Official LSU vs USC thread with poll

[Mill]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill BTW, look at the results of the poll...

heh so , big deal, more ppl from SEC schools are on ATOT, wohooooo LSU ownzzzz man

I find that hard to believe since the whole population of the SE is barely close to the 58 million in CA, but whatever makes you feel better.

even if so, i find it funny that you find this POLL more accurate than AP or Coaches (before being forced to vote according to a contract rather than choice) , you have lot of trust in ATOT for sure

But you have no proof that people voted that we because they were forced; no more than I have proof they voted for USC in the AP because they felt both were deserving. You can't chart the unknown, but I do know that the PAC-10 is weak, USC didn't play a single one loss team, and LSU had a tougher schedule. Oh yeah, USC lost to CAL.

 

[Mani]

OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster well when USC beat Michigan it was coz michigan choked but when LSU beat Oklohoma it was coz they got Owndd by LSU, i dont understand that logic

OSU had one loss and dominated all year. Michigan had 2 and had several miracles to even have only 2 losses. They could have easily had 3 or 4.

Mich's 2 losses were by a total of 7 points. Just 7 measly points is all that seperated them from being undefeated. The loss at Iowa and the early game deficit vs. Minnesota (the "miracle") were both the result of the hangover from Oregon. Michigan then went on to crush 3 top-10 ranked opponents. There's a reason Michigan was the top 2-loss teams in both polls.

and also remember USC has lost just 3 games in the last 2 seasons, 2 in over time (to WASU last year, and obviously CAL this year )and the 3rd by 5 (IIRC) points and spanked IOWA (#2 in big 10) in last years orange bowl

If last season counted than OSU(ohio) would there with USC.

last season doesnt count obviously all i am saying is no one has spanked USC and in the past 2 seasons as LSU fans believe (wrong ofcourse) they will(last year USC had the toughest schedule in all of Div I IIRC, so dont bring up the weak schedule agrument again)

But this year was soft and last year they had 2 losses, so that still leaves you with the inablity to win big games or go undefeated.

oookkkkkkk and .... that means LSU can OWN USC,


i fail to see the connection

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Mani
OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani
USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves.

They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas.

Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic.

I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team.

I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani
USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves.

They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas.

Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic.

I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team.

I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

And your biased because it makes you feel better for your team to have lost to this "super" team instead of the regular USC team. Fact: I have no reason to be biased because my team lost to BOTH USC and LSU, and LSU is a bitter rival. I hate LSU, but I'm indifferent about USC. Regardless, LSU was clearly the better team.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now

just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves. They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas. Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic. I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team. I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

And your biased because it makes you feel better for your team to have lost to this "super" team instead of the regular USC team. Fact: I have no reason to be biased because my team lost to BOTH USC and LSU, and LSU is a bitter rival. I hate LSU, but I'm indifferent about USC. Regardless, LSU was clearly the better team.

same way as you are biased coz you want to consider a team from your confernce to be better

well anyway its a matter of opinion

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani
OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

Rank at the end of the season doesn't tell the whole story. It doesn't tell the story about how MSU was on a hot streak going into the Michigan game and then went cold after, or the story of how Florida was on fire before they went on a downward spiral after getting screwed by the ACC refs at FSU. Rank at the time is not nearly as irrelevant as people think.

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now

just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves. They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas. Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic. I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team. I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

And your biased because it makes you feel better for your team to have lost to this "super" team instead of the regular USC team. Fact: I have no reason to be biased because my team lost to BOTH USC and LSU, and LSU is a bitter rival. I hate LSU, but I'm indifferent about USC. Regardless, LSU was clearly the better team.

same way as you are biased coz you want to consider a team from your confernce to be better

well anyway its a matter of opinion

Why would I want my hated rival to win? Regardless of conference. That's like accusing me of cheering for alabama. :disgust:

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani
USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves.

They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas.

Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic.

I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team.

I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

And your biased because it makes you feel better for your team to have lost to this "super" team instead of the regular USC team. Fact: I have no reason to be biased because my team lost to BOTH USC and LSU, and LSU is a bitter rival. I hate LSU, but I'm indifferent about USC. Regardless, LSU was clearly the better team.

