Started By
Message
Posted on 4/24/14 at 9:31 pm to BlackCloud
Posted on 4/24/14 at 9:32 pm to cbi8
I believe LSU's true rivals are OM, Bama, and Florida. You're assessments are all very true. LSU and Ole Miss date back to the 50s and 60s and BC famous Halloween return. Fast forward to the 2000s and it sparks again when Eli is at OM and just recently a resurgence. Bama and LSU are more recent with essentially the West riding on the line with the game. Florida and LSU are permanent scheduling teams with national implications on the line just about every time they play.
I ignore the Arkansas rivalry. LSU AUB are big games. Honestly, week in and week out the whole SEC is a rivalry. Everyone hates each other till bowl season.
I ignore the Arkansas rivalry. LSU AUB are big games. Honestly, week in and week out the whole SEC is a rivalry. Everyone hates each other till bowl season.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 9:33 pm to cbi8
We will agree to disagree there.......Funyuns makes me chuckle
Posted on 4/24/14 at 9:49 pm to Ole Geauxt
quote:
you're figurin' shows that you don't know shite from shinola.
Mebbe, mebbe not, but I's know who Chuck "Chollie Mac" McClendon was, and that makes me a rarity outside of Louisiana. LSU's main problem, methinks, is they just never really established a brand even with their most successful coaches. People know Neyland and Shug and the Bear and so forth even outside of the respective fanbases, but LSU never really gained the same sort of traction in the wild-and-wooly days of the early- and mid-20th college football, and that's in no small part, imho, due to the fact that they simply didn't have the same national cachet as some other SEC football programs. Not an insult, just an observation. LSU simply didn't have the sheer clout to draw as much attention as they might have away from the bigger names that potential rivals were focused on, so establishing meaningful rivalries with staying power was a difficult task.
This post was edited on 4/24/14 at 9:51 pm
Posted on 4/24/14 at 10:11 pm to randomways
quote:
but LSU never really gained the same sort of traction in the wild-and-wooly days of the early- and mid-20th college football, and that's in no small part, imho, due to the fact that they simply didn't have the same national cachet as some other SEC football programs. Not an insult, just an observation. LSU simply didn't have the sheer clout to draw as much attention as they might have away from the bigger names that potential rivals were focused on, so establishing meaningful rivalries with staying power was a difficult task.
Ole Miss and Tulane were very good in the 40's,50's and 60's and were well respected nationally. I'm not sure what "national cachet" has to do with the OP about LSU and rivals. Most rivals are in-state or border by nature.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 10:14 pm to cbi8
Historically and geographically the only rival that really makes sense for LSU is Ole Miss.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 10:24 pm to cbi8
quote:
Everybody knows that LSU doesn't have a "true rival"
Why? I might have figured it out.
As college football became more and more popular during the 30's and 40's, teams were starting to become more competitive.
LSU in the late 50's/early 60's had many memorable games with another elite team in Ole Miss. Thus, a first "LSU-type" rivalry was born.
Fast forward to the early 2000's (past more "rivals" in Auburn and others), and replace Ole Miss with Tennessee. The LSU/UT matchup's during that time were slugfests.
Late 2000's- Florida.
Early 2010's- Alabama.
Conclusion:
-Ole Miss is LSU's primary rival because they were their first "rival."
-Arkansas and LSU rivals? No chance.
-LSU/aTm might become TRUE rivals, (if aTm can continue to play at a high level) because of the LSU support in Texas (I believe true rivals have fan bases living amongst each other in a major city)
Hypothesis:
LSU does not have a true rival. The Bayou Bengals have always had success and when another SEC team steps up to challenge them, they become short-term "rivals"
TL;DR? Just read the hypothesis. Is there validity to this Rant?
Good assessment. I know its old, but you forgot to mention Tulane. At one time that was a rivalry, and as you point it it was fan bases living in close proximity and among each other.
And then that rivalry went poof
This post was edited on 4/24/14 at 10:26 pm
Posted on 4/24/14 at 10:26 pm to randomways
are you in politics? you seem to say so much, that means so little..
congrats on knowing who CCM was,,, ever heard of Johnny Vaught?
congrats on knowing who CCM was,,, ever heard of Johnny Vaught?
Posted on 4/24/14 at 10:40 pm to BlackCloud
quote:
I'm not sure what "national cachet" has to do with the OP about LSU and rivals. Most rivals are in-state or border by nature.
It means teams take a greater interest in you as a potential rival. Yes, rivalries themselves tend to be regional (though there are significant exceptions) but let's not underestimate the power of branding here. LSU could resume playing Tulane every year from now until Star Trek and while it may be a "rivalry," it's not one LSU would choose. The same holds in other situations -- if LSU had a bigger footstep back in the day, they certainly would have attracted more interest in a potential "rivalry" from other teams they played regularly. People can -- and do, apparently -- argue endlessly about whether Bama/LSU is a rivalry, but the arguments would be a lot more muted if the two teams were both huge names simultaneously back when Chollie Mac was doing a damned fine job of coaching in the same conference as the Bear. If LSU had been a bigger brand, or Chollie more competitive overall, we might even now be talking about the half-century old classic Bama/LSU rivalry. The fact that shamefully few outside Louisiana know what a great coach LSU had at the time is symptomatic of what I'm saying.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 10:46 pm to randomways
I bet you're a teacher of some sort?
I'm goin to bed, indigestion hit me while reading all the bs.
I'm goin to bed, indigestion hit me while reading all the bs.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 11:22 pm to cbi8
I award you zero points and may god have mercy on your soul.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 11:37 pm to cbi8
quote:
-LSU/aTm might become TRUE rivals,
I think we already are but in time this game may separate from the others. Last game of the season, annual, close proximity, overlapping recruiting areas (maybe most important), already a very long history (there were 50 OOC games before A&M joined) which is quite a bit.
We could ask RogerKlarvin but I had him assassinated.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 11:52 pm to Whiskey Man
quote:
We don't have a true rival because no other team can contend with us on a consistent basis.
A&M beat you so thoroughly and repeatedly that you backed out of a contract. Your head coach was convinced that he was incapable of beating us, and also incapable of building a winning program starting 0-1... so he viewed the only option as not playing A&M. You don't have a real rival because your program pulled the most chicken shite move in the history of college football.
Posted on 4/24/14 at 11:54 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
Historically and geographically the only rival that really makes sense for LSU is Ole Miss.
Oxford is only 7 miles closer to Baton Rouge than College Station is.
Posted on 4/25/14 at 12:15 am to cbi8
quote:
Ole Miss is LSU's primary rival because they were their first "rival."
Really the only thing I disagree with. Tulane was our first rival. But that died long ago.
I do think the Shelties can become a good rivalry with us. Especially if they continue to not play UTx.
Posted on 4/25/14 at 12:18 am to cbi8
quote:
LSU is 9-6 since 2000
Only 9-6? I would have thought the series would have been substantially more one-sided given how legendary LSU's run has been since their football program was founded when Nick Saban set up the athletic department upon his arrival in 1999.
Posted on 4/25/14 at 12:19 am to Tiger Live2
LSU is just like us. We both dont have a rival
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News