Talk:LSU Tigers football

message: After studying the "LSU Football" article and comparing it to the "LSU Tigers football" article I would suggest that the "LSU Football" article just simply be deleted.  It contains no relevant information that the "LSU Tigers football" article doesn't already contain.  The section labeled "2006 Season" is actually just a recap of the 2005 season and really doesn't need to be in the article.  If you're going to recap a season then a new article should be started for each season, for example, "2006 LSU Tigers football".  The naming of the "LSU Tigers football" page keeps with the standard set by the WikiProject College football. Seancp 17:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you.  It is just a stupid insult that opposing teams fans call LSU fans.  Its akin to calling Tennesseee Vols fans a bunch of hillbillies and it has no place on this article.  Thanks for removing it. Seancp 22:41, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: LSU Football

message: I have begun some pretty wholesale changes to the page. While I thank my fellow Tiger fans for their contributions, I've had to edit some sections pretty heavily because of some fairly embarrassing and fawning language used...we really don't need to describe certain victories as "incredible," "astonishing," "stunning," or the like...the only two exceptions which spring to mind are 1997 Florida and the Bluegrass Miracle. Let's try to make this article as unbiased as possible and not some bastion of homer hyperbole.
--Lengrand (talk) 05:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Concerns 

message: The band does run down the hill, I've seen it myself.
I changed the chinese bandits part because the entire stadium bows to the defense, not just the student section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.207.241.210 (talk) 03:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The traditions page 

message: Do the additions of speculative 2008 Depth charts violate WP:CRYSTAL and or WP:NOR
:(More detailed description). Another editor has been adding depth charts that could be WP:NOR as it is believed by some that even most coaches do not know what their depth charts may look like for 2008.  Players will declare for the NFL Draft, some incoming freshmen will be good enough to actually play their first year, etc...  The editor continues to add this information and seems to refuse to acknowledge any attempts to discuss the matter.  This is an encyclopedia and not a fan site.  Speculation is fine for a fan site, but articles need to be able to be sourced or be able to be for it to be in an encyclopedia.  These lists do not seem to qualify as encyclopedic.  These edits have been occuring on multiple team sites.  Some examples, but not all, include the following edits:      .
::Verifiability is the biggest concern here. Unless sources can be cited -- and I suspect few will be available until the college football previews/guides start coming out in mid- to late-summer -- then these "projected" depth charts will have to go. As stated above, several factors that can't be accounted for play here. Most coaches will have no idea what the team will look like for next season until, at the very least, spring practice. Caknuck (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a no brainer for me.  The 2008 depth charts don't belong.Brianreading (talk) 08:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC: 2008 Depth charts

message: The "Prominent" players page is a veritable mishmash of players, past and present, seemingly selected at random with no discernible common criterion between them. While I don't want to be too technical, "prominent", as defined by Mr. Webster, means "widely and popularly known." I would respectfully submit that at least 75% of the players listed there do not reasonably fall within that definition. Furthermore, it is near impossible to delineate who's "prominent" and who's not without some sort of objectively ascertainable criteria. And when that is coupled with the harsh but true fact that great players of the past are often forgotten, I submit that the page, as is currently written, falls victim to both generation-based partiality and the contributors' esoteric caprice.
From what I gather, most of the players mentioned there have moved on to the NFL. I do not dispute that making it to the NFL is an achievement worthy of mention on the LSU Tigers football page. However, if that is the basis upon which they have been selected to be labeled "prominent", then I suggest a new section be added, perhaps named "Tigers in the NFL", which would more accurately define the accomplishment warranting their inclusion on the page. That new section may also be subdivided further into "Current NFL Players" and "Former NFL players", if anyone is so inclined. This is the format used by many teams. See, e.g.,  USC,  Michigan,  Ohio State. Thereafter, the majority of the remainder of players could be put in another section, possibly titled "All-American Tigers", so that we can incorporate all of the excellent hard work that was put into the existing table. Others could be placed under "Other Notable Tigers" if need be.
In sum, I would recommend that an objective merit-based format be implemented. That may be much more prudent than plucking players out of the timeless field of talent for individual glorification, and then lumping them together as "prominent". With that said, I welcome the community's comments, and hopefully we can figure this out without stepping on any toes.--Htrahan (talk) 04:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prominent Players page 

