M-Borg vs. THE Flavortown U Thread, Orig. by Buckeye Paul, absconded w/by talent.

[entropy]

Omaha writer said similar things... That unlike bama, average HS kids will embrace the Buckeyes..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[entropy]

The 2001 Miami team didn't really play anyone. Not even in the title game. They were pushed to the edge by BC and the VT game was close. In retrospect, the talent on that team was out of control, but I'm not sure their actual performance was the greatest.

I'd still take 1995 UNL for the greatest single season. They beat some pretty good teams in the regular season and then throttled a pretty good Florida team. They basically throttled everyone. Average score was 53-14.

I don't really care a lick about all of that. I just want them to get back to the CFP and see what happens. If they're lucky enough to win it again then "back-to-back" is all that matters.

I will say this is "dream" stuff. I never thought I'd see an Ohio State team this good. With Tressel they were, obviously, very good, but I would have been really nervous about last night. Last night it was pretty much, yeah, we have UFM and talent out the ass. They're not losing.

Also re Tressel-UFM, guys who covered both teams have observed that with Tressel's teams there were always 10-15 kids that you wondered how they were playing for Ohio State. With UFM's teams, nearly ever kid looks like he could start for Ohio State.

Agree. Miami's talent should have equated to better performances. I do wonder how high of a ceiling they would have had with their A game. That said... I don't think there has been a truly dominant CF team since he Huskers in 95... You'd have to go back to the 70's IMO.. Maybe the Buckeyes will change that this year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[iam416]

Yeah, that's the thing about Miami -- they gave us glimpses -- Washington and Syracuse -- but I'd have loved to see them play another legit team (no offense to Crouch and such).

They're still my best team of the BCS Era. I think USC's 2005 team that lost was really good, too. And the Bama team that beat UFM was just an asskicking machine on the LoS. I guess that's The Nick's first title at Bama.

Ohio State has a chance. It sucks that their conference schedule is so awful, but eh, whatever. I really see UFM playing tons of kids over the next 9 games. Getting experience to replace upwards of 6 or 7 first round picks is going to be crucial for surviving next season.

[froot loops]

That Miami team was held back by the QB play. Dorsey was a solid college QB. Larry Coker wasn't the type of coach that was going to coax excellence out of his team. If you watch that documentary it sounds like the players ran the show. They were far harder on themselves than the coaches.

[iam416]

Correct re Dorsey. And Coker.

[Hannibal]

The 2001 Miami team was great but there have been better national champions recently. Their perceived dominance was largely based on destroying teams that were overrated at the time (e.g. Penn State).

[entropy]

Most NC teams are not complete... that is what seperates out the best of the best..

I'd argue that even during the SEC run, they never had a really complete team. I think talent is correct that bama's first NC under saban was the most complete. They were very very good up front.

it is also interesting that teams with very good offenses seem to get more votes than teams with very good defenses. JMO, but that seems like the national bias. that 92 bama team had a sick defense, but just ok O. They're never in any of these conversations, but I don't recall a better D performance in a title game in my life.

[Hannibal]

Bama had some very unimpressive victories. They had the good fortune of timing their really shitty games against the worst teams on their schedule.

[iam416]

That's a fair point, Entropy. As an OSU fan, I'd point out that the 2002 OSU team never gets mentioned, but they had a really, really fantastic defense. They sort of whipped the shit out of Miami in the title game and basically set up the offense for 14 of the 17 points they scored in regulation. Craig Krenzel is pretty similar to Jay Barker. But both those teams WERE utterly pedestrian on offense.

IMO, a more complete great defensive team is Purple Reign!!!!!

The Stoops OU National Champs were a fairly complete team, too. Undervalued, IMO.

[Hannibal]

The 2002 OSU team also barely did enough to win.

The 2005 USC team had some big issues on defense that got exposed as the season went along. They weren't complete.

[iam416]

So, is the 2004 USC team better than the 2005 USC team? The 2004 team was really good on defense and, well, really good on offense though not anywhere near 2005 levels. They had some close calls, but at the end of the day they pasted OU (and would have pasted Auburn).

[entropy]

People also forget that UNL beat 4 end of season top 10 teams.. all by pretty large margins. That was probably the best year for the big8. Some very good teams that year

[entropy]

talent.. I'd suggest most would say 2005, but again.. I think that is because a good offense is more memorable than a good D. jmo

[iam416]

People also forget that UNL beat 4 end of season top 10 teams.. all by pretty large margins. That was probably the best year for the big8

Yeah, but that was almost self-fulfilling. Half the league was trash. The other half was really good. KU and KSU played no one OoC and then played poop in the bowls. I get that the finished 10-2 and in the top 10, but, meh. IIRC, both barely beat Cincinnati and one of them needed an f'n hail mary. Colorado was good, though!

That said, UNL destroyed all 3. So whether they were top 10 or top 20 doesn't matter, IMO. Beating those teams by 25-40 points each was damn impressive.

[Hannibal]

So, is the 2004 USC team better than the 2005 USC team? The 2004 team was really good on defense and, well, really good on offense though not anywhere near 2005 levels. They had some close calls, but at the end of the day they pasted OU (and would have pasted Auburn).

I would rank their 2004 team higher.