If Louisiana State University played the University of Southern California, there is no doubt in my mind we'd check those candyasses into the Smackdown Hotel, on the corner of Jabroni Drive and Know Your Role Avenue. USC has playe some pansies in the PAC-10, and lost to a sub-.500 team in Cal who was playing with their backup. You cannot prove to me that their defense is any better. I might have a bit more vitriol than the other more affable LSU fans, but I just find it hard to believe that you people were crowing all week about this exact same fact. "If you think that this Auburn team is the same one that lost the first two games of the year, you're in for a long night on Saturday." So, what you're telling me is that last week, you guys thought that the first two games were a different team, that was played by good opponents, but that you were at that time last week a 180 degrees different team. Now, you tell me that we dominated a team that was 180 different and much better than the one that lost its first two to those opponents, but that you still think that this team that beat your team that you thought was night and day better than you were against Southern Cal isn't as good as the Trojans were? I don't get it... You are a much better team coming into Saturday. We pistol whipped you. You were a much worse team at the start of the year. You got pistolwhipped. Wouldn't it stand to reason that if you are a better team than you were when you played Southern Cal, and we STILL whipped your ass like Southern Cal did, then we must be better than Southern Cal is? Sorry, I don't buy any argument other than that one...
I'll give it a try This opinion is from a fan that watched both games on TV. DL-- Both USC and LSU D-lines were very effective against AU's O-line. The difference, USC's guys just ran right around our linemen and tackled the man with the ball for a loss before the play even developed. LSU's D-linemen overpowered AU's line and held their position to make the tackle at the LOS or after a short gain. I could not say whether or not AU's line could actually control or block USC's D-linemen if they were able to catch them. LSU D-line = size and strength. USC D-line = less bulk/speed and strength. They both took care of AU's o-line, but it seemed like AU could not execute a single play against USC. On the other hand, against LSU, we did make a few first downs and it appeared that some of our plays worked though not many. OL-- LSU's o-line appeared to be more successful against AU's D than did USC's. WR-- Both USC and LSU have great talent at this position. I could not say one was better than the other. Both teams have multiple big play receivers and I can't say MW is better or more physical than Clayton is. DB-- AU did not pass enough on either team for me to form an opinion. We successfully passed the useless underneath passes against LSU, but we did not have time to do even that against USC. But really, LSU's db's were fine giving us those all night long because we were no better off for it. USC’s pressure on Jason Campbell prevented their DBs from even being tested. ST-- LSU's return team especially punts made more of an impression on me. Kick off coverage was AU's only bright spot of the night because Yost kicked most all of them for touch backs. Coaching-- Both have solid staffs. I give slight edge to USC here though. Carroll and Chow are both stars and I think are the best in the game. Not only do they recruit as well or better than Saban, but they have developed a reputation for in-game adjustments and that is huge in my opinion. Also, I feel that they are more versatile and can outscheme their opponent better than anyone else. They seam to have more available looks to worry about. They took a dead program to the top over night just like Saban. Saban is clearly a star and there is a star or two in the making on his staff. As long as both coaches are in place, both LSU and USC will be teams to be reckoned with. I don't know who would win between LSU and USC, but I think AU matches up better with LSU personnel and scheme wise than it does with USC. Yes, I do think matchups play a big part in football. Therefore, if I had to pick which team AU had the best chance at in a rematch, I would pick LSU. That is my best shot, I hope it was not too long. Take care, Dave
I'll give it a try This opinion is from a fan that watched both games on TV. DL-- Both USC and LSU D-lines were very effective against AU's O-line. The difference, USC's guys just ran right around our linemen and tackled the man with the ball for a loss before the play even developed. LSU's D-linemen overpowered AU's line and held their position to make the tackle at the LOS or after a short gain. I could not say whether or not AU's line could actually control or block USC's D-linemen if they were able to catch them. LSU D-line = size and strength. USC D-line = less bulk/speed and strength. They both took care of AU's o-line, but it seemed like AU could not execute a single play against USC. On the other hand, against LSU, we did make a few first downs and it appeared that some of our plays worked though not many. OL-- LSU's o-line appeared to be more successful against AU's D than did USC's. WR-- Both USC and LSU have great talent at this position. I could not say one was better than the other. Both teams have multiple big play receivers