http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=3481014 Other SEC Schools: 21. Florida 35. Alabama T-86. Mississippi State T-90. Auburn T-96. Vanderbilt 99. Tennessee T-105. Georgia T-185. South Carolina T-192. Mississippi
kentucky and arkansas didnt make the list? im happy with that ranking. #5 in the SEC. id argue #4 since bama hasnt been to FF and LSU has been to two. and you cant expect to be higher than UK or Arky because of the $$$ they put in. pretty stupid to consider conference tournament championships.
That stings a bit. I suppose someone has to set the curve, just wish it wasn't us. I hope the ambivalence towards the men's program has screeched to a halt. Considering how quickly a basketball program can turn around, we should know soon.
I really feel like the change was made around 5 to 6 years too late, but I can understand why it wasn't. It may have simply alienated fans to an unreal level to the point where it will take several years of a lot of winning to bring them back. Football being at the highest level that it has ever been has also hurt roundball some. Remember who the coaches of LSU football were during Shaq's time here? :nope: I got my season tickets for next year though, because roundball is #1 in my book.
I agree that #41 is too low if 'Bama is #35. Specifically b/c 'Bama may have never made it past the Elite 8 and so they had a few good years in the 90s--they've underachieved as well these last few years. I also believe that if 84-85 is your cut off, it's a little unfair to LSU since as an SEC school you're cutting out another FF in 81 and really before recent latecomers like Arkansas, 'Bama, Mississippi State, Florida and Tennessee, the only two SEC teams worth mentioning in the 80s were LSU and Kentucky. But, it probably reflects some recent lack luster years and lack of emphasis in the program, the sanction years, and some inconsistent years since. I disagree that conference championships shouldn't be at least factored since it's some measure of success (it's a trophy people put in the glass case right), although as we all know, it's the NCAA tourney that matters. To me it points out that LSU has been good in recruiting (lots of NBA lottery picks), but not particularly effective when the chips were down (chalk that up somewhat to the coaching acumen of Daddy Dale and Brady at crucial times in tournaments). As Deek says, let's see what CTJ can bring to the history books. I have a feeling that LSU will be more consistent in winning, see less attrition, graduate more players and build better bridges in the community. Whether CTJ can get LSU to the FF level remains to be seen however--I want to give him a few recruiting classes and years of SEC play to see if he can adjust his learning curve to the athletes in the SEC. I feel good that LSU will be back to a year in and year out top 4 SEC player though. :geauxtige
I agree with all of these points. I believe that CTJ will be able to guide LSU to more consistent performances in the postseason, and I believe what he was able to do at Stanford and Nevada shows that. He should certainly be able to recruit superior athletes to LSU than what the other schools would have been able to do.
