News Article: Tua doesn't have to play against LSU.

[DzynKingRTR]

Tua was not seen at practice today during the media visitation period.

Neither was I. We are doomed.

 

[bamaga]

Simple and to the point: Without Tua, we do not win LSU game.

JMO, if Auburn can almost beat LSU with true frosh Bo Nix in Baton Rouge, then Bama can beat LSU with Mac Jones in TTown!

 

[Tenntiderman]

Another Goodman article

Don't know who the real talent is between Goodman and Josh Bean. Neither would be closer to the truth.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I get what you are saying but he came within a 4th and 4 stop w/3 min left vs LSU of beating the eventual NCs and winning the SEC West with the 5th best talent. They collapsed after CMA called that PA pass vs MSU just before the half. Saban did a fabulous job that year til then.

In context, of course, I was addressing the suggested notion of Saban being so good that the talent doesn't matter.

Saban did a phenomenal job with the talent he had that year.......and he was victimized by the Textbook Scandal and yet still we kept clawing.

However, I also think that the talent gap plus the energy in that LSU fight took everything out of the team for the rest of the year, too. Yes - an opinion - but one I think is justified by the subsequent results, too.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

It has seemed to me this year that Auburn looks to have a better defense than we do.
That's what it looks like just watching the games so far.

But then I look at the numbers, and if you subtract last weekend's 508-yard performance by LSU, they average giving up 319 yards per game,
which would rank 25th - between (coincidentally) LSU and Florida's totals. We're surrendering 307 yards per game so far. Of course, the immediate objection (with some validity) is that Auburn has played a tougher schedule thus far. So that really leaves us just to look at common opponents, and there are only two: ATM and Arkansas.

ATM had 391 yards and 20 points against Auburn, while Arky had 234 yards and 10 points.

Against us, Arky had 21 fewer yards and 3 fewer points while ATM had 2 fewer yards but 8 more points.


What I'm saying is that while viewing the games shows Auburn seems to have a better pass rush (up until the last game for each team), statistically we're actually better than they are (at this point). That reinforces the feeling I have on it in that if Auburn held them to 23 in Red Stick, we should be able to do the same in BDS (or close to it anyway). I realize the real world doesn't work that way, but the data points so far point in that general direction.

I think LSU is likelier to get 17-21 points than they are 31 or above, and I also don't think their defense is nearly as good as in previous years. Much is made of "but Texas," but for the life of me I can't figure out why LSU gets some sort of special status on the basis of that one game. Texas lost by ten points to TCU and seven to OU......and both held the Longhorns to fewer points than LSU did despite playing in the Defense Optional conference.

 

[Saban4Ever]

It has seemed to me this year that Auburn looks to have a better defense than we do.
That's what it looks like just watching the games so far.

But then I look at the numbers, and if you subtract last weekend's 508-yard performance by LSU, they average giving up 319 yards per game,
which would rank 25th - between (coincidentally) LSU and Florida's totals. We're surrendering 307 yards per game so far. Of course, the immediate objection (with some validity) is that Auburn has played a tougher schedule thus far. So that really leaves us just to look at common opponents, and there are only two: ATM and Arkansas.

ATM had 391 yards and 20 points against Auburn, while Arky had 234 yards and 10 points.

Against us, Arky had 21 fewer yards and 3 fewer points while ATM had 2 fewer yards but 8 more points.


What I'm saying is that while viewing the games shows Auburn seems to have a better pass rush (up until the last game for each team), statistically we're actually better than they are (at this point). That reinforces the feeling I have on it in that if Auburn held them to 23 in Red Stick, we should be able to do the same in BDS (or close to it anyway). I realize the real world doesn't work that way, but the data points so far point in that general direction.

I think LSU is likelier to get 17-21 points than they are 31 or above, and I also don't think their defense is nearly as good as in previous years. Much is made of "but Texas," but for the life of me I can't figure out why LSU gets some sort of special status on the basis of that one game. Texas lost by ten points to TCU and seven to OU......and both held the Longhorns to fewer points than LSU did despite playing in the Defense Optional conference.

It will be interesting to see what the Playoff committee really thinks of the Texas win for LSU, compared to what all the "experts" have been saying about it. I agree LSU's schedule has been more difficult than Bama's so far.

 

[colbysullivan]

This year's Alabama defense is better than last year's.

Bruh...

 

[trenda]

Reading this thread, it sounds like maybe we're actually playing the '85 Bears instead of LSU.

Auburn JUST held them to 23 points at home and lost by 3 with a very pedestrian offense. Did I mention it was in "Death Valley"???

I think our offense - with Mac at QB - is light years better than Auburn's. In my opinion, the onus is on our D. If we get consistent pressure on Burrow and our secondary cuts out the stupid PI, we win. Also need to do a better job of wrapping up and finishing tackles. Do that and everyone will see why Vegas likes Bama in this game.

Also, this is a chance for our fans to make a difference. BDS HAS to be as loud as possible.

We got this!

 

[cmmiller711]

Goodness, have you totally lost faith in the rest of the team and in Coach Saban?

No, we're starting the youngest defense we've started in what? 20 years? Ever? As everyone here loves to say, history has no bearing on this team this year, and this team is not good enough to beat this LSU team without elite QB play IMO.

Here's hoping that either we get that elite QB play, or they choke.

 

[The Ols]

...or that we play well as a team and boat race the corndogs...

No, we're starting the youngest defense we've started in what? 20 years? Ever? As everyone here loves to say, history has no bearing on this team this year, and this team is not good enough to beat this LSU team without elite QB play IMO.

Here's hoping that either we get that elite QB play, or they choke.