and I can't say MW is better or more physical than Clayton is. DB-- AU did not pass enough on either team for me to form an opinion. We successfully passed the useless underneath passes against LSU, but we did not have time to do even that against USC. But really, LSU's db's were fine giving us those all night long because we were no better off for it. USC’s pressure on Jason Campbell prevented their DBs from even being tested. ST-- LSU's return team especially punts made more of an impression on me. Kick off coverage was AU's only bright spot of the night because Yost kicked most all of them for touch backs. Coaching-- Both have solid staffs. I give slight edge to USC here though. Carroll and Chow are both stars and I think are the best in the game. Not only do they recruit as well or better than Saban, but they have developed a reputation for in-game adjustments and that is huge in my opinion. Also, I feel that they are more versatile and can outscheme their opponent better than anyone else. They seam to have more available looks to worry about. They took a dead program to the top over night just like Saban. Saban is clearly a star and there is a star or two in the making on his staff. As long as both coaches are in place, both LSU and USC will be teams to be reckoned with. I don't know who would win between LSU and USC, but I think AU matches up better with LSU personnel and scheme wise than it does with USC. Yes, I do think matchups play a big part in football. Therefore, if I had to pick which team AU had the best chance at in a rematch, I would pick LSU. That is my best shot, I hope it was not too long. Take care, Dave
Re: I'll give it a try From your post (and the other AU fans who have offered an opinion), I can only surmise that you guy believe that if you were to play USC at this point in the season that you would do no better than you did in the first game of the season. I would have thought that more than ONE AU poster would have recognized the fact that AU has come a long way since the USC game and, therefore, you really can't compare the two ass-whoopings because LSU put an ass-whooping on a vastly improved AU team than that which USC played in August. But, the original post asked for your opinions and you are certainly entitled to them.
Here is my attempt to explain LSUBud, I completely understand your point/question, and I agree with you that AU was a vastly improved team when LSU whooped them. But, since I have been old enough to understand more about football than just the score of the game, I have never witnessed an AU defeat where our offense had no answers to the opposing defense. AU had no plays, formations or personnel that could even slow down USC's defense and it felt hopeless. It was the kind of game that left me watching the clock wishing it to speed up. USC slanted because they were so much faster than AU. We could not stop it. GT did the same with good success, but benefited from an offense that tipped its hand. Reports from AU linemen say that GT was calling out the direction of the play before the snap. I don't think any other defenses to date have employed the slanting scheme on AU, so I am not sure we have solved that problem. According to the coaches, AU's success is due to added formations, which make our offense less predictable, and our o-linemen picking up the right men to block. However, nobody blocked anyone against USC, so there was more to blame than just missed assignments. I can see how AU made the turn around by throwing new twists into the offense and o-linemen learning the blocking assignments, but I can't say that those things are enough to solve the problems AU had with USC's speed. That whipping that they gave our o-line just convinced me that nothing we could do with our current personnel would be effective against them. I could be wrong, but we were so bad in that game that the memories of that debacle are still fresh and probably has a lot to do with my view of the two teams. As soon as the ball was snapped, Campbell had to hurry to hand the ball off before being sacked and the tailback tried to juke past three and four USC players every snap. It was hopeless. I am sure Au would be more successful against USC at this time, but I have no idea how much more. So, to explain my opinion, it all comes down to the whether or not our corrections could negate their speed (to that I have no idea) and my really bad memories of the game. LSU dominated the LOS the whole game for sure, but at least it was hat on hat the whole time. Our guys were able to touch your guys. We just got beat at the point of attack and there was nothing our guys could do. I do know that we can put a man on every player that LSU has, but I do not know whether the same could be said about USC. Like I said in my first post, I think matchups are an integral part of success and/or failure in a football game. Therefore, LSU might have zero problems with USC's speed and take it to them. I don't think AU's game is suited for USC's. Every player on their roster is very athletic, as opposed to just big and strong. You can definitely see their recruiting philosophy. I hope this explains my thinking.
Having seen both the Auburn vs. USC and Auburn vs. LSU, I would say the only way to know who is the best between LSU and USC is for them to play. On paper it's a toss-up. I would pull for LSU.
