- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: ~~~ESPN Preseason Top 25 Released~~~
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:19 am to Mr. Hangover
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:19 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
so does SC, Auburn, Florida, Washington (maybe), Arkansas, and MSU
was a response to this
quote:
I know its fashionable to bash them, but playing them is not the same as scheduling Sun Belt or FCS teams. They have talent and could be good
and that was a response to this:
quote:
and don't say ND is good, because they're not
quote:
how is my statement incorrect?
those teams are talented and could compete in their respective conferences if they could get their shite together
its not, but I never said anything about any of those teams, I just said ND could be good. Personally I think they will be at least top 15 level.
quote:
so we aren't allowed to use past trends to predict future outcomes?
you're allowed to use what ever trends you want. The way you use said past information may or may not be relevant and may or may not be logical.
quote:
FSU gets picked on for choking consistently in this decade, so why can't notre dame?
Again, you can pick on them all you want, for what ever reason you want. But saying they are bad, because they are over rated most times is wrong. A team that starts at #6 and finishes #24 is not a bad team, just one that was over rated So rail on them all you want, but don't say they are "bad" just so you can claim some one else's schedule is weak.
quote:
SEC homerism? so you don't agree that the SEC is the best conference in america by far?
please show where I said it wasn't.
quote:
please tell me, when's the last time any team (not from the SEC) won the national championship??
2005, what does that have to do with anything? Its more recently than USCe, MSU or Arky have won the NC. Florida last won it in 2008, they were #2 in 2009. Doesn't change the fact that there weren't any good last year and don't look to be very good this year.
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 10:20 am
2
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:That depends. What assumption are you going to give Arkansas? That the instability of their coaching situation doesn't impact their season? That they fix their WR dropsies problem?
let's just assume they fix the red zone-turnover issue, what really separates them from arkansas?
Saying Notre Dame + a big assumption in their favor is comparable to Arkansas as-is, basically equates to saying that Arkansas is significantly better than Notre Dame as-is.
I'm not suggesting the Irish are going to be plagued by the exact nature and number of red-zone turnovers, but to say the problem goes away entirely is a pretty big assumption.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:25 am to King Joey
quote:
I don't see anything like @Florida, @Akansas, South Carolina and @Auburn on SC's schedule.
I never said USC's schedule was harder or even equal, just that LSU (and Bama) will probably be favored over everyone on their schedules by more than 7 except each other.
quote:
and having Notre Dame be the 3rd (maybe 4th, but maybe 2nd depending
Notre Dame could be in the 2-4 range on LSU or Bama's schedule. They are on par with Arky and USCe. At this point they look better than Florida and Auburn.
LSU certainly has a tougher schedule than USC because the SEC is much deeper than the Pac-12.
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 10:27 am
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:25 am to LSUbase13
quote:
7. Florida St. This shite again?
they had no running game last year. There is still a lot of youth on their O-line I think. Can't do much worse running the ball than they did last year, they probably will improve some.
And they need to cut out all of those penalties. They may have been the most penalized team in CFB last year. This has been going on for awhile too it seems like. They constantly shoot themselves in the foot.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:28 am to LooseCannon22282
So after 9 pages of argument we are back where we all started:
Unless you play in the SEC, or somehow schedule 3 away SEC games in your non-conference schedule...you can't be good.
Unless you play in the SEC, or somehow schedule 3 away SEC games in your non-conference schedule...you can't be good.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:28 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
please tell me, when's the last time any team (not from the SEC) won the national championship??
2005, what does that have to do with anything? Its more recently than USCe, MSU or Arky have won the NC. Florida last won it in 2008, they were #2 in 2009. Doesn't change the fact that there weren't any good last year and don't look to be very good this year.
you pick and choose the smallest details of my side of the story to contest.. why can't you just get over the fact that notre dame WILL NOT finish the season in the top 20 and that USC's schedule is not comparable to LSU's or Bama's.. i'd love to see USC play ND's schedule, they'd probably finish 8-4 or 7-5
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:40 am to King Joey
quote:
What assumption are you going to give Arkansas
I'm just considering them talent wise. You're right, the wheels could come off without Petrino.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:41 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:Any more so than the jury on Stanford without Luck? They haven't had a winning season without him since Tyrone Willingham. And I don't mean a top 5/top 10 season, I mean winning more games than they lose. 5-7 is the best they've done without Andrew Luck since 2001. And they don't have Harbaugh anymore, the guy who built Stanford (with the benefit of Luck) into the power it has been the last 2 years from the rubble of what it was 5 years ago.
