
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sporting News Top 20 CFB Teams of All-Time
Posted on 8/16/26 at 11:26 pm to 632627
Posted on 8/16/26 at 11:26 pm to 632627
I’d make the argument 2008 SC was better than 05
Definitely. The 2008 USC team had one bad half the entire season. USC never got the BCS breaks, having to go undefeated in 2004 and 2005 to get into the title game. The SEC, OU and Ohio State always got the BCS breaks.
Definitely. The 2008 USC team had one bad half the entire season. USC never got the BCS breaks, having to go undefeated in 2004 and 2005 to get into the title game. The SEC, OU and Ohio State always got the BCS breaks.
Posted on 8/17/26 at 9:08 am to CountryVolFan
quote:
Both 2011 LSU and Alabama have almost always been underrated in these discussions. Either team could hang with or beat just about any team on that list. Suffocating defenses that could single-handedly take over games.
They also took turns running into the teeth of each other’s defensive strength in a year without a Cam Newton or Percy Harvin type running around the SEC to cause problems.
Heavy formations with limited passing ability is the worst thing you can do against hyper physical defenses. When you have superior physicality, you can still score 40-50+ regularly - as those teams did. But when you don’t, you get one combined TD in 8+ quarters of play.
Posted on 8/17/26 at 11:36 am to boston vol
quote:Literally every USC fan and the media as a whole said 05 was better until they lost to Texas
What? I’ve never even heard any SC fan say this. The ’05 offense was better, but it was basically the same crew as the ’04 team, just with more experience. The difference was the defenses. The ’04 defense was dominant, #1 in the country in rushing defense, # 2 in scoring defense, and #5 in total defense. The ’05 defense was decent, but in the same categories I listed for the ’04 team, the ’05 team ranked 31st, 28th, and 46th, respectively. You can even throw in their 71st ranked pass defense that year.
Another example, in the most important drive of the season, Texas’ game winning one in the Rose Bowl, the Ting twins were on the field trying to help protect the SC lead. Those dudes would have never seen the field in ‘04.
Comparing stats is stupid. 05 USC played like 7 of the top 12 offenses in the nation.
Cal ASU Fresno Oregon ND UCLA and obviously Texas were all averaging like 40ppg. WSU and Hawaii averaged around 35.
04 USC is 1 of the least dominant undefeated teams having close games vs Stanford Oregon St UCLA Cal and VT. 05 was way more dominant.
Posted on 8/17/26 at 12:59 pm to VerlanderBEAST
quote:
04 USC is 1 of the least dominant undefeated teams
That’s because the offense wasn’t what it was in ‘05, especially early in the season. The defense is what got them through the regular season undefeated. And no, every USC fan didn’t say they were better, They knew the defense was a major issue. Again, the ‘04 team was a better all around team, that’s not really even debatable.
Posted on 8/19/26 at 6:02 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
One of those wins was against a Trevor Lawrence-led Clemson team that had 10 wins. They beat them by three touchdowns.
I never said they weren’t a very good team. I said the reasons LSU 2019 would be ranked higher are very obvious.
Posted on 8/20/26 at 11:25 am to vidtiger23
quote:
I never said they weren’t a very good team. I said the reasons LSU 2019 would be ranked higher are very obvious.
I think people spend too much mental energy comparing numbers instead of evaluating personnel, strengths and weaknesses, and matchups.
If all the teams since 1970 (accounting for physical differences between eras) were put into a tournament - which would take about 15 games to play out - the teams most likely to win it would exhibit at least one of three characteristics:
1. Great overall roster balance with no obvious personnel liabilities. There’s no Tiny Tim out there waiting to get exposed against the wrong team. Every position group can at least hold its own against top competition.
2. Excellent QB play. The player at the most important position can’t just be along for the ride with a talented team. He needs to be a baller himself with the arm talent of a first round draft pick. Being a running threat too is advantageous, but the ability to stretch the field vertically with great QB and/or WR play and force the defense to defend every blade of grass is paramount.
You’re not going to consistently score a bunch of points against great defenses on a compressed field.
3. Studly defensive front. Going to be hard to at least slow down the great offenses without some dudes up front to control the running game and get after the QB.
If your roster has some deficiencies, you must have an A+ passing game or an A+ defense to still have a chance against a series of all-time great opponents.
This post was edited on 8/20/26 at 11:30 am

Popular
Back to top

0