message: I think that the arbitrary move done is wrong.  Consensus should be obtained before doing this.  I'd like to voice my Oppose to this action, as sports fans and the public in general know this school commonly as LSU, not Louisiana State.  I think the article spells out that LSU stands for Louisiana State University, which should suffice for the presentation of that info. Sf46 (talk) 04:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The user that did this, SportsMaster, has done it to almost every LSU athletics page repeatedly, even after I asked him to stop.  He also did it under another username, SportsMasterESPN.  Can we report him to the admins or something?  I'm tired of this happening all the time. Seancp (talk) 11:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, what the hell happened to the edit history of this article? Seancp (talk) 11:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The edit history was lost when I unmoved his redirect.  The history appears to have stayed attached to his redirected article. Sf46 (talk) 13:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I'm working on fixing that.  I already put in an admin request to have the original name restored on the article with the correct edit history. Seancp (talk) 13:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you notice the guy seems to have ties to Ohio.  Could it be he's sore because Ohio State can't beat an SEC team to save their soul? Add your vote here & at Requested Moves. Sf46 (talk) 13:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: One thing to note is that cut-and-paste moves are prohibited, because they separate the page from the page history. This violates the GDFL, which requires that all contributors must be given credit for the article. As an aside, you have to admit the refs at the OSU v. LSU game this year were hardly impartial. They didn't call a single penalty against LSU until the 4th; they made all kinds of bs calls against OSU. Regardless of my personal biases :) , I'll move the page back. Parsecboy (talk) 13:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for helping out.  I think most Tiger fans think that LSU got the shaft in penalties the whole season.  They were one of the most penalized teams in the SEC. Maybe the refs in that game decided to cut 'em some slack to make up for being so overbearing on them the whole season.  Maybe the bookies bought 'em off or they just didn't commit quite as many penalties.  Who knows?Sf46 (talk) 20:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitrary move to Louisiana State Football 

message: Stay with Louisiana StateTigers football or move back to LSU Tigers football?
Support moving back to name LSU Tigers football Sf46 (talk) 13:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hopefully an admin will see the Move Request I made on the Louisiana StateTigers football article and act on it soon.  We just need to maintain the edit history of the article and the only way to do that is to ensure that Louisiana StateTigers football gets moved back to LSU Tigers football. Seancp (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The move request appears to be completed.  I went through and corrected all of the double redirects that pointed to the Louisiana StateTigers football first.  It appears that all that is now needed is that the Louisiana StateTigers football page be deleted and we are back to where we were prior to that user's against-consensus page move. -Pparazorback (talk) 20:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move or stay? 

message: The University does not have seven national titles or even four. We claim three. We're not as pathetic as Alabama, people.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lengrand (talk • contribs) 16:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Titles 

message: The logo used on the helmets in the uniform picture for this Wikipedia page is wrong. LSU has never, nor will they ever, use that logo on their helmets. A simple Google image search would show the proper helmet logo.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbiesqp (talk • contribs) 01:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  LSU Uniform Picture (Helmets) 

message: I'm curious as to why nothing about the racial integration of the team is mentioned. The way I understand it, although they had black players riding the bench previously, LSU didn't actually put blacks in the game and give them scholarships to play until 1972, tying with Ole Miss for the last two major college football programs to fully integrate. I could be wrong on this - I was hoping someone who knew more could fit it into the wiki.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpidermanTUba (talk • contribs) 17:12, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no mention of integration? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on LSU Tigers football. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20160204092339/http://www.mmbolding.com/bowls/Independence_1997.htm to http://www.mmbolding.com/bowls/Independence_1997.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130304022434/http://www.tigerrag.com/wp-content/uploads/celebration-3.jpg to http://www.tigerrag.com/wp-content/uploads/celebration-3.jpg
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:53, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 21:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: This section states that "LSU is the only SEC team Texas A&M has not defeated since joining the conference". Texas A&M has lost their only match-up with Florida and has yet to play Georgia or Kentucky in-conference. I think "the only SEC team" should be changed to "the only SEC West team..." or "the only one of its annual SEC opponents".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.59.1.157 (talk) 16:25, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  LSU - Texas A&M Rivalry 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LSU Tigers football. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141226035457/http://www.tulane.edu/~athletic/FB/FBHIST/FBHISTORY.HTML to http://www.tulane.edu/~athletic/FB/FBHIST/FBHISTORY.HTML
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:14, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hey I just wanted to know if I could add Tulane down in rivalries for LSU, They used to be pretty big rivals right? I just want to make sure it's alright. Just let me know if I can. Thanks for the help Boosama (talk) 03:21, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's mentioned later in the article. The infobox on the right is for listing major current rivals; LSU and Tulane haven't played for nearly a decade, and even then, the series hadn't really been competitive since the 1950s or earlier. Lizard (talk) 03:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

text: No, it shouldn't be included in the infobox. Lizard (talk) 03:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle For The Rag 

message: Auburn should be listed as a rival in the infobox, given the history of tight finishes and notable moments. Lizard (talk) 19:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auburn 

message: 2601:845:C180:3780:A4D3:7CEE:D03E:88CB (talk) 05:16, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 06:58, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2020