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

soclose

Ima guess 1993 Auburn because I'd find that interesting. It's almost assuredly wrong and I should guess another UF team like 1996. I don't think Payton ever did it at UT. 

01 Miami would probably be the  toughest nut for LSU to crack.  There were no holes.  It was stupid. 
Okay, they have one great WR, let's turn that into a weakness by bracket covering him.  Oh, their All-American, 1st rd TE will destroy you underneath.  Umm, okay, let's get a good pass rush.  Their left tackle got Heisman votes.  Fine, let's key on the run!  Well, if we can slow 1200 yd rusher Portis, his backup is Willis McGehee.  And the 3rd string guy is Frank Gore.
.
And the defense.....7 of the starting 11 were 1st rd draft picks.  Vince Wolfork was a backup.  Sean freakin' Taylor was a backup. 
.
The only way you'd beat them is if they were bored.  Their only single-digit game in 2001 was Dec 1 @ Va Tech.  They were bored.  Why do I say that?  They hadn't allowed more than 7 points vs an opponent since Oct 13.  Their previous 2 games were vs ranked opponents and the final scores had been 59-0 and 65-7. 
.
For all the marbles, they went up 34-0 at halftime vs Nebraska.  I don't like any incarnation of the Canes, but 2001 was too much.

The tough part is we have the benefit of hindsight with the other teams.  You mentioned McGahee and Gore but we didn’t know anything about them in 2001.  They were just second string RBs.  Who was the TE in 01? Shockey? Would he be viewed that much better than Thaddeus Moss if both played in college this year and we didn’t have his pro career to lean on? It’s just hard to think of them 20 years later without taking into consideration how good they also were in the NFL.  Twenty years from now we may be viewing this LSU squad as the most talented we have ever seen but they aren’t going to get the benefit of the doubt right now.

2001 Miami was definitely one of the most talented teams of all time but they aren't without their warts. Their very close win vs VTech (admittedly they were good in 2001) and unimpressive win vs BC come to mind. 

I’d rather argue more nuanced “bests” then delve into the TV idiots idiots promoting LSU as the greatest team ever even though they admit they don’t watch college football. Looking at you Stephen A.

He knows less about the NFL.there is strong evidence ESPN hires the handicapped.No disrespect to the handicapped

Crazy Vote,gun to my head I'd take the Shorthorns.They beat a USC Team that had at least as many weapons as LSU.And a defense that tagged along also

i would argue Clemson's OLine is/was stronger and the key to the horns was Vince... reduce V's scramble and true dual threat, and... they're beat.  USC couldn't do that- I think LSU could do that at least better than USC did, and result in an LSU win by at least the same margin the Longhorns beat USC.  

apples to apples, the 'best' opponent for this season's LSU is this season's tOSU.  Again, I'm not pandering to company when i offer that. 

we see the score of the game and in the years to come we'll only see the score- but the score doesn't explain how that game could have went either way... especially when you're talking about an offense (LSU and tOSU ~AND~ Clemson) that can truly score on any play from anywhere on the field.  these scores usually result in a mismatch found somewhere and exploited (duh), and it's usually the first team to find it wins... LSU found it... and punched it over and over and over resulting in Clemson being forced into a place they aren't familiar with (playing from behind) and losing tempo, and isolating their likely play calls to a smaller variety playing catch up... it could JUST AS EASILY in my opinion been LSU behind the eight ball in that game, but they 'broke free' first... and that is the difference in that game.  it was all on the coaches. 

saying it plainly, Clemson caught significant breaks in the game against tOSU- and it was and wasn't officiating.  Had they scored even once in the red zone on two drives they settled for 3, they would have most likely shoved Clemson in the same corner LSU did, and.... they'd have (as recorded by history) 'easily' won that game by two or three scores.  all the while, it wasn't that Clemson was better- it was that tOSU shot themselves in the foot in the most crucial time NOT to shoot themselves in the foot, and allowed Clemson opportunity to hang on.... add to that two really botched calls, and.... we would have seen a far different NCG by my reckoning.  

in the title game there was a significant happening that i haven't seen anyone discuss- two were early, and it was Clemson allowing the LSU drive to continue because of penalty.  It seemed to me that LSU was about to push the O.S. button before that- but keeping the score close kept them off it.  Then, the killer- Burrow was yanked by his mask and resulted in a F&10.... the significance? the guy that grabbed his mask was being held.  had the holding been called?  THAT was the breaking point in that game by my reckoning... it sent Clemson into desperation mode and played directly into LSU's strengths after the resulting score.  

targeting was HUGE in both games.  that key element reduced a solid defense to one with holes on both the Clemson team in the title game, as well as the OSU team against Clemson. 


we look at statistics and base opinions solely on them- as that's how we record the games and justify their outcomes... and then compare teams from despair ages.  that's not smart.  LSU's offense was prolific, and they did it against defenses who were good and those defenses were diminished statistically by playing teams who also had good offenses... meaning- Bama's D was 'off center' from what we usually consider a good bama d... but.... had they played in the ACC their defense, statistically, would have been lights out as the ACC doesn't have O's to truly threaten opponents defensive (statistically supported) ratings.  Statistics are skewed across the board- which would make Clemson (ACC) look better than they are... but... just to confound- Clemson was every bit as good as advertised on both sides of the ball.  

i guess all that^ to say- eye tests from reasonable and informed fans of this sport tell me more than statistics which have to be scrutinized against competitors and their competitors, and... the three best teams were given a chance... one literally lucked out, score be damned.  they're all three 'that' good.  ...... and this is the case more often than it isn't over the years and over individual seasons. 

just my opinion and 35 cents (sorry- i started typing with 3 cents in mind and got carried away).  

The tough part is we have the benefit of hindsight with the other teams.  You mentioned McGahee and Gore but we didn’t know anything about them in 2001.  They were just second string RBs.  Who was the TE in 01? Shockey? Would he be viewed that much better than Thaddeus Moss if both played in college this year and we didn’t have his pro career to lean on? It’s just hard to think of them 20 years later without taking into consideration how good they also were in the NFL.  Twenty years from now we may be viewing this LSU squad as the most talented we have ever seen but they aren’t going to get the benefit of the doubt right now.

I'm sort of the king of separating NFL and college accomplishments.  Preaching to the choir.

My thing about Texas getting the most votes is yeah, Vince Young.  But when any team in any sport is so reliant on one player, that's not a good thing when it comes to an exercise like this.  
.
What if he's off?
What if he tweaks an ankle?
What if he misses the flight?
You're screwed.
.
Even if the great player is known for coming up big in big games....it'll hold true, until it doesn't.  Bob Stoops was "Big Game Bob"...until he wasn't.  Now he'll be remembered for sucking in bowl games.  
.
Just as a genetic bottleneck is bad for a species, so too, can a dominant player be for a great team (when compared to other great teams).