Started By
Message
re: The 2003 and 2007 LSU National Championship Seasons
Posted on 7/29/18 at 4:45 pm to Scoob
Posted on 7/29/18 at 4:45 pm to Scoob
quote:
Oklahoma got their doors blown off by K State, and ... stayed #1.
That's the problem, not LSU getting in. LSU deserved its berth (and proved it by winning). They should have played USC, not Oklahoma.
Get out of here with that common sense shite. These trolls and smack talkers simply like to bitch and moan.
0
Posted on 7/29/18 at 4:45 pm to geauxbrown
Yeah, not disputing 2003 LSU was the BCS champ and I liked 2007 LSU, fun team.
But 2003 USC was nasty. Better than 2004 USC and a bit better than 2003 LSU.
2003 LSU and 2004 USC would be dead even IMO.
And 2004 Auburn beats both FYI.
But 2003 USC was nasty. Better than 2004 USC and a bit better than 2003 LSU.
2003 LSU and 2004 USC would be dead even IMO.
And 2004 Auburn beats both FYI.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 4:46 pm to Oklahomey
quote:
Some might dismiss 2007 LSU because tney are the only 2 loss national champion in major college football history. (1960 Minnesota was named national champion prior to second loss in Bowl)
who else should of been in the game besides LSU?
The only way you can diss it is if we weren't deserving to be there.
Who else should of been there?
Posted on 7/29/18 at 4:47 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
2003 LSU and 2004 USC would be dead even IMO.
And 2004 Auburn beats both FYI.
I like this stupid old argument.
Auburn beats 2004 LSU 10 to fricking 9 and you want to say this shite.
Oh well.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 4:48 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Yeah, not disputing 2003 LSU was the BCS champ and I liked 2007 LSU, fun team.
But 2003 USC was nasty. Better than 2004 USC and a bit better than 2003 LSU.
2003 LSU and 2004 USC would be dead even IMO.
And 2004 Auburn beats both FYI.
I can agree with every word you just wrote. No argument here.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:04 pm to CBandits82
LSU clearly deserved to be there. No denying that.
Only other choices:
Oklahoma (11-2) losses to Colorado, 24-27 and Texas Tech, 27-34.
USC (10-2) losses to Stanford, 23-24 and Oregon, 17-24.
Only other choices:
Oklahoma (11-2) losses to Colorado, 24-27 and Texas Tech, 27-34.
USC (10-2) losses to Stanford, 23-24 and Oregon, 17-24.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:07 pm to RollTide1987
LSU is returning to "Purple and Gold Ole Miss" status where they belong. Let them have their glory days.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:08 pm to Oklahomey
quote:
LSU clearly deserved to be there. No denying that.
Only other choices:
Oklahoma (11-2) losses to Colorado, 24-27 and Texas Tech, 27-34.
USC (10-2) losses to Stanford, 23-24 and Oregon, 17-24.
for sure, I just don't get it when people shite on LSU for having 2 losses when there was no one else to put in.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:12 pm to CBandits82
quote:
The only way you can diss it is if we weren't deserving to be there.
It’s based on mnc contenders from every other year in history. Only Ohio st wouldn’t be viewed as a red headed step child champ in 2007.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:21 pm to RollTide1987
Shitty thread of the day and there’s been some hum dingers
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:29 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
2003 USC > 2003 LSU.
2003 USC also > 2004 USC.
All of those teams > 2004 Auburn
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:52 pm to djsdawg
quote:
It’s based on mnc contenders from every other year in history. Only Ohio st wouldn’t be viewed as a red headed step child champ in 2007.
the team LSU beat?
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:56 pm to ImayGoLesMiles
quote:
This is weak.
Very.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 5:56 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
And 2004 Auburn beats both FYI.
I know you've got it prepared so go ahead and post about how Auburn somehow dominated VT in yalls bowl game
Posted on 7/29/18 at 6:08 pm to CBandits82
He’s probably referring to had Ohio State won the title, they would have finished with only 1 loss.
ESPN should do a 30 for 30 on the 2007 season. There would be a lot of material for it; The Curse of #2.
ESPN should do a 30 for 30 on the 2007 season. There would be a lot of material for it; The Curse of #2.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 6:17 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
But 2003 USC was nasty. Better than 2004 USC and a bit better than 2003 LSU.
How so? USC lost to a 6 loss Cal team in 2003.
LSU lost to #24 Florida.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 6:20 pm to TouchdownTony
quote:
I've always thought the 2007 season should have just had vacated that season for a national champ. That may have been the weakest year ever for college football.
Because of a 2L champion means a weak season?
That's fricking retarded even by gump standards.
Goddamn you're dumb.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 6:26 pm to BamaCajunMan
It’s better to be a Lucky Les winning a title than an unlucky UGA team with third an eternity for the title.
Posted on 7/29/18 at 6:42 pm to 19
quote:
Because of a 2L champion means a weak season?
Means a weak champ
Posted on 7/29/18 at 6:43 pm to CBandits82
quote:
team LSU beat?
They would have been the only possibility for a one loss champ.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News