 

[cmmiller711]

...or that we play well as a team and boat race the corndogs...

i just dont see it but here's hopin.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

It will be interesting to see what the Playoff committee really thinks of the Texas win for LSU, compared to what all the "experts" have been saying about it. I agree LSU's schedule has been more difficult than Bama's so far.

I agree that LSU's schedule has been harder so far, but I'm not sure of what the point of that exercise really is.


When Clemson and Auburn beat the Aggies, it was, "Wow, they won a big game."

We beat the Aggies by more and it becomes, "Well, the Aggies aren't really that good."

(Before the season we were getting trashed for not playing anybody while Clemson was getting praised for playing ATM. What the hell.....)

Sure, LSU has played a tougher schedule but that's not really the question. After all.....name the team that LSU has already beaten that Alabama wouldn't also beat.

THAT'S the issue.

SoS is a real thing, but it's a small one. It's also the easiest thing for anyone to whine about since it's the kind of thing that you can ALWAYS name a team that the team you
didn't like didn't play. But the committee has shown in the past that - despite what Clay Travis wishes to argue on his Twitter - NOBODY really knows who's going to get selected.
Urban Meyer was absolutely correct when he said that the problem with the playoff is that - aside from winning all of your games if you're P5 - there's no clear guidance on
"what to do."

Once you lose a game, you're at the mercy of people.

It's not simple enough to say, "Well, Alabama had a 9 SoS and Clemson had a 31 SoS, therefore, Alabama is obviously better." Same with LSU. Yeah, they've probably played the
toughest schedule of any unbeaten but it won't matter come kickoff time, either.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

I agree that LSU's schedule has been harder so far, but I'm not sure of what the point of that exercise really is.


When Clemson and Auburn beat the Aggies, it was, "Wow, they won a big game."

We beat the Aggies by more and it becomes, "Well, the Aggies aren't really that good."

(Before the season we were getting trashed for not playing anybody while Clemson was getting praised for playing ATM. What the hell.....)

Sure, LSU has played a tougher schedule but that's not really the question. After all.....name the team that LSU has already beaten that Alabama wouldn't also beat.

This is the problem with "tv" recognizing the mythical rankings of the AP and Coaches' Poll. It creates built in assumptions. "We just beat the #5 team in the country!" No you didn't. LOL! The Texas win is getting less and less impressive as the year marches on. They weren't the "#5 team in the country" or whatever their mythical preseason ranking was.

 

[Ledsteplin]

This is the problem with "tv" recognizing the mythical rankings of the AP and Coaches' Poll. It creates built in assumptions. "We just beat the #5 team in the country!" No you didn't. LOL! The Texas win is getting less and less impressive as the year marches on. They weren't the "#5 team in the country" or whatever their mythical preseason ranking was.

Like the 2017 season opener with Florida St was a big win for Bama. But by season's end, it didn't mean much.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Like the 2017 season opener with Florida St was a big win for Bama. But by season's end, it didn't mean much.

I get why "tv" recognizes the AP mythical rankings. It generates money and interest. But what people still haven't grasped is those rankings became irrelevant to the official "system"/method used in determining the NC. The only ones that are official are the ones the playoff committee puts out in November. I keep talking with people that say "We beat the #5 team in the country." And I tell them "No you didn't. There aren't any rankings until November. Those rankings you're referring to aren't real." Blows their mind.

 

[TiderJack]

I think LSU is likelier to get 17-21 points than they are 31 or above, and I also don't think their defense is nearly as good as in previous years. Much is made of "but Texas," but for the life of me I can't figure out why LSU gets some sort of special status on the basis of that one game. Texas lost by ten points to TCU and seven to OU......and both held the Longhorns to fewer points than LSU did despite playing in the Defense Optional conference.

And Texas gave up 48 pts to Kansas and the Mad Hatter and had to kick a field goal on the last play to win the game or they would be 4-4. LSWho should get less credit for this win than we did for the A&M and probably the USCe win. That's what happened to Bama a few years ago when we beat FSU in a #1 vs #3 game and FSU tanked after that loss.

 

[CoachJeff]

The AP has been doing football rankings since the Great Depression. They're important for posterity. They're not irrelevant. They don't determine who gets in the playoff, but that doesn't make them "irrelevant".

 

[Bamabuzzard]

The AP has been doing football rankings since the Great Depression. They're important for posterity. They're not irrelevant. They don't determine who gets in the playoff, but that doesn't make them "irrelevant".

Which is the context in which relevancy and "we just beat the #5 ranked team in the country" is being discussed. So they are irrelevant when someone is using those rankings to discuss within the football "world" the quality of their team or the teams they've beaten. Uniformity is important in the social aspect just as much as it is in the "official" aspect of the playoff process. Discussing from the same point of reference is important. The AP poll maybe relevant to you or an LSU fan. But for me personally, it hasn't been since the BCS and playoff system was put in place. I don't put much stock into them because it's been proven time and time again that we know a lot more about the quality of a team at the end of October/beginning of November, than the end of August/beginning of September. Yet here we are October 31st and you've got people continuing to say they've beaten the #5 team in the country when now we all know Texas isn't even a top 25 team. Wasn't then and isn't now. It's the exact reason why the current system is designed the way it is and needs to be the basis in which we discuss college football.

 

[B1GTide]

I think that the AP Poll is very relevant, and am happy to see the AP Trophies in the OSU and Alabama facilities. I just wish that they would stop releasing the polls so early. At least wait until teams have played 4 or 5 games before you start ranking them. Why? Because previous rankings, as meaningless as they are, skew future rankings.

 

[bamacon]

This is absolutely the playoff quarterfinal for Bama. They have to win. Period. Lose this and they are done. LSU will not lose again this season. No chance to sneak in like years past because the schedule just isn’t there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk