Here's your first one. It might be rash, but I'm sick of losing big games. If Gus had just kicked the field goal like a normal human being in the first quarter, the game might have been totally different. Just ridiculous. Hats off to LSU.
Oh, whatever. Could he have been more polite? Sure. But Paul is way overblowing it with his "rule the world" talk. And not that it matters, but anyone with half a brain would have avoided that question. lol
The article did have a few errors, and not just in spelling/grammar, but in overall flow and structure as well. It's like it didn't get proofed at all. I'm not placing the blame on the writer. Sometimes that's more to do with the editing staff than anything. Even good writers don't always catch every flaw in everything they've written. Also, ironically, Hater's comment isn't error free. lol I get it, one is writing a published piece and the other just a comment, but it still strikes me as slightly comical.
Considering his body of work at USC and LSU until now, I don't really think Orgeron's a bad coach. Heck, I'm an Auburn fan, and I'm sure I'll take some flack for this, but I honestly don't see him being any worse than Gus. After all, he did lead the Tigers to a win over a pretty good Auburn team last year. And I don't really think LSU has been in a winning position the last few years. Yes, the talent was there, but Miles was stale and was consistently being blown out by what should have been inferior teams. Any regression that's happened under Orgeron would probably have happened under Miles, anyway... At least from my outsider's perspective, which is definitely limited. A 9-4 season with a less-than-stellar quarterback (in a "rebuilding year," no less) isn't too bad.
"So again you fail to understand the point." Yeah, I probably did because your initial comment wasn't exactly relevant to my post. I honestly don't know why you thought to say "Auburn beating Bama has nothing to do with MSU beating Bama" because I never suggested it did. I also didn't try to make a prediction about any game, so that was also irrelevant. "What Auburn does against Bama means nothing when it comes.to MSU. MSU has never had success against Bama even during their down years." Again, this seems to have little relevance to my post. I never suggested that MSU has ever had success or will ever have success against Bama, and I certainly was not saying Auburn's victory over Bama is relevant in making that type of prediction. "I agree Auburn is no guarantee win for MSU but using their win against Bama means nothing…" I disagree. Their win over Bama does have significance in that it shows Bama and Auburn are not very far apart in talent level; because of this, it seems strange for the writer to say that MSU shouldn't worry about Auburn and should only worry about Bama, as if Auburn is not somehow a team that could challenge the Bulldogs like Alabama can. Or that somehow the West could be Alabama, Mississippi State, and then everybody else in 2018. Also, I wasn't using Auburn's victory over Alabama to prove that Auburn is a team the Bulldogs should worry about. I used Auburn's success over MSU to do this. I am mentioning the Auburn victory to question the writer's claim that Bama is somehow fearful and Auburn is not. You are kind of conflating two different issues, if I'm being honest.
I'm not sure what your comment has to do with my post. I'm not trying to make predictions based off one game. I'm merely stating that Auburn has had consistent success against MSU and questioning why the writer of the piece thinks Bama is almost a definite loss for MSU while Auburn will be easy (seeing as how Auburn handed it to Alabama pretty convincingly last year and obviously has the ability to play at a very high level). I'm not trying to say one team is better than the other. I'm just saying MSU should be "scared" of a potentially-dangerous Auburn team with arguably its best quarterback since Cam and a defense that's finally playing at a championship level. I think most MSU fans would agree with that. Even with its best defense in recent memory and a pretty good offense, MSU struggled against more elite teams like Auburn and UGA last year. I don't know if I've ever seen more hype for a new staff than I'm seeing with MSU's (and maybe they will prove to be deserving), but I just think it's kind of ridiculous for the writer to assume that the Bulldogs shouldn't see anybody but Alabama as a huge threat when they literally got blownout by Auburn last year. Granted, Auburn is an up-and-down team under Gus, but I think it's way too early for any suggestions that MSU (after losing 49-10 last year and losing its best coach in history) will be too much for an Auburn team that's returning several key players from a double-digit win season where only a rematch loss to the eventual national runner up kept them from a playoff spot.
Now I'm not suggesting that MSU won't be good next year, and I am not saying they won't win, but I don't see Auburn (a team that beat MSU 49-10 last year and wiped the floor with them the year before, too) as an easy win or as a team not to be scared of. The only time MSU has had real, continued success over Auburn in the last 10 years is during the Prescott years. And the Auburn defense had improved greatly since then (as has quarterback play). I could be wrong, but I think you are evaluating the Tigers too harshly. You say MSU should worry only about Bama, but you can't ignore the fact that a healthy Auburn team handed it to the Tide last year. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out next year, though.