Do LSU fans really understand what "elite" status means?

Ohio State was ranked #5, but they were not the 5th best team in the country. They were more like a top 20 team at that time.

I want to see LSU play big games too, more for my personal entertainment that anything though. I'm just saying, using Texas was a bad example. They have played 2 good teams all season and they had to go out of conference to get one of those because the Big XII is pathetic.

Sure, it looks worse when we play a Div II school, but in all honestly there's no difference between them & some of the Div I schools we (& every team) play.

 

not calling for miles' head, but

a) no one can dispute that the players didnt develope throughout the year.
b) not very disciplined...penalties, bad decisions
c) late hits, bad class shown on the field isn't acceptable.
d) it just seemed like the team was not emotionally ready for the uga game... maybe they were tired, who knows what it was, but that team just didn't show up excited to play.
e) it took 12 games to find a way to get skyler green the ball.
f) run blocking was atrocious.

I don't claim to be an insider or have any special knowledge of the team, so I don't know WHO'S fault it was, but I can say that CLM REALLY NEEDS TO FIX THESE THINGS in the next year or so.

Even if those things werent his fault, he needs to replace the people at fault and get this thing right. Sure, 10-2 season and Im not going to play the what-if field goals were made, passes were caught, etc... game. I just dont see any way to deny that the team was extremely sloppy and not disciplined.

 

Uh, Arizona St tougher than Ohio St? The Big12 may have been down, but so has the SEC. LSU wouldn't have performed on the level that Texas performed this year in the Big12. Texas would have looked better in the SEC this year than LSU. My opinion.

 

I didn't deny that. But it still remains that Texas only played 2 good teams all year. LSU has played several. The main difference is that Texas has blown everyone but Ohio St out - we haven't blown out more than 2/3 teams.

 

Saban started at the bottom and quickly worked his way up. Miles in his first year started with alot of potential and won 10 ugly games and two ugly losses. It's too early to make a final judgement on Miles, but if you watched the games this year they were not impressive. Saban only had two impressive years, not including the first year turn-around; including that year that's 3 years out of 5. So it is fair to say that Saban had two less than impressive years, no better than Miles' 2005 season so far. Having confidence in Saban, however, was easier, because he accomplished things in his first year and won the SEC in his second. And we looked good in that second season after the Ole Miss game.

If I were not a fan of LSU, I would not respect LSU the way I did in Saban's tenure. I wouldn't write them off, but I would feel a little hopeful that LSU's dominance was crumbling.

As an LSU fan under Saban, I respect Georgia to a point, but I don't feel they are a *great* team. I feel Florida will improve, but they had nothing when we played them early. I'm not afraid of Tennessee. I feel the same about Alabama as I do Georgia. I think Arkansas is a solid program a notch below us. Mississippi is a black hole, no threat. Vanderbilt and Kentucky aren't really competitive. The teams I respect are Auburn, South Carolina, and Florida. I think South Carolina is going to be good and Florida is going to keep getting better.

As an LSU fan under Miles, the only teams I feel confident against are the pair from the state of Mississippi, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt. That may change as Miles' proves his worth, but it's hardly debatable that at this point Miles' hasn't proven he can carry on a winning legacy. IT IS STILL REASONABLE TO BELIEVE THAT MILES MIGHT CARRY ON A WINNING LEGACY, BUT HE HAS PROVEN NOTHING TO MOST FOOTBALL FANS YET.

Miles' first year was the equivalent of one of Saban's less than impressive years if you look at the true substance that wins and losses don't neccessarily reflect. A solid performance against Miami FL, win or loss, would do alot to bolster my confidence.

 

The majority of our opponents were not on the level of Ohio St. Georgia and Auburn are in that neighborhood, Alabama is comparable; the rest of our opponents were not much tougher than Texas'.

 

Are you talking Ohio St now? Or Ohio St then? Because at that time, Ohio St was not the team they are now - they have improved vastly as the season went along. If Ohio St would have had an offense at that point in the season, they would have beaten Texas. (Texas has also improved though.) Auburn now is a much better team than Ohio St then. Georgia now is a better team than Ohio St then. Bama is probably comparable to them, but a notch below.

I don't really care. I don't even know why this argument is still going on. What was the point again?

 

I'm confused!:shock:

 

The point was that my hopes are for no more Division 1-AA teams on our schedule..... Let's try to get stronger OOC Competition.
:lsup: :geauxtige :lsup:

 

Err... most teams improve as the season goes on, and all teams have bad games. As "pathetic" as the Big12 is, it isn't considerably worse than the SEC this year. No reason to dog Texas for playing a close game against a strong Ohio St team early in the season. Texas deserves to be playing for the NC.