Started By
Message
re: 2008 USC vs 2011 Alabama
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:10 pm to VADawg
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:10 pm to VADawg
quote:
Or, you know, it might be entirely possible that I watched both teams and formed my own opinion. My opinion is that while USC was inconsistent and did play down to inferior teams sometimes, their A game was better than anyone else's that year, and no one did big games better than Pete Carroll's USC teams (except for Vince Young).
Also it's easy to forget that the SEC in 2004 was pretty good, but nowhere near what it has been over the last 7-8 years. The Pac 10 had two deserving BCS teams (USC, Cal) while the SEC had only one (Auburn).
The SEC hadn't been given the chance to prove their superiority yet.
UT was as good as Cal but had the misfortune of playing Auburn twice. Auburn was the better team by all measurable standards. Auburn suffered from the crush the media had with USC and Tubbs desire to step on peoples throats and watch them slowly suffocate verses using the two shotguns and the rifle he had in his hands to end their misery.
1
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:15 pm to Tigerman97
You're telling me that Tennessee, with Erik Ainge and Brent Schaeffer at QB, was better than Cal with Aaron Rodgers and Marshawn Lynch? The same Cal that was 10-1 with only a six point loss at USC (a game in which they outgained the Trojans by 200ish yards)? You've got to be joking. That was a great Cal team.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 3:16 pm
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:22 pm to VADawg
quote:
You're telling me that Tennessee, with Erik Ainge and Brent Schaeffer at QB, was better than Cal with Aaron Rodgers and Marshawn Lynch? The same Cal that was 10-1 with only a six point loss at USC (a game in which they outgained the Trojans by 200ish yards)? You've got to be joking. That was a great Cal team.
You seem to think the skills guys are more important to success than I do. The Oline and Dline are where titles are won and the further you get from the ball at snap the less important you are to the success of the team you play for and this was more so the case in 2004. Cal's oline and dline both were filled with future insurance salesmen, high school coaches and Best Buy managers not NFL talent. UT on the other hand had NFL talent on both lines.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:25 pm to VADawg
quote:so we ignoring the bowl game then?
The same Cal that was 10-1 with only a six point loss at USC
quote:and ignoring a 10 point win against 7-5 Southern Miss? and a 1 pt win against 5-6 Oregon?
That was a great Cal team.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:27 pm to joeyb147
quote:
so we ignoring the bowl game then?
You mean Cal getting screwed out of playing in the Rose and getting stuck with the damn Holiday instead?
And if you bring up bowls, then you can't ignore what USC did to OU. Can't have it both ways.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:28 pm to VADawg
quote:
You're telling me that Tennessee, with Erik Ainge and Brent Schaeffer at QB, was better than Cal with Aaron Rodgers and Marshawn Lynch? The same Cal that was 10-1 with only a six point loss at USC (a game in which they outgained the Trojans by 200ish yards)? You've got to be joking. That was a great Cal team.
And Cal didn't lose to a 6-6 team at home.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:28 pm to Korin
quote:Oh, did I ignore that game?
And if you bring up bowls, then you can't ignore what USC did to OU. Can't have it both ways.
Please point out where I did.
TIA
quote:Cal coach Jeff Tedford was quick to address the question that's been on everyone's mind for a month.
You mean Cal getting screwed out of playing in the Rose and getting stuck with the damn Holiday instead?
"We didn't lose the game tonight because we didn't go to the Rose Bowl," Tedford said. "It had nothing to do with focus and preparation because we didn't go to the Rose Bowl.
"Once and for all, please, it has nothing to do with it. It is not going to set our program back."
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 3:30 pm
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:29 pm to joeyb147
55-19 over OU, meanwhile y'all only beat VT by 3.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:32 pm to Korin
Thanks for the recap. It's almost like I didn't see those games 10 years ago.
However, I don't remember ever posting about that in this thread. Can you please stay on topic. We are talking about Cal here now.
TIA.
However, I don't remember ever posting about that in this thread. Can you please stay on topic. We are talking about Cal here now.
TIA.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:32 pm to Tigerman97
Unless Tennessee's DL beat Aaron Rodgers to the spot of his three step drop, they would have been toast.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:42 pm to joeyb147
Yeah because Tedford would come out and say "We didn't care about this bowl game." It's the same situation as the Bama/Utah bowl game.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:43 pm to VADawg
Didnt Cal hold USC to like 206 yards of offense in 2004 and nearly win?
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:44 pm to Korin
quote:Somebody didn't watch the game...
55-19 over OU, meanwhile y'all only beat VT by 3.
Anybody claiming Auburn "only" or "barely" beat Virginia Tech by 3, didn't watch the game. The score wasn't indicative of how bad Auburn really beat Virginia Tech. It was dominated from start to finish, with them scoring some garbage points.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:45 pm to VADawg
quote:Is it the same situation as the Auburn vs Georgia game this year?
Yeah because Tedford would come out and say "We didn't care about this bowl game." It's the same situation as the Bama/Utah bowl game.
"We didn't care about this game."
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:46 pm to The Silverback
Yeah. Cal played a great game. Rodgers started that game something like 29/31 before missing his final three passes on the last drive inside the USC 10. USC had a few big plays in special teams that led to good field position, but their offense was held in check for the only time all season. Personally I thought those were two of the three best teams in America that season, with Auburn being the other.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:49 pm to TTsTowel
Lol at Auburn not caring about a rivalry game. If Auburn didn't care, they wouldn't have come out and looked so good on their opening drive.
Agree to disagree I guess. I think USC was the best team in 2004. I think Cal and Auburn were 2/2A. Auburn fans disagree, for obvious reasons. Most others agree with me. It is what it is. Not everyone will have the same opinion. That's part of what makes this fun.
Agree to disagree I guess. I think USC was the best team in 2004. I think Cal and Auburn were 2/2A. Auburn fans disagree, for obvious reasons. Most others agree with me. It is what it is. Not everyone will have the same opinion. That's part of what makes this fun.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:50 pm to joeyb147
quote:
Thanks for the recap. It's almost like I didn't see those games 10 years ago.
However, I don't remember ever posting about that in this thread. Can you please stay on topic. We are talking about Cal here now.
TIA.
You're the one who brought up bowls.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:51 pm to The Silverback
The same team that won the 1st time, '11 LSU.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:51 pm to TTsTowel
quote:
Somebody didn't watch the game...
Anybody claiming Auburn "only" or "barely" beat Virginia Tech by 3, didn't watch the game. The score wasn't indicative of how bad Auburn really beat Virginia Tech. It was dominated from start to finish, with them scoring some garbage points.
That's nice and all, but I'm going by what matters most (aka the scoreboard).
Posted on 12/19/14 at 3:52 pm to Korin
quote:Oh, in that case...all that matters is that Auburn won and went undefeated in 2004.
That's nice and all, but I'm going by what matters most (aka the scoreboard).
Page 7 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News