Officiating gift wrapped the 93 Orange Bowl for FSU.

 

Weak.

Did you throw in level of competition each program faced. I mean for the love of pete, the 99 championship was handed to them when they looked over and saw Virginia Tech on the opposite side of the field.

That '99 team beat 4 ranked teams out of its 12 wins, including beating #3 Florida in the Swamp.

2000's

LSU (81-20) overall, (48-15) vs. SEC, (6-2) in Bowl Games, including two National Championships '03 and '07

 

1990's

FLORIDA (102-22-1) overall, (69-9) vs. SEC, (5-4) in Bowl Games, Nat'l Champs in '96, finished 8 of 10 years in the top 10.

 

1980's - Miami

1970's- Alabama (103-16-1) 2 nat'l titles, 8 top 10's

1960's- Alabama (90-16-4) 2 nat'l titles, 9 top 10's

 

I'm pretty sure Michigan won the 96 title....

LSU is the only team with multiple titles this decade....I'd say you'd be hard pressed to make much of an argument against them.

I'm pretty sure Michigan won the 96 title....

Michigan won half of the 97 title.

good eye Neersfan, I was thinking the same thing about Miami's titles. 3 in the 80's. I will say LSU for the 2000's two championship game wins. USC is probably the most consistent along with OSU though.

LSU is the only team with multiple titles this decade....I'd say you'd be hard pressed to make much of an argument against them.

 

I don't know. USC would make a VERY good argument against. Honestly USC should have been in three BCS Championship games, if it weren't for the flawed BCS system. That year LSU won it, they should have been playing USC and not Oklahoma who got crushed in their Big 12 championship game.

I don't know. USC would make a VERY good argument against. Honestly USC should have been in three BCS Championship games, if it weren't for the flawed BCS system. That year LSU won it, they should have been playing USC and not Oklahoma who got crushed in their Big 12 championship game.

 

And they have 1 title....It doesn't compare....I mean tO$U has made 3, but you're not too quick to make an argument for them.

Florida State loses by 7 at #2 Notre Dame and then Notre Dame loses at home to unranked Boston College the following week. The 'Noles only dropped one spot because of how close the game was and where they were playing at. Notre Dame dropped significantly more because they lost to an unranked team at home. I would have rather seen a rematch in the Orange Bowl, but let's not pretend that we haven't all heard about it being important when you lose and to whom.

 

Nebraska getting a gift vote from the coaches despite Michigan clearly deserving it more is totally the same thing. You're right, how comical.

 

That's exactly what I said. You tried to use the Nebraska incident as support for you case, while conveniently omitting the 'Noles title gift. I called you on it, but nice try.

 

We can debate all we want, but the fact is Nebraska and Michigan were both undefeated and they didn't play. The only reason Michigan jumped to #1 is because Nebraska WON a close game. In the bowl games, Nebraska was far more impressive. They beat the #3 team, Tennessee, by 25 points. Michigan beat the #8 team by 5. Why is it fair to cry about Nebraska jumping back over them at the end, when the same thing happened earlier in the year, only in reverse?

 

When it comes to FSU and Notre Dame, they actually played. And, Notre Dame won.

 

To a neutral observers, Nebraska has a stronger case.

 

But, it is what it is, and both teams won national championships. The only point I'm making is that you can't strengthen FSU's argument by saying Nebraska didn't deserve their title (or vice versa).

 

If you think FSU was the team of the '90's, I have no problem with it. You have plenty of good arguments to back up that claim. This just doesn't happen to be one of them.

 

But, I'll take Nebraska. The overall records are so close, its a wash. I'll choose the team with more titles. And, that is the 'Huskers.

LSU is the only team with multiple titles this decade....I'd say you'd be hard pressed to make much of an argument against them.

 

If you're going only by the BCS. SC has two otherwise.

And they have 1 title....It doesn't compare....I mean tO$U has made 3, but you're not too quick to make an argument for them.

 

Maybe because they've been annihilated in two of them.

That's exactly what I said. You tried to use the Nebraska incident as support for you case, while conveniently omitting the 'Noles title gift. I called you on it, but nice try.

 

We can debate all we want, but the fact is Nebraska and Michigan were both undefeated and they didn't play. The only reason Michigan jumped to #1 is because Nebraska WON a close game. In the bowl games, Nebraska was far more impressive. They beat the #3 team, Tennessee, by 25 points. Michigan beat the #8 team by 5. Why is it fair to cry about Nebraska jumping back over them at the end, when the same thing happened earlier in the year, only in reverse?

 

When it comes to FSU and Notre Dame, they actually played. And, Notre Dame won.

