BobbyBlueChip said:
:clap:
How does USC's talent get into a thread about LSU having value at 20-1?
Got LSU at 20-1.......
- Thread starter Thunder Lips
- Start date
:clap:
How does USC's talent get into a thread about LSU having value at 20-1?
AU2001 said:
Because somebody said LSU was the most talented team in the country!
BobbyBlueChip
That is great! I agree LSU 20-1 is good value bet. IMO, they are the 2nd most talented team in the country and taking the 2nd most talented team at 20-1 odds is value IMO. However, "I" wouldn't take the bet as posters mentioned new coach and questions about QB. When someone says LSU is the most talented team, that obviously is not true based on multiple data. Therefore, I commented on it.
AU2001 said:
There are multiple sites called "recruiting services" that judge talent coming into college. Then you have your eyes to judge talent at the college level and see the results. Compare USC and LSU position to position and depth, and IMO LSU outclasses USC "talent" wise at DB and DT. Every other position I think USC outclasses LSU talent wise. In terms of recruiting, USC has smoked LSU and the rest of CFB the last 3 years. (25 kids max per class, so we are talking about 60-70 recruits) That is a large sample. Therefore, I come to the conclusion that USC is more talented than LSU. This conclusion is shared by many others.
But here is a guy who shares "your" opinion.
FoxSports Rankings
They have LSU #2. So at 20-1 odds, and they have them finishing #2, you gotta love the value! How can a team who has arguably the 2nd most talent in the country be 20-1 odds to win it all?
LSU only plays 4 road games all year. What is up with that?
That is a major bonus and you get them 20-1 odds? It gets even more sweeter. These are LSU's 4 road opponents. Miss. St., Vanderbilt, Alabama, & Ole Miss. WOW! I am starting to talk myself into betting on LSU to win it all. :lol:7 home games, 4 road games, don't play anybody tough on road, and LSU gets to open their season with 3 straight home games. What a great schedule!!!!! Props to the SEC for getting away with this crap year after year and fooling the country! :thumb: Unfortunately, Auburn had to pay the price last year with this philosophy. When there are more than 2 teams undefeated, schedule then comes into play.
Last edited:
As an LSU alumnus, I wouldn't have it any other way. Why is it such a problem for you that SEC gamedays are more important to some than strong OOC schedules or any of the other nonsense spend your time ranting about.
I hope you're kidding. If it such a problem that LSU is playing Miss St., Vanderbilt, Alabama, & Ole Miss on the road this season, then you must have marveled at their road schedule last season when they played UGA, Aub and Fla in the month of October with a frosh and a perennial backup rotating at QB.
Sadly, Auburn did "pay the price" last season and were forced to watch the title game, even though I feel they were the BEST team in the nation. How soon you forget that your Trojans paid a similar price the previous season. Rather than take your medicine like a man, you bombarded this site with bogus pro-USC propaganda and cried like a little girl for months about this perceived snub. Fortunately for the members of this forum, AU and Wareagle did not wage a childish campaign after last season.
The fallacy, yet again, is that shcedule had anything to do with Auburn's ranking. In fact, Auburn gained on OU each week and tied them in one poll, but suddenly fell after winning AT arch-rival Alabama while OU pounded that powerhouse Baylor. The idea that Auburn was held down because of a weak schedule is simply an after the fact justification. It boils down to what it always does - where did you start. For example, this year if USC and Texas (or Ohio State) go unbeaten they will play each other in the Rose Bowl, no matter who else is unbeaten or their schedule.
What is more funny is that Scott keeps lambasting Auburn yet forgets that 2 years ago USC had such a poor schedule and played in such a poor conference that being ranked #1 in both polls couldnt overcome it.
What is more funny is that Scott keeps lambasting Auburn yet forgets that 2 years ago USC had such a poor schedule and played in such a poor conference that being ranked #1 in both polls couldnt overcome it.
Cie Grant said:
That is great it makes you happy but it doesn't mean we should respect or give LSU free pass! In fact, LSU should lose peoples respect. What happened to earning respect? When rankings come out etc most fans and pollsters look past it. Not me! I find it sad you enjoy watching your team destroy inferior opponents. I am sure you are looking forward to Nov. 5th against Appalachian St. I think LSU's 2nd string would by TD favorite. Last year you prob. enjoyed watching LSU beat Arkansas St. by 50pts. But LSU was tested against mighty "TROY" only winning by 4pts @home!
We are talking about LSU this year, right? 20-1 odds for LSU to win NC for 2005. Correct?
Where did I wine about USC? USC was #1 in both polls by a landslide at the end of the season. USC didn't get screwed. LSU won BCS NC and USC won the AP NC. If anybody got screwed it was LSU. All LSU fans and players know that both polls thought USC was the #1 team in the country that year and LSU only got the coaches poll because they were "forced" to vote LSU #1. Maybe me explaining why USC was .15BCS pts behind LSU is considered wining.
BTW, .15BCS pts is a VERY SMALL margin. Sun Tzu said:
I think AU only gained on OU because OU already was ahead by wide margin. There was no talks about AU passing OU in the polls. At least I don't think AU would have passed OU even if the blew out Alabama.