Like I said, I would have said the same thing before new year's day. You, on the other hand are biased to LSU because they are an SEC team. Just like I hae a bitter hatred for Ohio State during the regular season but root for them in the bowls.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now

just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

But CAL sure isn't!

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves. They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas. Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic. I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team. I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

And your biased because it makes you feel better for your team to have lost to this "super" team instead of the regular USC team. Fact: I have no reason to be biased because my team lost to BOTH USC and LSU, and LSU is a bitter rival. I hate LSU, but I'm indifferent about USC. Regardless, LSU was clearly the better team.

same way as you are biased coz you want to consider a team from your confernce to be better

well anyway its a matter of opinion

Why would I want my hated rival to win? Regardless of conference. That's like accusing me of cheering for alabama. :disgust:

Because they are representing your conference.

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now

just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

But CAL sure isn't!

Not this again.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

But CAL sure isn't!

Not this again.

well if insist to that same ol argument

LSU played a Div II team which i would consider a loss actually

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves. They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas. Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic. I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team. I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

And your biased because it makes you feel better for your team to have lost to this "super" team instead of the regular USC team. Fact: I have no reason to be biased because my team lost to BOTH USC and LSU, and LSU is a bitter rival. I hate LSU, but I'm indifferent about USC. Regardless, LSU was clearly the better team.

same way as you are biased coz you want to consider a team from your confernce to be better

well anyway its a matter of opinion

Why would I want my hated rival to win? Regardless of conference. That's like accusing me of cheering for alabama. :disgust:

Because they are representing your conference.

I think you needing validation from them being good is a bigger bias than the fact my hated rival is in the same conference.

 

[kalster]

well ne way

USC is a very good team, just as LSU is a very good team

we can keep arguing over and over

based on what i have seen this season from both these teams, there is no way i can predict (and i am a USC alum)

that USC wud OWN LSU or that LSU wud OWN USC

it wud be close whoever wins

i dont think USC is THAT better than LSU that it wud own LSU neither is LSU so much better than USC that it wud OWN USC (as LSu fan's in this thread believe)

that is all

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

But CAL sure isn't!

Not this again.

well if insist to that same ol argument

LSU played a Div II team which i would consider a loss actually

The PAC 10 is made of teams that LOSE to div II teams, so 1/2 of USC's schedule were losses.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

But CAL sure isn't!

Not this again.

well if insist to that same ol argument

LSU played a Div II team which i would consider a loss actually

The PAC 10 is made of teams that LOSE to div II teams, so 1/2 of USC's schedule were losses.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

But CAL sure isn't!

Not this again.

well if insist to that same ol argument

LSU played a Div II team which i would consider a loss actually

The PAC 10 is made of teams that LOSE to div II teams, so 1/2 of USC's schedule were losses.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani OSU, MSU, and Purdue were top 10 at the time Michigan played them. And if you think MSU was a fluke win, you must not have watched that game. Michigan dominated a lot more than the score indicates.

What matters is NOW not then. If you want to live in the past then LSU beat about 6 top ten teams. Auburn, Georgia, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma.

true, its now just like LSU lost to a poor unranked florida team

Exactly. See how unfair it can be to look at end-of-season rankings only. Florida is a much better team than their ranking (or lack thereof) indicates.

But CAL sure isn't!

Not this again.

well if insist to that same ol argument LSU played a Div II team which i would consider a loss actually

The PAC 10 is made of teams that LOSE to div II teams, so 1/2 of USC's schedule were losses.

some facts please and for this season coz last year doesnt matter as you say yourself , IIRC, no one in Pac 10 scheduled any Div II teams this season

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Mani

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Mani USC would own. It's not possible to stop their offense - the only way USC can lose is if they kill themselves. They have so many dependable recievers between their TEs and wideouts, that LSU's biggest defensive advantage, the blitz, will be nullified - noone can dump the ball of better than Leinart. Think about it, they annihilated a Washington State team that calls blitzes on every play which were able to stop Vince Young at Texas. Leinart is also a freaking surgeon - he was able to pick apart Michigan's secondary - ranked among the top 3 in the nation which had only allowed something like 5 TD passes ALL SEASON. USC hung up 4 passing TDs by themselves. Leinart's precision combined with his recievers' amazing amount of raw talent and fact that they are the best coached offense in the nation = unstoppable.

