Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Very good, thank you for that.

See, I think their offense was more Antonio Langham pick-6s and opponents punting it to David Palmer. 
.

bama had 5 non-offensive td's that season. about 3 ppg. 1 was in seccg, and another in the national title. langham had 2 pick-6, palmer had 1 return td.

having said that, the d (and returns) absolutely set the offense up for easier scores.

Oh, okay.  My mistake.  Because you say so.

I mean.....that's exactly your logic.....because you said so.

I have as much proof as you do.

Both units dominated their seasons, but the game is so radically different that it depends on how you view the changes that have come.  My thoughts on offenses, qbs, and physical level of the players are public record by this point, ymmv. 

All we know for sure is Bama did things like slow down Miami to a virtual crawl, and LSU stuck 42 on that year's #1 defense...with a QB with a broken rib for half the game.  The truth lies in some hypothetical alternate reality. 

....but they'd still totally drop 40 on them.  

I think this RPO, pass-a-lot offense is like the wishbone....it diverts the defenders' eyes and will take some time to really defend, schematically.
.

My biggest problem with RPO isn’t how it’s defended, it’s how it’s officiated.  Until officials start consistently flagging linemen being downfield that will continue to be hard to stop.  The NCAA should adopt the NFL rule of only allowing linemen one yard past the LOS, imo.  It’s a pet peeve of mine.

I'd take the legendary 1899 Sewanee team over that:
12-0, 11 by shutout.  Won 5 road games in six days.
Oct 21 - Georgia (12-0)
Oct 23 - @ Ga Tech (32-0)
Oct 28 - Tennessee (46-0)
Nov 3 - SW Presbyterian (54-0)
Nov 9 - @ Texas (12-0)
Nov 10 - @ Texas A&M (10-0)
Nov 11 - @ Tulane (23-0)
Nov 13 - @ LSU (34-0)
Nov 14 - Ole Miss (12-0)
Nov 20 - Cumberland (71-0)
Nov 30 - Auburn (11-10)
Dec 2 - North Carolina (5-0)
.

Nope.  They let Auburn score 10 on 'em.  Crappy defense.

that's just cause those '92 players are in their 50s now.

Ha that's along the lines of what the press asked Ty Cobb in the 1950s how he would hit against today's pitchers, Cobb told them  "probably 270-280".The scribe asked why so low,Cobb shot back " because I'm 73 F****** years old" (supposedly)