Best Run of the BCS Era?

[FirstTimer]

Even though LSU has a better record than each program in the entirety of the time period in question

Shaq already pointed out how that wasn't the case. And right now Alabama is forced to use a shitty Saban season. Extend this out one more year and Bama blows by LSU more than likely.

I just think your reasoning sucks

You have no reasoning other than LSu was the first to win two BCS titles(do not care as they are the worst of the three to do it)..once was a split title season anyways.

LSU was "not in the discussion." .

It must not be all that "laughable" since pretty much everyone who has strolled through here with the exception of you thinks otherwise. LSU doesn't belong on this list.

Adding up every single factor...LSU doesn't hold up given the parameters and even extending them out a bit to include a turd Saban season.

Sorry LSU doesn't belong brah. Don't be mad.

My reasoning is perfectly fine. It's great you want to stomp for the hat and all but this LSU run has been one of the most underwhelming of these 6. Taking into account every paramter we have in the OP, expanding some out...LSU doesn't belong. You're the only one who thinks so(Knubb doesn't count as he doesn't have two hands)

 

[shag773]

LSU > Bama and Florida in the BCS era.

Again, FWIW

Florida 1998-2011
Overall 134-47
Conference 82-31

LSU 1998-2011
Overall 130-49
Conference 73-40

Alabama 1998-2011
Overall 118-60
Conference 69-43

But again, this wasn't what the OP was asking...

 

[nwfisch]

I named those two first in my original post in this thread. No longer what is being discussed. FT listing LSU behind Florida and Alabama is what I'm addressing, obviously.

Then why are you fighting for LSU for being 2nd loser?

 

[NAHSTE]

You have no reasoning other than LSu was the first to win two BCS titles(do not care as they are the worst of the three to do it)..once was a split title season anyways.

LOL... Four top-five finishes in five seasons isn't a reason? Three SEC title game appearances in five years isn't a reason? Five straight years producing a top five draft pick isn't a reason? Seems like you chose to list LSU fifth initially, based on perception or a guess or whatever other nebulous reasoning, and are now adjusting your argument to suit your answer. "Split titles" can be applied to other programs on this list ... "winning percentage" is again, a product of arbitrary end points by the OP and could be altered to argue for or against any team simply by changing those end points.

Taking into account every paramter we have in the OP, expanding some out.

Well, the parameters laid out in the OP are very loosely defined, so if that's all you are basing it off of, cool. Still find it mind-blowing that you don't feel they warrant inclusion in the discussion, and your only justification for saying so thus far has been Heisman winners and LSU's one split national championship (though not really since AP national titles don't count, but I digress), two factors that were totally under LSU's control and have proven over time to be completely accurate barometers of quality. Yep, Heisman voters and top 25 pollsters never get anything wrong. Let's rely on them as objective criteria.

:lol:

 

[KNUBB]

Again, FWIW

Florida 1998-2011
Overall 134-47
Conference 82-31

LSU 1997-2011
Overall 130-49
Conference 73-40

Alabama 1997-2011
Overall 118-60
Conference 69-43

But again, this wasn't what the OP was asking...

This is the time frame that should be used for all teams IMO

 

[nwfisch]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6f31AqZdM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6f31AqZdM[/ame]


:smug:

 

[FirstTimer]

1988-1993 Notre Dame Fighting Irish
64-9-1 overall record (.864 win %)
1 National Championship
5-1 Bowls (3-1 BCS)(2-0 in Cotton Bowl as well which Coalition still had as a major bowl)
4 Top 5 Finishes

 

[KNUBB]

They have a tie. They don't belong

 

[NAHSTE]

Then why are you fighting for LSU for being 2nd loser?

I am not you dunce. I am asking FT to qualify his laughable stance that LSU does not belong in the discussion, when he has already admitted to "splitting hairs" to differentiate the teams in question.

How do they not warrant discussion if you can't even clearly say the teams he's listing as ahead of them were better? Alabama and Florida were clearly more impressive? Really? I'm not sure even FT believes that, he just already said it so he has to hold his ground with a barrage of MQs. Par for the course, really.

 

[FirstTimer]

Four top-five finishes in five seasons isn't a reason? Three SEC title game appearances in five years isn't a reason?

Odd you've never listed these before.

Five straight years producing a top five draft pick isn't a reason?

:yao: at you taking issues with Heismans then listing this.

Come on.

At least be consistant.

Seems like you chose to list LSU fifth initially, based on perception or a guess or whatever other nebulous reasoning, and are now adjusting your argument to suit your answer.

Wrong.

"Split titles" can be applied to other programs on this list

No shit.

I already said as much.

Thanks for restating it though.