I would love to see USC and LSU be paired up for a post-season bowl. It would be the premier game on my watch list because the teams are very close. Auburn, as the common opponent, is a hard game to use to judge performances. I believe both teams beat Auburn because the coaching for both LSU and USC are superior to that currently at Auburn. I'm not a Tuberville-hater at all, but the lack of continuity on the staff, now entering it's fourth year, has not been kind to the development of the players. (e.g. Jason Campbell - 3rd QB coach in 3 successive seasons). Campbell is a superb athlete that would flourish under the tuteledge of someone like Chow or Fisher. Just wait and see Booty's development after 1-2 years under Chow (he's the "Yoda" of QB coaches) . Just like Carson Palmer and Philip Rivers, he will reap the benefit of superior teaching. The athletes on LSU and AU are similar, maybe a little more Senior leadership on LSU, but Saban and staff have their $hit in a pile and it shows - this is a disciplined, well-coached squad. USC has a slight edge over the SEC in recruitment. Recruiting mags are always suspect, so I hate to utilize their "predictions," but if you look at first year performances of key athletes, USC shines above many, many schools. Look up Bing and Bush and you'll see what I mean. And no offense intended here, but the person who suggested Clayton might be about even with Mike Williams is vastly uninformed. Not only will Williams (BMW) be the first receiver taken in the NFL draft (ahead of Fitzgerald), but IMHO, Clayton isn't even the most talented receiver on the LSU squad. Sky Green is still "raw" talent and has the ability to change the outcome of a given game more than Clayton does. I like Clayton, I fear Green. Ultimately, it comes down to coaching and preparation, and that is likely where USC would have the advantage over most teams. Carroll and Chow are studs and their penchant for mid-game adjustments is legendary - really. On D, they can run the 3-4 or the 4-3 without missing a beat. Slants, stunts, unothodox blitzes.....it's a freakin' nightmare if you're not accustomed to seeing an NFL-style scheme at the collegiate level - something we don't see alot of in the SEC. In summary, LSU is a fine team that beat Auburn soundly. They have much to be proud of and Saban has done a fine job of keeping the team focused at the right times. Good luck the rest of the way.
Caddy, you make some good points but I have to take your analysis with a grain of salt. Both Pete Carroll and Nick Saban will make your offense a nightmare with NFL style schemes. The Auburn team that LSU beat Saturday was a lot better Auburn team than the one that played USC to open the season. Against LSU Tubby had the advantage of watching the game tapes from the 7 games LSU played this year before the AU game while he could only view last years USC tapes in preparation for an opening game.
Here is my attempt to explain LSUBud, I completely understand your point/question, and I agree with you that AU was a vastly improved team when LSU whooped them. But, since I have been old enough to understand more about football than just the score of the game, I have never witnessed an AU defeat where our offense had no answers to the opposing defense. AU had no plays, formations or personnel that could even slow down USC's defense and it felt hopeless. It was the kind of game that left me watching the clock wishing it to speed up. USC slanted because they were so much faster than AU. We could not stop it. GT did the same with good success, but benefited from an offense that tipped its hand. Reports from AU linemen say that GT was calling out the direction of the play before the snap. I don't think any other defenses to date have employed the slanting scheme on AU, so I am not sure we have solved that problem. According to the coaches, AU's success is due to added formations, which make our offense less predictable, and our o-linemen picking up the right men to block. However, nobody blocked anyone against USC, so there was more to blame than just missed assignments. I can see how AU made the turn around by throwing new twists into the offense and o-linemen learning the blocking assignments, but I can't say that those things are enough to solve the problems AU had with USC's speed. That whipping that they gave our o-line just convinced me that nothing we could do with our current personnel would be effective against them. I could be wrong, but we were so bad in that game that the memories of that debacle are still fresh and probably has a lot to do with my view of the two teams. As soon as the ball was snapped, Campbell had to hurry to hand the ball off before being sacked and the tailback tried to juke past three and four USC players every snap. It was hopeless. I am sure Au would be more successful against USC at this time, but I have no idea how much more. So, to explain my opinion, it all comes down to the whether or not our corrections could negate their speed (to that I have no idea) and my really bad memories of the game. LSU dominated the LOS the whole game for sure, but at least it was hat on hat the whole time. Our guys were able to touch your guys. We just got beat at the point of attack and there was nothing our guys could do. I do know that we can put a man on every player that LSU has, but I do not know whether the same could be said about USC. Like I said in my first post, I think matchups are an integral part of success and/or failure in a football game. Therefore, LSU might have zero problems with USC's speed and take it to them. I don't think AU's game is suited for USC's. Every player on their roster is very athletic, as opposed to just big and strong. You can definitely see their recruiting philosophy. I hope this explains my thinking.