The jury is out on Florida and Mushcamp
And you want to talk about juries still being out, how about Arizona State, Arizona, Washington and Notre Dame? 8-5 as an independent doesn't sway many more juries than 7-6 in the SEC.
If you want to see how the schedules shake out, just list both teams' schedules in order of challenge, and see where Washington falls on each of them. If you have the Huskies in the same spot on both our opponent rankings, then I don't know what to tell you other than take your money to Vegas and win a fortune. Right now, I see Oregon, Stanford and Notre Dame as bigger challenges than Washington. That's it. And that's assuming Stanford can come even close to sustaining without Luck.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Somewhat, but remember giving up much fewer yards can still result in giving up 3 points. A turnover always results in giving up zero points (on that drive, obviously). I think the red-zone TD vs. FG stats of the 400 yards/3-4 TO defense would be trememdously important in figuring whose more likely to give up more points.
200 yards will eliminate a ton of drives for the opponent, also though
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:49 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
you pick and choose the smallest details of my side of the story to contest
no I don't. You said Notre Dame is not good, I disagree. you also said USC would be favored by 2 scores over everyone they play but Oregon and I contend that LSU will be favored by that amount (or close to itat least) over everyone we play except Alabama. Clearly there is a difference between being 24 point favs and 8, but that point stands.
quote:
hy can't you just get over the fact that notre dame WILL NOT finish the season in the top 20
Fact? Do you have a link for this fact Nostradamus?
You are just proving my point that you hate Notre Dame and are basing your opinion on just that. quote:
USC's schedule is not comparable to LSU's or Bama's
probably not, but what most of you SECtards don't get is the difference is marginal. The SEC is better than the Pac 12, but the Pac 12 is not the Sun Belt either. A team like Florida would not have won or even contended in the Pac 12 last year. At best they would have been 4th.
quote:
i'd love to see USC play ND's schedule, they'd probably finish 8-4 or 7-5
Uh, oh, now you've gone full blown retard
USC is very good, but they are also lacking depth. If they have a rash of injuries, they could drop a couple of games. If however, they remain reasonably healthy, there is no rational reason to think they won't be BCS contenders at the very least. The real trouble for them and Oregon is there will almost certainly be a rematch since they are in different divisions.
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 10:55 am
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:56 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
i'd love to see USC play ND's schedule, they'd probably finish 8-4 or 7-5
Really???????
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:57 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
USC is very good, but they are also lacking depth
Bingo.
Any number of significant injuries and USC is in big trouble. Even worse so in 2013 and 2014.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:57 am to H-Town Tiger
you called me a retard, then proved my point with your rebuttle (sp?)... you said
which is why i said,
quote:
USC is very good, but they are also lacking depth.
which is why i said,
quote:
i'd love to see USC play ND's schedule, they'd probably finish 8-4 or 7-5
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:58 am to dukke v
quote:
Really???????
yes dukke, really
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:59 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
which is why i said, quote:i'd love to see USC play ND's schedule, they'd probably finish 8-4 or 7-5
So by this logic, If ND played Usc's schedule they would be preaseason # 1??????????????
Posted on 5/1/12 at 11:02 am to dukke v
quote:
So by this logic, If ND played Usc's schedule they would be preaseason # 1??
no, i never said that.. ND will be 1 or 2 games above .500 at the most when it's all said and done
Posted on 5/1/12 at 11:04 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:No, I don't, and we also won that game going away. Defensive stats in a win that isn't particularly close down the stretch are not as reliable as indicators as defensive stats in a game that is tightly contested until the end (like the 3 OT game).
