Of course there is an argument. A damn strong argument. No coach in LSU history has achieved more than Les Miles. Not one. Not Charlie Mac, Not Nick Saban, Not Paul Dietzel. If all it takes to win at LSU is to show up and recruit, then why did Charlie Mac, Jerry Stoval, Mike Archer, Curley Hallman, and Jerry Dinardo all post losing seasons and get fired? Answer me that one. Miles has taken his LSU team to two national championship games. Saban didn't, Arnsparger didn't, and Dietzel didn't. Well, who really gives a shit? LSU doesn't finish in 10th place every year, do they? In fact, they never have. We finish ranked nationally more often than not. LSU goes to championship games. Wins are all that matter. There are no trophies for offensive rankings. When has LSU ever finished in 10th place in the SEC? Never. It's as simple as that.
Those guys didn't have the ground work laid down for them like Leslie had. They didn't have the facilities that Miles has. LSU wasn't bringing in the cash as they are today. Miles has more resources at his expense than any of them before him.
Bullshit. LSU has always had one of the biggest stadiums in college football and top athletic facilities. LSU has always had a rabid fanbase and brought in lot's of money. Groundwork my ass. Every coach at LSU has had an opportunity to win, a few did and a few didn't. But Les not only won, he won more and won at the highest levels.
It's true that LSU has more money and better facilities than 15+ years ago. Guess what? So does everyone else. What you've said is as pointless as saying, "Other LSU coaches did not have the internet. Les Miles has the internet - so winning is easier."
His point is still valid. There are trends, and considering 2008 is the year Miles players took over QB, the trend is even more valid. I'm in agreement; in 10 years our QB play has been sufficient 3 of those years. Should be able to figure out the most important position on the field in 10 years, but we're still struggling mightily. I think this a perfect example of cherry picking (comparing SO and SR is not fair), but at his best Russell was a non-factor (positives and negatives nullify each other). It glosses over what we have an issue with... Mettenberger was a SR, it wasn't a surprise that he was leaving at the end of the year. We have shown ourselves to be unprepared at QB, similar to most of Miles' time here.
Of course I would like to see our O perform better and more consistently. But as I said, I'm more concerned with the W's & L's. I also understand that we are a very young team and that assuming everyone stays, the next couple of years could be very good. If Jennings progresses and develops into a good (not great) passer, the future could be very bright.
Obfuscating MFers. With better offensive stats comes more wins. Millions of dollars and 10 years should result in better than terrible offensive stats, which would result in more wins and championships.
Brett, I cannot disagree that our offense could and should be better. There really is no excuse for it being so below average. However, I also find it strange that you chose to leave out the '05-'07 seasons. Shouldn't a coach be judged by his entire tenure? Again, I'm not discounting that you have a valid argument, but post numbers from the other three seasons as well. ETA: I just read that the database you chose only goes back six years. But lsusports.net or some other site should have the rankings from those 3 seasons.
