re: .

quote:

---

I"m going off of memory here, so I could be wrong but...

I don't remember Tallet from '98. If he was a weekend starter, he definitely was not at the same level of the 2000 Tallet. Doug Thompson was the go-to guy in 98, but to my point, he was also on the 97 staff. Ainsworth was dominant in 99, but he was not quite there yet in 98. The 1999 Ainsworth was a bonafide #1 starter, but he was still developing in 98. I'm almost certain that Weylin Guedry was not on the 98 team. I thought he was a freshman in 2000. Shane Youman was never a great pitcher at LSU. I'd rate him a serviceable. Cresse did grow up in 98, so I'll give you that much, but I would hardly call Furniss' 98 a career year. Furniss was just that good for 3 straight years from 96-98. He was awesome in 98, but he was just as good in 96 and 97.

---

1998 starting rotation was Thompson, Keisler and Esteves. And that team was not nearly as balanced offensively as the 1997 team. They hit only .299 as a team and scored nearly 100 fewer runs. They lived and died with the home run much more so than we did in 97.

quote:

---

'98 had better pitchers with Tallet, Ainsworth, and the bullpen l/r combo of Weylin Guidry and Shane Youman.

---

Tallet, Guidry and Youman werent even on the team


Ainsworth pitched 8 innings that whole year.

The '98 team had 3 players in the lineup that hit 29, 28, and 27 HR's. I believe 5 others had double digit HR's as well. Now don't get me wrong, '97 had a tougher lineup, but '98 was right there with them. 3 guys getting close to 30 HR's? How do you approach a lineup like that from a pitching standpoint?

Also, if we're making an all-time team, don't leave off Lloyd Peever. Pitched 1 year, but went 14-0. 1st team All-American, Collegiate baseball player of the year, 1.92 ERA.

quote:

---

but '98 was right there with them.

---

97' hit 31 more HRs than the 98' team.

huge gap.

97

quote:

---

97 was the best. Completely and utterly dominant, mainly cause of the bats, but hey, everyone else was using the same ones.

---

agreed. probably the best team ever in college baseball. was the pitching great? no, but the offense was so completely unstoppable, it didnt matter and no pitching staff ever would be able to slow it down

quote:

---

normally i wouldnt split hairs, but in this context, i will, because i feel the 1997 team stands alone. It has no peers

---

If you take a look at the offensive stats other than homers, 97 had a much better and more balanced lineup.

quote:

---

97 was pretty sick

---

And there were some other teams in late 80's early 90's that were better than any team we had in 2000's

quote:

---

True some of Skip's earlier teams may have been better than some of the ones that won titles. They just couldn't close the deal in Omaha.

---

I understand what you're saying talent wise but IMO the best are the ones that did close the deal in Omaha.

quote:

---

97 was pretty sick

---

this. 1997's team was bad to the fricking bone