Do you judge LSU's pass defense bashed solely on the WVU game?
quote:How is predicting a team that finished #6 last year won't finish five full spots higher -- and higher than every other team in the country -- not using past performance? If their performance this year is even remotely similar to their performance last year, there is very little chance of them being #1. Predicting them to be #1 is predicting a huge positive shift in their performance over the course of the season. Let me ask you this: do you think a 1-loss SC would be #1 ahead of a 1-loss LSU, Alabama, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Auburn, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State? I don't, and I don't see it as likely they'll finish with a better record than enough of those teams to end up #1 (or more relevantly, in the top 2 to get a chance in the National Championship Game).
USC finished 11-2 last year, ranked #6 in the AP, they were ineligible for the coaches poll due to probation. You are not using past performance as a guide, you are just cherry picking games because of bias.
quote:No, I'm not. I'm challenging a view point that has dismissed and/or ignored their performance in 4 games (at least).
You are supporting your view based on basiclly 2 games
quote:Okay, I disagree bigtime there. Ask Boise State, or SC themselves how big that jump from #6 to #1-2 is for a team that doesn't have the benefit of an SEC schedule. SC has to go undefeated and have a few of just the right teams suffer at least one loss, or only lose one game have a ton of just the right teams suffer 2 losses, to even get into the Championship Game. That lack of margin for error to finish #1 is an enormous difference from going 10-2 and finishing around the top 5.
USC finished last year #6. going from that top the top 1-2 is not really a reach.
quote:No, and we're not talking about ranking SC "high". We're talking about ranking SC #1. And yes, those losses and the way they happened were a very valid reason for predicting Alabama would not finish #1. And but for a literally unprecedented fluke of BCS mathematics, that prediction would have been correct. So I'm not saying it's impossible for SC to end up #1, I'm just saying the info we have now doesn't seem to indicate it's more likely.
Just as 2011 Alabama had most of their guys back from a team that lost 3 games in 2010 including blowing a 24 point lead at home to Auburn. Was that reason to not rank them high in 2011?
quote:What part was I missing?
Its completely biased because you have just proved you don't even know the whole picture
SC does return most of their guys who got beat by Arizona State and Stanford and gave up 41 points to Arizona.quote:SC did not have those losses against an SEC schedule. LSU could have lost a game in 2011 and easily still gotten into the Championship Game. We might have had an outside shot at losing 2 and still getting in, depending on how things shook out. SC does not have that luxury in 2012.
USC had the same amount of loses in 2011 as LSU did in 2010
quote:Because it's expecting them to step up from losing a couple of games and have a couple of more shaky performances over the course of the season to being perfect week in and week out. That's a huge step. Otherwise, they'll need a helluva lot of luck to even get a shot at the Championship.
why is it a reach to expect a young team with a lot of key guys, including their QB back to step up if not bias?
Posted on 5/1/12 at 11:05 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
.. ND will be 1 or 2 games above .500 at the most when it's all said and done
Ok thats better.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 11:06 am to King Joey
quote:
Any more so than the jury on Stanford without Luck
I never said anything about Stanford being a contender this year. My comments about Stanford were in regards to last year and your dishonest way of describing that game last year from USC's perspective.
quote:
If you want to see how the schedules shake out, just list both teams' schedules in order of challenge, and see where Washington falls on each of them
I was not in any way saying that USC has an equal or better schedule to LSU. That's a pretty lousy way to compare schedules.
quote:
Right now, I see Oregon, Stanford and Notre Dame as bigger challenges than Washington. That's it. And that's assuming Stanford can come even close to sustaining without Luck.
And for LSU, I only see Alabama, the SEC CG and maybe Arkansas as serious threats. USCe should be good, but we play them at home. Florida and Auburn maybe better than say ASU or Az, but LSU should have no more trouble beating those teams than USC should have beating ASU this year.
I'll put it another way. If you exclude LSU and Alabama, Oregon and USC are better than every one else in the SEC.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 11:08 am to H-Town Tiger
Lots of people mad in here that we staaaaaaaaaacked
Page 9 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News