....wishful thinking.

Spoken like a true LSU fanatic. I have no allegiance to either school - my take is based on watching both schools play all year.

I hate LSU, but they'd whoops USC's ass. You're just a USC fan because your team choked vs them. If USC wins it doesn't make you feel as bad.

I knew USC was by far the best team in the nation way before Michigan played them - my story would be no different if you had asked me 3 weeks ago. You just say LSU because they are an SEC team. I keep hearing people say that LSU would whoop USC's ass, yet in 52 posts, not a single one has said HOW. I gave perfectly logical reasons for why USC would win. If you want to provide reasons why LSU would win (besides "they have a good D") I'd love ot hear them. I'd love to hear how their defense can stop an offense that has a counter for everything. Or how Matt Mauck and a freshman running back are going to compete against what may be the best front 4 in the nation and a lightning-quick secondary.

The same way CAL did. Passing the ball.

If you have watched USC throughout the season you would know that the USC team of today doesn't even remotely resemble the team that played Cal.

Sure sure.... but you have no proof of that because it was the same team.

Seriously dude - ANYONE who has followed USC this season knows they are about 500% better now than they were at that point in their season. A team this young with a QB that didn't even take a snap before this season cannot be expected to go undefeated. You don't need proof of something that's plain as day.

And your biased because it makes you feel better for your team to have lost to this "super" team instead of the regular USC team. Fact: I have no reason to be biased because my team lost to BOTH USC and LSU, and LSU is a bitter rival. I hate LSU, but I'm indifferent about USC. Regardless, LSU was clearly the better team.

same way as you are biased coz you want to consider a team from your confernce to be better

well anyway its a matter of opinion

Why would I want my hated rival to win? Regardless of conference. That's like accusing me of cheering for alabama. :disgust:

Because they are representing your conference.

I think you needing validation from them being good is a bigger bias than the fact my hated rival is in the same conference.

I have at least a dozen posts on the espn forums under my nick _Michifan_ before Jan 1st saying that USC was without a doubt the best team in the nation. Feel free to look them up if you want. I had no need for validation then and neither do I now.

You still have not stated any real reasons how you think LSU would beat USC. The fact is, LSU's greatest weapon all season has been their blitz. But that was WSU's strength as well, to an even greater extent (WSU blitzes on just about EVERY play) and USC obliterated them. USC's recievers are also insane - Mike Williams is simply uncoverable with his size and speed (basically an NFL reciever in CF) and Keary Colbert is just as talented. This combined with an ingeniously coached offense that involves EVERYBODY is something LSU's secondary has not seen yet. USC is the rock to LSU's scissors. You just can't say the same about LSU's offense vs. USC's defense.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Mill BTW, look at the results of the poll...

heh so , big deal, more ppl from SEC schools are on ATOT, wohooooo LSU ownzzzz man

I find that hard to believe since the whole population of the SE is barely close to the 58 million in CA, but whatever makes you feel better.

even if so, i find it funny that you find this POLL more accurate than AP or Coaches (before being forced to vote according to a contract rather than choice) , you have lot of trust in ATOT for sure

But you have no proof that people voted that we because they were forced; no more than I have proof they voted for USC in the AP because they felt both were deserving. You can't chart the unknown, but I do know that the PAC-10 is weak, USC didn't play a single one loss team, and LSU had a tougher schedule. Oh yeah, USC lost to CAL.

well the AP has never bumped down a team which won its bowl game since its inception, and i didnt see how they cud bump down USC considering how well they played in their bowl game

so basically you are saying before the BCS, the AP always voted to a team that they thought deserved to share the championship?


would you just screwed alteast 10-15 teams of their right ot the champioship

 

[Oscar1613]

i think everyone needs to chill out... if both teams played their A game, i dont think theres a single person in this thread qualified to accurately predict who would come out on top. both teams are very strong, USC on offense and LSU on defense, which would make for an unpredictable matchup... i think the simulated games in that espn article show this... the virtual victor was determined by a margin of only 2% of the total number of simulations, and even then 60% of the total games were decided by a touchdown or less.



btw this is all coming from a current LSU student