if that's your side, then maybe i'm coming around b/c i'm starting to think the light isn't just going to come on one day. i've pretty much said since the off season, this ain't our year, but if things go like this in '10 and '11, i'm going to start grumbling. i'm very grateful for the championships of the past, but if the past is all we're clinging to, we're no better than bama fans who ironically have started to be excited about the present and future. 01, 03, 07 were all nice, but they are in the past. i'm not saying we should expect championships every year but i hope the days of tearing down goal posts after a big win are gone. i may not be pushing the panic button yet but not all members who make gripes against the coaching staff are way out of line here. i want to believe we'll have a new team show up against AU. i want to believe that crowton's to blame b/c at least then there's someone to actually blame instead of this "who's the man behind the curtain on this offense?" thing. i've defended miles way more than i've attacked him (way more) i want to believe that Les will right the ship and it's something i used to believe in 100%. now it's like 75% and falling. i still think he can do it and i hope in the next two years when LSU is heading to atlanta and bcs bowls i can feel foolish that my faith was shaken at one time.
It's a very flimsy argument made without any real subjective analysis. He doesn't even begin to mention the personnel changes which has a tremendous effect on an offenses production when you start with an experienced QB and have to move on to a raw prospect. Not that I really care to get into it because people's minds are made up and such an endeavor would be pointless. Nothing left to do but wish him well and continue to cheer for whomever is on the sidelines at LSU...
Well, when the same scenario plays out at three consecutive stints, with numbers to back it, that's pretty objective. To inject subjectivity would only weaken it.
I meant objective. Every time I see that argument pop up, it's nothing but cold numbers. Nothing circumstantial is ever presented. The problem with a "numbers only" approach is that it ignores the fact that we're dealing with humans. It's not a math problem.
The evidence is circumstantial but you could probably get an indictment. A conviction would depend on the jury. That's why Crowton elected for a change of venue. He couldn't get a fair trial here.
