In-Game Thread: Louisiana vs. Tulane

[Turbine]

Turnovers didn't cost us the game in regulation. They contributed, as did 1000 details during regulation. Our defense made pretty good work of those turnovers. They limited an ineffective offense to attempt field goals when they were within spitting distance of the end zone. There were massive opportunities to win the game, turnovers and the resulting opponents points aside, in regulation. We failed in numerous regards during regulation to exploit a one dimensional team. If you want to add up our dropped passes and theirs. If you want to add up our missed blocks and theirs. If you want to add up our missed tackles and theirs... you get another set of consequential numbers that a coach can say "that is what lost the game". That is an ignorant man's calculus of an entire 60 minutes of regulation. A massive number of actions and results culminated in a tie in regulation. I am stating, without any doubt whatsoever, that we lost in regulation, due to a lack of coaching from play to play, player to player, all regulation long. Turnovers are just the most ugly noticeable thing that happens. They do not by themself decide the outcome of games. And when you only drop 9 points from 3 TOs... you're sitting plenty good to bust a bad team in the ___.

You keep bringing up disconnect of "cost the game" and "lost the game" in connection with the turnovers.

That is something I have never claimed.

The turnovers' cost UL the win in regulation.

The turnovers bought UL the opportunity to play and win it in overtime.

All other scenarios aside from what actually happened are based on known unknowns' and unknown unknowns'. (Thanks Donald Rumsfeld)

I'm dealing in known knowns, at least this once.

[Just1More]

You must be oversauced. Usually you are only ludicrous enough to be comical. But this is beyond comedy. It's the unknown comic run amuck on the gong show. I guarantee if you look up all the stats ever compiled in the history of football, the one absolute most consistent stat is that teams who lose the turnover battle consistently lose the game. And the worse you lose the turnover battle, the higher the odds of you losing the game. The fact is the reason the game went into overtime was the score was tied. You take away any one of their points from a lost possession deep in UL territory, & UL wins that game. never mind what happened in a crazy overtime. If UL doesn't turn the ball over four times they win. Anyone who can't acknowledge that fact is so eaten up with another agenda, they can't be considered credible in their opinion.

We should just call them all "turnover battles". The turnovers, you clown, created minor costs. As I stated, when you manage to limit an opponent to FG attempts, and get the ball right back, your defense has actually shown you the ability to clamp down. We had the offensive firepower to easily overcome those turnover errors (of minor point value). Had we given up 21 points on those turnovers (showing our defensive weaknesses) then I'd be the first to admit the defense following the turnovers, added with our weak offense... cost us the game. We were tied in regulation because our coaching staff didn't take advantage of the talent we have. And OT? Where there were no turnovers. Our defense was putrid. The whole contest was not played well by the Cajuns.

What do you suspect is my agenda, clown? Wanting the coaching to improve?

[Just1More]

You keep bringing up disconnect of "cost the game" and "lost the game" in connection with the turnovers.

That is something I have never claimed.

The turnovers' cost UL the win in regulation.

The turnovers bought UL the opportunity to play and win it in overtime.

All other scenarios aside from what actually happened are based on known unknowns' and unknown unknowns'. (Thanks Donald Rumsfeld)

I'm dealing in known knowns, at least this once.

I'm sorry Turbine... you're obviously not reading what I'm saying. I'll claim the error and just leave this alone. We obviously must work on not turning the ball over from this point forward. The rest of what we do is snazzy.

[CharlieK]

They should just put the turnover numbers on the scoreboard and call it good.

If we don't close the playbook we win. Hell if we just don't close it after the punt block for that one series, we win. REGARDLESS OF THE TURNOVERS.

[Turbine]

They should just put the turnover numbers on the scoreboard and call it good.

If we don't close the playbook we win. Hell if we just don't close it after the punt block for that one series, we win. REGARDLESS OF THE TURNOVERS.

There are dozens and dozens of ways UL could have won.

3 out of 4 ways that prevented a regulation win

1 way on a 2 that they lost.

[cajunhawk]

You keep bringing up disconnect of "cost the game" and "lost the game" in connection with the turnovers.

That is something I have never claimed.

The turnovers' cost UL the win in regulation.

The turnovers bought UL the opportunity to play and win it in overtime.

All other scenarios aside from what actually happened are based on known unknowns' and unknown unknowns'. (Thanks Donald Rumsfeld)

I'm dealing in known knowns, at least this once.

Did you major in Semantics?

[CharlieK]

There are dozens and dozens of ways UL could have won.

3 out of 4 ways that prevented a regulation win

1 way on a 2 that they lost.

Boomer, is that you?

[ManAboutTown]

You must be oversauced. Usually you are only ludicrous enough to be comical. But this is beyond comedy. It's the unknown comic run amuck on the gong show. I guarantee if you look up all the stats ever compiled in the history of football, the one absolute most consistent stat is that teams who lose the turnover battle consistently lose the game. And the worse you lose the turnover battle, the higher the odds of you losing the game. The fact is the reason the game went into overtime was the score was tied. You take away any one of their points from a lost possession deep in UL territory, & UL wins that game. never mind what happened in a crazy overtime. If UL doesn't turn the ball over four times they win. Anyone who can't acknowledge that fact is so eaten up with another agenda, they can't be considered credible in their opinion.

And your dumb ___ is so ate up with your own deluded opinion, you can't get past the lazy, programmed response that "losing the turnover battle" always means a loss. Not to mention, you didn't watch the damn game! YOU DID NOT WATCH THE GAME. Your opinion is null and void. You have zero frame of reference, outside of the description you heard second hand.

Lazy, lip service explanation for a coach that coached scared.

[CharlieK]

The team that has less turnovers usually wins. That's a statistical fact. But is that because the better team "usually" wins....and good teams don't "usually" turn it over much?

I'll answer that, yes.

Correlation does not mean causation.

In this case we they scored 9 points off of our turnovers. 9.

We had 180 yards in the FIRST QUARTER. Then we turned it over. Then we got scared of turning it over. Then we put the playbook away and ran Eli over and over and over again. The turnovers only mattered in that our coach got scared of them. You could literally see it happening as the play calling changed.

[cajun_lannister]

Did Baer not kick a personal best FG (50 yards) to beat SDST in our first NO Bowl?

I know nothing of a NOLA bowl against San Diego state .. I think you are making this up

[CharlieK]

I know nothing of a NOLA bowl against San Diego state .. I think you are making this up

I think he will get it this time.....

[Turbine]

The team that has less turnovers usually wins. That's a statistical fact. But is that because the better team "usually" wins....and good teams don't "usually" turn it over much?

I'll answer that, yes.

Correlation does not mean causation.

In this case we they scored 9 points off of our turnovers. 9.

We had 180 yards in the FIRST QUARTER. Then we turned it over. Then we got scared of turning it over. Then we put the playbook away and ran Eli over and over and over again. The turnovers only mattered in that our coach got scared of them. You could literally see it happening as the play calling changed.

As it turns out the inept coaching decisions and turnovers had nothing to do with the loss.

A second game of multiple OTs was played to determine the winner.