ALL OF YOU ARE TRULY ~P~A~T~H~E~T~I~C~ :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: NARROW MINDS LOCKED WITHIN THE BOX ... LSU HAS RISEN ABOVE THE REST AND WE ARE PEERLESS ... LSU NEEDS NO RIVALRY We will crush the enemy before us on a weekly basis ... and what is best in LIFE, Conan? To see the enemy driven before you and to hear da' lamentations of da' wemen' LSU NEEDS NO WASTED ENERGY ON ANYTHING THAT TAKES OUR FOCUS AWAY FROM THE ONE TRUE GOAL
Judging from some of the comments in this thread, it seems that some of my fellow Tiger fans who don't want to see a revival of the LSU-Tulane "Battle for The Rag" rivalry like to use the argument that historic parity or balance in strength is, or should be, an essential component of a primary rivalry. But looking at some of the most red-hot rivalries in college football today, you can see that such a requirement isn't really necessary. For example: Clemson-South Carolina: Clemson leads the all-time series 61-36-4 Colorado-Colorado State: CU leads 55-19-2, but CSU has won 3 of the last 5 Colorado-Nebraska: Nebraska leads 44-16-2 Michigan-Michigan State: Michigan leads 63-26-5 Michigan-Ohio State: OSU leads 57-37-6, and that's with UM significantly closing the gap during the John Cooper era Oklahoma-Oklahoma State: OU leads 75-16-7 Texas-Texas A&M- UT leads 71-34-5 For reference, LSU leads Tulane 65-22-7 all time. Lopsided? Yes. But no more lopsided than the Longhorns and Aggies, and they wouldn't dream of not playing each other. Think Tulane is the only school that's had a long dry spell of not beating their archrival? From 1967 to 1994 (27 years), Oklahoma State beat Oklahoma ONCE, as in one time. It happens. College football ebbs and flows, and there are always shifts in power and up and down cycles for programs. Tulane has made some mistakes, but right now, they seem to be committed to improving sports, and I have no problem with playing them. Tradition makes college football what it is and I favor holding on to as much LSU tradition as we can. For those who say it would compromise LSU to have a rival that is not a BCS school, well, that hasn't hurt Kentucky with regard to Louisville has it? How about Colorado and Colorado State? How about Notre Dame and Navy? That's a lame excuse if there ever was one. True, the BCS and conference re-alignments have slain many good ol' rivalries (Texas/SMU and Tennessee/Memphis are examples) but it's not like it can't be done, with a little effort. And, if 12 game regular seasons are made permanent (and the likelihood of that is very good) it would be possible to be a lot more flexible in scheduling and accomodating rivalries. The arguments for playing Tulane really are quite persuasive, if one will simply listen. And our program and tradition would be helped immensely by having a primary rivalry. Question is; do we renew an old one by rekindling with Tulane, or do we concentrate on building a new one with Arkansas? I favor doing both; and whichever one catches fire quicker becomes THE rivalry game for us.
Nice post, Jet. I sure would like to play Tulane every year, but unless we go to a permanent 12 game schedule, I dont think it can happen. Especially with the new pricing structure, it is imperative that we have 7 home games a year. Im with you, though, Id like to work on both, continuing the Arkansas thing, as well.
That's the weenie Steve Spurrier excuse for not playing Miami every year. Playing Tulane every year gives LSU 7 home games every other year and LSU can work out a deal to get more money from Tulane when LSU comes to the dome. Tulane can charge more for the game and LSU can bring their fans and sell the place out. From a revenue standpoint LSU would have 6.5 home games a year by playing at the Dome. Or LSU could technically have a home game in the Dome and give Tulane a good cut. TU would probably get more from a generous payment from LSU with a soldout dome than playing USL or Navy at home.
Im not sure how willing Tulane would be to give us the lions share, but maybe youre right. I think yearly revenue is only half the issue, though. Considering the substantial increase in ticket prices, season ticket holders are going to want to get their moneys worth. I dont think it would sit well with the season(ed) ticket holders if they were told that not only are prices going up (and lets face it, this was just the first of what will be subsequent ticket hikes), but they are also getting less product.
First off I will say that I don't think it would help our program at all to have a "rivalry" game with Tulane and would in fact hurt it. And we sure as heck woiuld't want to lose a home game every other year just to play them. Of these only Clemson/USC and Colorado/CSU are the only to comparable with LSU/Tulane as they are non-conference rivalry games. The biggest difference is that all 4 of the programs are large state schools and the people of the state are dying to see them play, whereas no one in the state of Louisiana really gives a rat's ass about Tulane. There's a big difference between how people think about state schools and a private scholl like Tulane that has mostly out of state students. The other thing is that those other "rivalry games you mentioned on this list are all conference games and all big programs. It would be hard to hurt the Kentucky football program, they are on a lower level than Louisville at this time and have not had any prestige in football for an awfully long time. Notre Dame is an altoghter different program from all others but you are also talking about a game with much more national magnitude as people all over the country have feelings for the service academies and of course Notre Dame has a reputation and following second to none nationally. I just don't think there is a clamoring for LSU to play Tulane in football as I don't think it was really a rivalry game for LSU anylonger and actually lead to some Tulane wins in the later stages because they cared about the game much more than LSU did. I say forget em.
Bull **** ... Tulane is a Gimp with a limp and a rent-a-win Tulane is a untrained chihuahua that keeps crapping on the carpet It rubs the lotion on it's green skin ... ~A~N~D~ ... it gets the hose again It drives to Baton Rouge when it's told ... or else it doesn't come at all You don't go to your dog ... Your dog must come to you ... and take their annual whipping and ride home each year in the bus home glumly and whimpering past the leper colony with a few stragglers laying up in local hospital for X-rays and overnight observation.
Great post Ramah. Tulame is lucky if we allow them to be our bitch in Tiger Stadium once every 5 or 6 years. They can take their $400,000 rent-a-win check and slink home with their tail between their legs.
Why Bother? True rivalries end up creating more hate than they are worth. Having lived in Alabama (and having 2 Auburn grad brothers), I have seen the jealousy and antagonism between AMAB and Auburn first hand. No Thank You. With too many of their fans (on both sides) it's more important for their rival to fail than it is for their own team to succeed. Note how many AMAB fans were happy when AU failed to live up to expectations, yet their own team was wallowing in failure. Also, look at all the accusations that run back and forth between those teams regarding cheating 40+ years ago. The fact that AMAB fans have now turned their eye to Tennessee shows how the poison spreads. I'm happy when the Tigers win, but blood fueds encourage gloating, which turns a happy fan into a envious mob. We're accused of that too much already for my taste. Let the importance of the game be decided on the field, then offer your vanquished opponent some kind liguid refreshment. You'll be happier in the end. That said, GO TO HELL, OLE MISS, GO TO HELL! GEAUX TIGERS THORNY