 

To a neutral observers, Nebraska has a stronger case.

 

But, it is what it is, and both teams won national championships. The only point I'm making is that you can't strengthen FSU's argument by saying Nebraska didn't deserve their title (or vice versa).

 

If you think FSU was the team of the '90's, I have no problem with it. You have plenty of good arguments to back up that claim. This just doesn't happen to be one of them.

 

But, I'll take Nebraska. The overall records are so close, its a wash. I'll choose the team with more titles. And, that is the 'Huskers.

 

My fault. I suppose it wasn't clear enough that I was being sarcastic.

 

Your Notre Dame/Florida State argument would have more merit had Notre Dame not lost to an unranked team at home the following week. The #1 team losing to the #2 team on the road is not nearly as bad a loss as one to an unranked team at home. History has borne out my opinion on that matter many more times than yours.

 

Case in point: Don't believe for one instant that if Texas suffers a loss to any team but Texas Tech that they'll stay above Oklahoma. They may not stay above Oklahoma if they do lose to Texas Tech.

 

But, as far as the 90's go, if your sole basis is 2.5 titles over 2 (which is what it literally is, all of our debate aside), I think that's a rather narrow minded focus on it. What are your thoughts on the facts I stated other than the cumulative record, which is indeed close? FSU was 2-0 versus Nebraska in bowl games during the 90s. They won 3 more bowl games than them, only losing two in the entire decade. They finished 5 spots higher than them on average in the polls.

90's Nebraska

2000's LSU

 

Depending on how this year finishes out, the 2000's is still up for grabs.

My fault. I suppose it wasn't clear enough that I was being sarcastic.

 

Your Notre Dame/Florida State argument would have more merit had Notre Dame not lost to an unranked team at home the following week. The #1 team losing to the #2 team on the road is not nearly as bad a loss as one to an unranked team at home. History has borne out my opinion on that matter many more times than yours.

 

Case in point: Don't believe for one instant that if Texas suffers a loss to any team but Texas Tech that they'll stay above Oklahoma. They may not stay above Oklahoma if they do lose to Texas Tech.

 

But, as far as the 90's go, if your sole basis is 2.5 titles over 2 (which is what it literally is, all of our debate aside), I think that's a rather narrow minded focus on it. What are your thoughts on the facts I stated other than the cumulative record, which is indeed close? FSU was 2-0 versus Nebraska in bowl games during the 90s. They won 3 more bowl games than them, only losing two in the entire decade. They finished 5 spots higher than them on average in the polls.

 

My fault. I suppose it wasn't clear enough when I said you had some good arguments to back up your claim.

 

History has also borne out that when two teams are close, when one wins impressively against a strong opponent and one doesn't, they often switch places in the polls. It happened twice with Michigan and Nebraska that year. Nebraska deserved their title in '97 at least as much as FSU did in '93.

 

But, I suppose I can re-state my position again. The rest of the stats are relatively even. For me personally, a slightly higher win percentage for FSU and three more bowl wins doesn't outweight an extra national title. As for FSU being 2-0 against Nebraska in head-to-head bowl competition, I think we've already established in this debate that head-to-head results don't necessarily mean much when comparing two closely matched teams. It seems a bit contradictory to bring that up, while shrugging off the 'Noles loss to ND in '93. But, I suppose that's just me.

History has also borne out that when two teams are close, when one wins impressively against a strong opponent and one doesn't, they often switch places in the polls. It happened twice with Michigan and Nebraska that year. Nebraska deserved their title in '97 at least as much as FSU did in '93.

 

I'll give you that. It's why I dropped the Nebraska/Michigan argument. I just wanted you to know I was being sarcastic. But that also wasn't a full title. It was a split. Hence 2.5-2.

 

As for FSU being 2-0 against Nebraska in head-to-head bowl competition, I think we've already established in this debate that head-to-head results don't necessarily mean much when comparing two closely matched teams. It seems a bit contradictory to bring that up, while shrugging off the 'Noles loss to ND in '93. But, I suppose that's just me.

 

I'm not shrugging it off. Had Notre Dame taken care of their business I would have never advocated that FSU been ahead of them. What you seem to be shrugging off is that Notre Dame lost to an unranked opponent at home the following week. Florida State meanwhile added at least one more impressive win, winning by 12 at #7 Florida. Notre Dame meanwhile didn't play any more games after their loss to Boston College. Again, it's not always who you lost to, but when and what happened afterward. I would even go as far to say that had the FSU/ND scenario occurred in week 3 (with ND losing in week 4) that you may have seen Notre Dame ahead of FSU by the end.