Yes and no. I do think where you start has a major advantage but if Auburn played a tough OOC schedule, there is not doubt in my mind AU would have passed OU. #1 the computer polls would have had AU ahead and I think it would have boosted AU's argument to play in BCS title game that more pollsters would have changed their vote. There really was no argument to put AU ahead of OU.
Shows how much you know. I believe USC had a final SOS ranked somewhere in the top 40. #30-#40. I will guess BCS SOS #37. LSU if I remember correctly, only had a SOS ranked 10 slots higher than USC. So much for USC's "poor schedule" and "poor conference." LSU was "only" ahead of USC by .15 BCS pts in the final BCS standings. Remember, ND and Hawaii lost there last games of the year and that alone would have prob. put USC past LSU if they won. Don't forget Washington St. losing to Washington at end of year PUT LSU ahead. WSU would have boosted USC SOS and given USC quality win pts over top 10 team. The quality win pts = .50 BCS pts. WSU had lead at end of 4th where Washington came back to win in an upset. Oh yeah, did I mention WSU QB got hurt in game and was out? SURE USC's schedule was poor! :mj07: It was a year of bad breaks for USC in terms of BCS pts. There are few more examples to give. That might be considered whining.
You cannot make same arguments for Auburn and comparing AU and USC in terms of BCS is not even comparable. Cie Grant is about the only person who thinks AU was the best team in the country last year. But the people that matter most all felt USC was the #1 team.
Get your facts straight!
they are straight. You are just a blow hard who confuses fact with opinion ,and you are willing to distort anything to serve your purposes. This is why, generally, except stirring controversy I find that you add absolutley zero to the handicapping purpose of the site. Now save the carpal tunnel and dont bother typing the 8 page rebuttal. You obviously need those hands for other activity.
Sun Tzu said:
:nono: :nono: :nono:
LSU's final BCS SOS #29
USC's final BCS SOS #37
LSU's final BCS standing 5.99
USC's finalBCS standing 6.15
You just lost credibility and made yourself look foolish. Care to challenge me again? :nooo:
That is why I have won something like 80% of my posted "big" plays. I don't post plays often but when I do they win. Not to mention I always give detailed write-ups explaining my pick. Everything is documented on the site. You can't dispute my record and winnings. I am only talking about plays I posted and $$$ amounts posted. I have won over 50k on posted plays. I guess that is not contributing to the site in terms of handicapping.
Last edited:
AU2001 said:
How intelligent and mature of you to call me an idiot. What a thought provoking post. When you have to revert to name-calling, I know my posts sent a powerful message! Thanks for the compliment.
Last edited:
The point is that no one can start a thread on whether or not LSU has good value at 20-1 without you completely hijacking the thread to rant and rave about how great USC is!!!
Not everything is about you or USC, dork!
That's why everyone gets so sick and tired of your lengthy, self-indulgent posts!
Not everything is about you or USC, dork!
That's why everyone gets so sick and tired of your lengthy, self-indulgent posts!
Sorry I talked bad about your daddy. It just gets frustrating when every thread turns into USC bragfest!
Last edited:
AU2001
wareagle said LSU was the most talented team in the country. That was his opinion. I disagree and explained why I disagreed. The post was not even directed to you. If you do not like me or find my postings worthless simply ignore me.
Lets say for aguments sake that Thunder Lips (started this thread) was thinking about betting on LSU at 20-1. Lets say he is thinking how much to wager on them. He see's wareagles post that says LSU is the most talented team in the country. He might believe/agree with him and bet on LSU or bet even more. Or he might read my post and agree with me that LSU isn't the most talented team and maybe bet less or not even bet LSU at all. He also could think my post is full of BS and still bet on LSU. What if he wanted to wager on the most talented team in the country and after reading my post, he thinks USC is now the most talented team. Or he might agree with wareagle and think LSU is. Point being you might think my post is BS, he might think my post is BS, but maybe someone else finds is useful. The objective is to get a collection of opinions and hopefully analysis supporting each opinion. Then posters have the best chance in learning something. Calling me an idiot shows your lack of maturity. Grow up!
wareagle said LSU was the most talented team in the country. That was his opinion. I disagree and explained why I disagreed. The post was not even directed to you. If you do not like me or find my postings worthless simply ignore me.
Lets say for aguments sake that Thunder Lips (started this thread) was thinking about betting on LSU at 20-1. Lets say he is thinking how much to wager on them. He see's wareagles post that says LSU is the most talented team in the country. He might believe/agree with him and bet on LSU or bet even more. Or he might read my post and agree with me that LSU isn't the most talented team and maybe bet less or not even bet LSU at all. He also could think my post is full of BS and still bet on LSU. What if he wanted to wager on the most talented team in the country and after reading my post, he thinks USC is now the most talented team. Or he might agree with wareagle and think LSU is. Point being you might think my post is BS, he might think my post is BS, but maybe someone else finds is useful. The objective is to get a collection of opinions and hopefully analysis supporting each opinion. Then posters have the best chance in learning something. Calling me an idiot shows your lack of maturity. Grow up!
Last edited:
