I don't think we underachieved. To win a nat. champ. the ENTIRE team has to perform at a high level and basically have no weaknesses, all the players and all the coaches. Do you see our o-line or RB represented in this draft? No. Our D was good enough last year, and so was our passing game. The running game came around, but too late. That's my bottom line on last year. I didn't like the play calling on offense in the Auburn game. We didn't play for the nat. champ. because our running game was sub par. This year, we'll have more mature, younger, faster running backs, and a new o-line coach, and some new o-line talent. If Brandon LaFell continues to progress, we know Doucet is a winner, and if one more young man steps up (Terrence Tolliver, 5 stars?), and Flynn plays like in the bowl game, we can make a run for it all. I don't think the passing game could possibly be as good as last year, but the running game should improve to pick up some of that drop off. Then there is special teams, and I don't know how we'll do there, and it is always important.
Anyone who thinks two straight 11-2 seasons finishing in the top-5 with bowl game blowouts is underachieving needs his freaking head examined. Only two losses last year despite playing five ranked teams--all on the road and one of those losses was to the eventual national champion. Only two losses the year before despite the three moved hurricane games. If a number 3 finish isn't being competitive for a national title, then what the hell is?
what constitutes underachievement? not winning the :crystal: ? not winning the SEC? certainly playing 5 ranked teams on the road in the SEC is much different than playing 5 C-USA or SWAC or even PAC-10 or Big 10 teams. All one has to do is look at the number of SEC players taken in the draft. If underachievement is defined as not winning the MNC then there are a lot (see usuck or tosu) of reams "underachieving". If underachieving is not winning the SEC, then unfortunately that's something LSU has done quite a bit of through the years. I believe that underachievement is defined by expectations. Anyone who seriously believed LSU would win the MNC last year, with that schedule, was imo, wildly unreasonable. Put me in the camp of those that believe that the Tigers exceeded expectations. Coulda, shoulda, woulda is a game that lets the evaluator create his/her own ending. Hindsight is indeed 20/20 as all armchair qb's know. Now....expectations for this year are altogether different, given the schedule. anything less than a trip to the SECCG would, for me, be a disappointment. :lsup:
No else seemed to catch this ass-clown statement: "For a program that's gone 59-6 since 2002 and played for three national titles, you would think the Trojans would be churning out first-round picks the way Miami did earlier this decade." Closet USC homer I guess...
I've never thought of Mandel as a USC homer, far from it. I did find it ironic to have read this comment on TF yesterday: The ridiculous things about this article is that he doesn't mention the tough schedule LSU always has to play or the role the polls play in a team having a shot at the title. At this point, Mandel's comment from above is not correct and yet the shoe now could be considered on the other foot. And red55 referenced quite eloquently that you don't have to be in the NC game to be considered a contender.
Freudian slip or attack of the revisionist sports historian, I dunno, but some people people are doers and some people are giant turd sandwiches. BTW, This is no knock on our resident USC posters. They seem to have a good grasp of reality. See you next :crystal: ...
Welcome to the forum:thumb: Glad to see we have another Bama fan that actually seems to have a view of football with out the crimson glasses on. We have been flooded with those Bama fans lately and I think you understand the kind of fans we are talking about. Stick around, you will enjoy it.
