October 31, 200817 yr 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. 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. All I'm saying, is in a system as ridiculous as college football, when the debate is between the top two teams, both when one loss, and they played head-to-head, then the result of that game should be the deciding factor. I didn't like the fact that you attempted to place an asterisk on the Nebraska title, without mentioning the title FSU won in '93 that was questionable in its own right. I don't see a big difference in "lets give one to the gipper" whether the motivation is because he's retiring, or because he's been a great coach for a long time that just hasn't won the big one yet. Regardless, you give FSU the nod. Fair enough. I honestly don't have a problem with that. Its a very close argument and I can see both sides. I just choose to go with Nebraska. I'd say its similar to the basketball debate between UK and Duke in the '90's...a strong case can be made for both. :thumb:
October 31, 200817 yr That '99 team beat 4 ranked teams out of its 12 wins, including beating #3 Florida in the Swamp. I'm talking about the whole decade.
October 31, 200817 yr 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. You're almost correct. Look up USC, and then come back and tell me if LSU was the best team this decade.
October 31, 200817 yr I'm talking about the whole decade. A serious question, because I don't fully recall, but how good was the Big Eight and then Big XII during Nebraska's dominant years?
October 31, 200817 yr A serious question, because I don't fully recall, but how good was the Big Eight and then Big XII during Nebraska's dominant years? I don't know either. I'm pretty sure that Michigan's schedule in '97 was tougher than Nebraska's, because I looked it up a while back. Its hard to remember how good the conferences were looking back that far...I catch myself sometimes judging the past champions by how tough the conference is in the present. :lol:
October 31, 200817 yr 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. Are you talking about the same USC team that won a share of the national title in 03 and repeated in 04. I think that equates to 2, plus they played in a third championship game against Texas when Vince (Crybaby) Young played the game of his life. During that impressive run, they also put together one of the greatest winning streaks in the history of college football, but no, why would we make a case for them as the best team of this decade.
October 31, 200817 yr Comparison of USC and LSU this decade... LSU Overall Record: 82-22 (78.8%) Bowl Record: 6-2 (75.0%); 11.5 point average margin of victory BCS Bowls: 4-0; 15.3 point average margin of victory 3 Conference Championships (4 SEC West Titles) 5 Seasons of 10+ wins No .500 or losing seasons 2 BCS National Championships 13 game win streak from 2006 thru 2007 USC Overall Record: 81-21 (79.4%) Bowl Record: 5-2 (71.4%); 15.7 point average margin of victory BCS Bowls: 5-1 (83.3%); 19 point average margin of victory 6 Conference Championships 6 Seasons of 11+ wins 2 Seasons of .500 or worse (5-7 in 2000 and 6-6 in 2001) 34 game win streak from '03 thru '05 1 BCS Championship; 1 AP Championship 1 undefeated season Similar to the FSU/Nebraska argument in the '90's...I think you can make a good argument for both.
November 1, 200817 yr Author Comparison of USC and LSU this decade... LSU Overall Record: 82-22 (78.8%) Bowl Record: 6-2 (75.0%); 11.5 point average margin of victory BCS Bowls: 4-0; 15.3 point average margin of victory 3 Conference Championships (4 SEC West Titles) 5 Seasons of 10+ wins No .500 or losing seasons 2 BCS National Championships 13 game win streak from 2006 thru 2007 USC Overall Record: 81-21 (79.4%) Bowl Record: 5-2 (71.4%); 15.7 point average margin of victory BCS Bowls: 5-1 (83.3%); 19 point average margin of victory 6 Conference Championships 6 Seasons of 11+ wins 2 Seasons of .500 or worse (5-7 in 2000 and 6-6 in 2001) 34 game win streak from '03 thru '05 1 BCS Championship; 1 AP Championship 1 undefeated season Similar to the FSU/Nebraska argument in the '90's...I think you can make a good argument for both. Man, thats close, but I'll say LSU. I didnt realize that USC had 2 non winning seasons!
November 1, 200817 yr Bama won NCs in 1973/78/79. Lost 13 games in the 70s. They were voted "team of the decade" for both the 60s/70s. In the 90s they have a NC and beat TheOSU/Michigan/Colorado in Bowl games.
November 1, 200817 yr IMO Bama has to be the team of the decade in both the 60's and 70's With Championships in 61,64,65 and 73,78,79
November 4, 200817 yr Author A serious question, because I don't fully recall, but how good was the Big Eight and then Big XII during Nebraska's dominant years? Oklahoma and Colorado were good. Texas and A&M were competetive. Now dont you guys look these up and jump on me...Im going from memory!
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.