Well, the parameters laid out in the OP are very loosely defined, so if that's all you are basing it off of

What the fuck else would I be basing it off of?

I've repeatedly told you that's what it's based off of yet yo ufinally just seem to be getting it now?

,

and your only justification for saying so thus far has been Heisman winners and LSU's one split national championship

Wrong.

(though not really since AP national titles don't count

Incorrect.

 

[NAHSTE]

Oh, now that FT has dissected my post into little bit sized chunks and dismissively typed "wrong" or "incorrect" between them, I totally see what he was saying.

 

[nwfisch]

I am not you dunce. I am asking FT to qualify his laughable stance that LSU does not belong in the discussion, when he has already admitted to "splitting hairs" to differentiate the teams in question.

How do they not warrant discussion if you can't even clearly say the teams he's listing as ahead of them were better? Alabama and Florida were clearly more impressive? Really? I'm not sure even FT believes that, he just already said it so he has to hold his ground with a barrage of MQs. Par for the course, really.

Nice name calling mod.

:cano:


So you're fighting for 3rd fiddle ahead of Florida, who has a better record, and better conference record. :gayrod:

 

[NAHSTE]

Nice name calling mod.

:cano:


So you're fighting for 3rd fiddle ahead of Florida, who has a better record, and better conference record. :gayrod:

Again, no, I am arguing why or why not a program would belong in the discussion, and I feel all the ones listed in the OP other than Boise State did in fact warrant inclusion ... Florida only got 4 votes. Alabama only got 2 votes. Why are they even in the discussion? Let's just vote on whether USC's 9 year run trumped Miami's 3 year run and ignore all other successful programs of the BCS era!

 

[nwfisch]

Again, no, I am arguing why or why not a program would belong in the discussion, and I feel all the ones listed in the OP other than Boise State did in fact warrant inclusion ... Florida only got 4 votes. Alabama only got 2 votes. Why are they even in the discussion? Let's just vote on whether USC's 9 year run trumped Miami's 3 year run and ignore all other successful programs of the BCS era!

They are in the discussion, but no one voted for them. I voted for them so maybe you'd be quiet about it, but that didn't work. :sammysosadatass:

And the poll is about the best run of the decade, so the longest run would probably get more votes :gayrod:


Butt hurt over a discussion on a message board :brianwilson:

When I see you post, this is the image I get in my mind.

 

[FirstTimer]

I'm not sure even FT believes that, he just already said it so he has to hold his ground with a barrage of MQs. Par for the course, really.

Seriously.

Fuck off.

I'm not the only one who has said/implied that in here nor am I the only one who has agreed/thanked people who have said as much.

Given the parameters of the OP LSU doesn't belong.

They trail the two SEC schools. They don't have Heismans. They were as dominant as USC or Miami(split title for USC be damned) They don't have the resume when looking at what the OP gave us.

It's not some nebulus reasoning. Everything is laid out in the first post.

LSU belongs here more than Boise.

Is that better?

LSU out of 6:
Total record: 6th
Conference record: 6th
Conf Championships (on percentage of CC's won/season) 5th
Nat'l Titles: 2nd "Tied" for 1st, but only one with two to have lost one. ..Whcih I guess could make the 4th but I'll give them 2nd
Bowls: 2nd
Top 5: 3rd (percentage of Top 5's per span)
Heismans: Tied for 4th.


Average: 3.8(4th)..or 4.14 if the NC's goes to 4th

Zomg! Maybe they should be 4th rather than 5th

I just BCS'ed the BCS.

:smug:

 

[NAHSTE]

They are in the discussion, but no one voted for them. I voted for them so maybe you'd be quiet about it, but that didn't work. :sammysosadatass:


Butt hurt over a discussion on a message board :brianwilson:

When I see you post, this is the image I get in my mind.

Cool.

 

[NAHSTE]

Nat'l Titles: 2nd "Tied" for 1st, but only one with two to have lost one.

Wait, are we extending the parameters selectively now? Did not know 2011 fell within the parameters of the OP which you are so faithfully adhering to.

Anyway, FT, I think the main problem is the criteria listed in the OP was loosely defined so there's no need for you and I to continue this.

 

[nwfisch]

Cool.

Cograts on the wedding.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdO5YPeT83w"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdO5YPeT83w[/ame]

 

[FirstTimer]

Average Ranks:

USC: 1.57
Miami: 2.5
Florida: 3.4
Alabama: 3.7
LSU: 3.85
Boise St: 3.85

:smug:

 

[Senser81]

Everyone needs to lay off NAHSTE. He only included LSU to round out the field. Kind of like having Larry listing in the VSN Poster of the Year voting.