Oh, yeah. I almost forgot that it's always the quarterback's fault. I need to dust off my trusty copy of "LSU Football Fandom 101". But wait...it says here on page 47 that "no matter what, the blame shall always be placed squarely on the head coach's shoulders". So was it the defense (the common sense answer), the quarterback (the popular opinion answer) or the head coach (the doom-and-gloomer's answer)?
I think we can both agree he's a better coach now than he was then. I judged how Miles would do at LSU based on what he did at Okie State. That was a mistake on my part.
Our defense was bad in '08, no doubt, but never underestimate the deflating that took place because of the pick sixes.
Easier as compared to where, Stacey? Easier than Arkansas? Sure. No doubt. Easier than Georgia? Florida? Texas? USC? There is an advantage over other schools. However, I distinctly remember being told, here, that there wasn't any way he could duplicate his success with LSU at Bama because now he had another school within the state borders he'd have to compete with. That said, history shows that even average coaches can have a lot of success in Tuscaloosa. I don't believe it's easier at Bama than Georgia. Georgia is a sleeping giant that has failed to put the right coach in place. The development of players in high school within that state and the sheer number of players it annually produces makes it program with unlimited potential. It's my opinion he's a better coach now than he was a decade ago. It's not solely my opinion.
My point is that Bama historically has won more than other SEC programs. Is there more money pumped into the program from donors (legally/illegally)? Is the SEC Bama bias really true? Looking at the comparative schedules of LSU and Bama would suggest that. Calls go Bama's way most of the time, low number of holding calls, etc. All of these things might be contributing to Saban's success. I know that he was not so universally respected when he was @ LSU, but was that way the minute he stepped on campus in Tuscaloosa. The program at Bama may be bigger than the coach, I'm thinking, which in turn makes the coach look bigger than he is (no pun intended for his slight stature...)
This stuff just wouldn't come up if not for the last few years in this rivalry. Nobody was questioning all this conspiracy theory during the Shula "error." When you think about how close these two programs have been on the field, I get it, I really do. You think about the last 3 seasons between these programs and it's really scary how close they have been and not just playing for the SEC but even going nuclear in 2011. So what has been the fall out? Alabama's record is 35-5, LSU, 34-6. Each team has won two and lost two in the series. With both trading wins on the others home field. Each team has won one SEC championship. Alabama has won two NC. LSU arguing they could easily have at least a split. Which is true. So these types of discussions on Miles and Saban are fair and fun to debate. Personally, I always knew Les could coach, warts and all, he can coach. Miles can find and delegate to outstanding assistance coaches and that has made him a excellent head coach. I think this rivalry has made Saban and Miles better at what they do. No one can take a rivalry as serious as these two and not get better, just through outright will and determination. Alabama probably doesn't get to the mountain top without this kind of push that demands your best. I do get the feeling that LSU could still do the same. Great teams can make great teams, great. These two programs have arguably been the best two football teams in the last three years in America. How weird has this been? And why would anyone think these types of debates are going anywhere?
