Any thoughts on this? If Bama had never gone on probabtion in the 90's how do you think that would have changed LSU's performance since the millenium? They must be wondering how the hell it came to be that the West is basically being run by the Auburn and LSU Tigers. I know it sickens them. :thumb::rofl:
No difference, LSU has shown the prowess to play with any SEC team and the 10 other programs (Excluding LSU and Bama) had free reigns and Bama is only one team. May have made some things more difficult but wouldn't have changed the outcome. That's MO. :thumb:
I don't think so, LSU rising to the top was inevitable. With Saban here we were getting top talent and utilizing it. Bama has been good despite the probation but they've also had many issues with their coaches and such. LSU will continue to stay atop the SEC for a while now.
Re: Would a non-probation Bama have prevented the stunning ascent of LSU since circa2 Not without the Bear giving out about 50 scholarships a year. Today's game is much different than it was in the past, not just the game itself but the landscape of CFB. And no one would have stopped Saban from imposing his will on the state of Louisiana, putting up the fence if you will. Of course that would have made Bama more competitive, but they would not have dominated us by any means, they may have knocked us off once or twice though.
No but I think the rise of LSU, Auburn, and Georgia have had something to do with Miami and Florida State's demise. Since Saban, LSU has kept the Claytons, Spears, Hills,Dorseys, and other top talent at home. In addition we have gone out of state to sign some guys that at one time might have gone to those schools.
Re: Would a non-probation Bama have prevented the stunning ascent of LSU since circa2 That's exactly what I was thinking when I first proposed the question. It is obvious that our in-state talent is top notch especially given the size of LA. Once we started keeping our boys home, and with the right coaching, we began ripping off the wins. Of course now we steal a few stud recruits from neighboring states every year but it started first by building an attractive (read: winning) program with Louisiana boys. I was just wondering what others' take on the hypothetical situation was. It pains me to think what kind of program we could have always had if our past coaches had always been able to keep our best talkent home. One of the greatest things about college ball that I love and that the Pro's will never top is that when I look down the roster or when the broadcasters introduce our starting line-ups, 75-90% of our guys are from Louisiana. Makes me proud. It's probably also why rivalries mean so much more. When we beat Bama it's like saying our Louisiana boys are stronger, faster, and tougher than your Alabama boys... essentially it's more than just a game and the bragging rights and the pride that accompanies a win spill over into areas outside the realm of the football field on that day. I do think the situtaion is becoming less regional since so many college games are nationally televised and with travel and communication becoming easier/faster/cheaper. I think CFB will always be pre-dominantly regional but I expect to see in-staters going to schools across the country and for us to pick up studs from far away states more often than in the past.
Re: Would a non-probation Bama have prevented the stunning ascent of LSU since circa2 Reynoch Thompson was a LB on Tennessee's National Championship Team. Ike Hilliard was on Florida's Reggie Wayne was on Miami's as well as a DE, Seymore (sp) Travis Minor and Warrick Dunn led Florida State. That kind of talent made them and killed us.
Re: Would a non-probation Bama have prevented the stunning ascent of LSU since circa2 No. I do think Auburn's rise is more of a reflection of that, with the Barn being their in-state rival. What will be interesting is what happens at Ole Miss with whomever replaces Coach "O". He has recruited well there and if they get a coach worth a damn, they will be a factor.
