don't know what the frick you were talking about and were just repeating a trope you've seen posted here countless times by fans of losing programs, we're good. History is relevant and in recruiting HIGHLY relevant.
This is so laughably ignorant and wrong it is hilarious:
quote:
Whomever wins the SEC West the most over the next 10 years will have precisely DICK to do with how they performed in the past.
QED
This post was edited on 4/30/13 at 3:22 pm
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:20 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
So Mississippi State has just as much of a shot as Alabama eh?
Dear lord.
quote:
You want to argue that A + B = C, but the truth is A + E = C. I agree that recruiting is one of the factors that dictates success, but only ONE of many. It is true that past success is a factor in recruiting, but many times is NOT demonstrable over the course of even a single year.
So if you want to argue that LSU is more talented and thereby will have more success, fine, but you can't project that out over the course of 10 years, given eligibility issues and whatnot.
The adults are talking. Go fix me a sammich and STFU.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:21 pm to Indfanfromcol
quote:
Lets just be honest here, all three teams will be starting over with a new qb after next season.
That is certainly possible, but we don't know what Manziel's draft stock will be after this year.
Manziel is only 6-1 at best. Probably closer to 6 feet and around 200 pounds. Does he have an NFL arm? I don't know that.
He is not big enough to run the ball in the NFL on a consistent basis. Do you think Manziel will have a better NFL career than Michael Vick?
Manziel's draft stock for next year is not that certain to me.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:22 pm to therick711
quote:
You said the past and history has NOTHING to do with future results. You were/are dead wrong. As long as we agree that you don't know what the frick you were talking about and were just repeating at trope you've seen posted here countless times by fans of losing programs, we're good. History is relevant and in recruiting HIGHLY relevant.
There is NO WAY you can DEMONSTRATE that success 10 fricking years ago is helping recruiting NOW. frick off with that. You can't prove ANY of the bullshite you are running, and I am calling you out on it.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:23 pm to mrnegative
LSU
Ole Miss
TAM
Until you have won one, no reason to think you will ever win one. Ask Vandy.
Ole Miss
TAM
Until you have won one, no reason to think you will ever win one. Ask Vandy.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:24 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
There is NO WAY you can DEMONSTRATE that success 10 fricking years ago is helping recruiting NOW. frick off with that. You can't prove ANY of the bullshite you are running, and I am calling you out on it.
You are absolutely wrong AND you are misstating my argument and your completely baseless fricktard argument.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:26 pm to therick711
Demonstrate to me how LSU's past success means they will win more championships than any other team. Don't throw in recruiting or any other factor. SOLELY PAST SUCCESS.
...and unrustle your fricking jimmies.
...and unrustle your fricking jimmies.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:28 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Demonstrate to me how LSU's past success means they will win more championships than any other team. Don't throw in recruiting or any other factor. SOLELY PAST SUCCESS.
Demonstrate how their past success is irrelevant. Go ahead. Show me how that could possibly be. You can even use recruiting. I don't have to create an artificial construct to show you that you have no basis to say that it doesn't matter at all. Show me your proof, Mr. Science.
Here, I will prove your statement wrong.
LSU has won past SEC Championships
An SEC Championship is a successful season
As LSU wins additional SEC Championships, the margin for other teams to win more than them gets larger.
LSU's past success thus "means they will win more championships" as they are adding additional numbers by winning championships. It is axiomatic.
QED
any other brain busters, Mr. Wizard?
This post was edited on 4/30/13 at 3:30 pm
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:29 pm to therick711
A&M went 11-2 in the SEC. 6-6 the year before in the Big Twatever.
Next....
...and eat a fat one...
Next....
...and eat a fat one...
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News