What does it mean for LSU? It means LSU needs to focus on their own chit, make sure they take care of business every week, and not worry about what happens on other teams.
I've hated the gumps since I was 9 years old... think the whole team needs a fist enema, but to the point of this thread, it means absolutely nothing for LSU... either he'll be back in time to be beat in TS or he won't... but I find it hard to believe they won't find a suitable replacement before Nov. 3rd.
LSU has lost their best O-lineman and blindside protector for the season. You have recently put 4 more players on your academic casualty list. Neither team has made it yet to the SEC side of our schedule where serious attrition has been known to occur. Sounds like your giving out good advice. And no, I too, like everyone else, have no idea what all this means come Nov. 3rd.
In Baton Rouge? Fairly often. I get what you're saying, which is what I alluded to in my first post, but I really think you are overstating it.
I'm not sure that I can agree. In the old days of the I-formation, the fullback was a big guy who could run, catch passes in the flat, and block for the tailback. But in the last 15 years, many teams, including LSU, have been quite successful putting pure blocking backs at fullback. Guys who never see the ball and are more like small, quick guards who line up in the backfield than running backs. Indeed several LSU fullbacks have been converted tight ends or defensive linemen.
This isn't accurate at all. You can have plenty of success in the I if your fullback is primarily a blocker and at best an adequate runner and/or receiver. Now, does it make the I profoundly more effective and versatile which then makes it far more challenging to defend if you have a fullback who is adept at all three aspects of the position? No question. That doesn't mean if the guy is lacking in one or even two of those areas that suddenly the I is ineffective or even a liability to run. That's silly. No team is going to invest in the I if only one fullback makes the formation effective. You put into play formations and systems that make use of your talent, yes, but then you equally mold all of your players to perform in those schemes. Next man up.