Top Undefeated Teams of the Decade?

[AuburnAlumni]

Quote: Originally Posted by Husker_OS

BS...Florida was better in '05. Alabama was better in '05. LSU was better in '05. South Carolina was better. UGA WON the East so I fail to see how they were worse. '07 was a banner year for the SEC in terms of bowls. The SEC went 6-2 that year. '04....3-3.

You're still here?

You get the award for longest and most pointless attempt at an argument in the history of the Operation Sports Forums.

In recognition of this impressive feat, I've enclosed a coupon for a free McRib when they return to McDonald's and a piece of lint. This package should arrive at your dwelling within 3-5 business days. Congratulations!

[Cebby]

Quote: Originally Posted by Husker_OS

BS...Florida was better in '05. Alabama was better in '05. LSU was better in '05. South Carolina was better. UGA WON the East so I fail to see how they were worse.

Florida was slightly better. Their offense was garbage and their bowl win was a travesty. The difference in win totals was playing an UGA team with no QB, a much worse Tennessee team, and the bowl game.

LSU and USC were about the same. They had one more win in one more game. The difference for LSU was playing a worse Auburn team at home and not pulling a choke job in the bowl game.

UGA was worse regardless of winning the East. The had a worse record, worse ranking, and had probably the biggest loss of talent in school history from 04 to 05.

2007 was comparatively a great year for the SEC, but I've maintained that every team was down that year from the beginning of the year on, especially when the top 10 included Kentucky, South Carolina, BC, Cal, and Southern Florida. That was a great year games wise, but there was nothing close to a great team that year. Aside from 2000, that was probably the worst year for the SEC. Unlike 2000, it happened to coincide with a terrible year for everyone else as well.

[Husker_OS]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

Florida was slightly better. Their offense was garbage and their bowl win was a travesty. The difference in win totals was playing an UGA team with no QB

Ahh the CFB forum...such a delight. Only here can a team WIN their conference and be considered a team who was worse than the year before when they did not even win their division. And for that, I'm really not looking at the rest of your post.

[Cebby]

Quote: Originally Posted by Husker_OS

Ahh the CFB forum...such a delight. Only here can a team WIN their conference and be considered a team who was worse than the year before when they did not even win their division. And for that, I'm really not looking at the rest of your post.

First, you did look at the rest of my post since the part you meant to quote was 2 lines down.

Second, Georgia finished with a worse record in 2005.

Georgia finished with a worse ranking in 2005.

Georgia suffered, until Alabama's epic loss, the biggest blow to the SEC in SEC history in 2006 (2005 season).

Georgia lost their best QB and defensive players in school history, 2 first team All SEC WRs, and first team All SEC/first and second round LB and DB.

Clearly they got better.

Third, it is possible for a conference/division winner to be worse than a conference/division loser. In fact, it happens all the time. 2005 Ohio St was better than 2006 OSU. 2003 Oklahoma was better than the 2006 Oklahoma team. 2002 USC was better than the 2006-2008 USC. 2006 WVU was probably better than 2005 WVU. 2001 Florida was certainly better than 2000 Florida. 2001 Nebraska was far better than 2006 Nebraska. Hell, division winning 2000 Auburn was worse than 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2007 Auburn.

[BigDofBA]

Quote: Originally Posted by AuburnAlumni

Why are you here? Seriously. Why are you even in this thread? In no way, shape, or form does a Crimson Turd fan have any relevance in this thread.

LMAO at you telling people who can post in a thread on an internet message board.

How is it any different then the Auburn fans pimping Auburn, Texas fans pimping Texas, and Ohio State fans saying they are underrated?

I didn't even mention the 2000 OU team and I'm getting flamed to hell because my top three are Miami, USC, and Texas. I freaking hate Texas and I still put them third. I hate USC yet I respect how good they were. As for Miami, OU and Miami have a rivalry that dates back to the 80's. I'm not exactly a Miami fan if you catch my drift. Yep, I'm being really biased in this thread.

If we had a thread about which team has gotten screwed the worst over the past decade Auburn would win that.

[Cebby]

Quote: Originally Posted by BigDofBA

How is it any different then the Auburn fans pimping Auburn, Texas fans pimping Texas, and Ohio State fans saying they are underrated?

I don't think any of those 3 groups have posted in this thread with the explicit purpose of hating like Husker did.

I'd say the same thing if, in a "top teams of the 90s" AA came in talking nonsense about the 1992 Alabama team saying they were essentially the 2006 Auburn team.

[mmorg]

Quote: Originally Posted by P2K

Bullcrap. While you are correct that Sharpe was pulling on Gamble, Gamble was also clutching and pulling on Sharpe at the same time. That's what happens in a 5 yard dogfight toward the endzone. That is also why the line judge that was a couple feet away on the sideline let them play it out. And the was no pass interference on the play. After the fighting for position in the endzone, neither of Sharpe's hands were on Gamble until the ball got to his hands. That left hand the vid tells you to look at did nothing to Gamble. Game was over. I'll always think that with one foot in the grave. I also hate discussing in because hated that entire week after. I had dreams that Miami actually did win and what I saw didn't really happen. I was screwed up mentally. But, no one will ever convince me that the call should have happened. And the fact that Bucknut fans have to keep justifying that call with new pics and videos each year tells me in the back of their minds, they aren't that sure on the call themselves.

Ohio State fans didn't bring it up. But you can keep on telling yourself whatever you want. You can blame losing the game on this call all you want but OSU was able to score again in OT and stop Miami in the end.

The NASO seems to disagree with you and all the "haters" in Miami and the media:
http://www.naso.org/pressreleases/st104.htm

It's ok to be bitter, but don't try and act like that call ruined the game for you guys. It only allowed OSU to tie the game. Miami had plenty of chances to tie it back up and they failed.

[dopeboy206]

Quote: Originally Posted by AuburnAlumni

95 Nebraska would pimp slap the 91 Huskies all over the field.

The 91 Huskies were more balanced. They had the purple haze defense which I think would stop Nebraska's running game. The 90s Huskies were way more loaded with talents than any 90s Nebraska team point blank even with that 2 year probation. If that 2 year bowl ban never happened imagine what would of happened? Sorry for sounding biased but its the truth.


For you to say they would pimp smack U-Dub is a bit foolish don't you think?

[Husker_OS]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

I don't think any of those 3 groups have posted in this thread with the explicit purpose of hating like Husker did. I'd say the same thing if, in a "top teams of the 90s" AA came in talking nonsense about the 1992 Alabama team saying they were essentially the 2006 Auburn team.

I came into this thread because an Auburn fan started saying they "ran through their schedule". Which is hardly correct. And I pointed out Alabama/Auburn that year was a close game.


Yes...so much hating going on. Then you got offended when I compared Auburn to Alabama...oh the horror.

[Cebby]

Quote:

Yes...so much hating going on. Then you got offended when I compared Auburn to Alabama...oh the horror.

You compared an undefeated Auburn team who was in a position to lose 1 game to an Alabama team that was dominated by a mid major and thoroughly defeat by Florida and in a position to lose a few other games.

There is quite a difference.