Is Texas the best ever?

by FreedomDip on Dec 30, 2005 10:24 AM CST

Since everybody and their dog is in forward-thinking mode about USC being the best ever even though they have just one outright title and haven't won this year's yet, let me throw a bone out there.

Like Miami (2000) and USC (2003), Texas lost only one game in 2004. Should Texas beat USC by, say 17 points or more, and Vincent Young decides to stay and the Horns beat Ohio State at home, Oklahoma in Dallas and run the table to the Fiesta, will we have the same debate over Texas being the best ever this time next year?

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Of course

and this website will be complementing ESPN for their fair and balanced coverage of UT going for a 3 peat, 2004 champions as voted by CFCH, Center for Changing History.

by Wells on Dec 30, 2005 10:27 AM CST 0 recs

Yeah no kidding...

Because if you think about it, even though USC won the BCS National Game, Texas did win the Rose Bowl, which was like winning a faux national championship. If it's not a three-peat, its definitely a 2.5-peat at least.

by bendj on Dec 30, 2005 11:16 AM CST up 0 recs

Best ever...

If Texas beats SC this year and runs the table to another national championship next year then they certainly would belong in a discussion of all-time great teams.

They still have a long way to go at this point to match what SC has done though. Last year's Rose Bowl is a good start, but that would equal SC's first Orange Bowl win against Iowa not the split national championship Rose Bowl game against Michigan. A BCS win is great but it isn't the same thing as the AP national championship.

True SC has only one outright national title at this point, but a 34 game win streak and having as many Heisman winners as losses over the last 4 years are impressive feats that make them worthy of all-time consideration. If Texas were to win a second NT next year and run the table, I'd bet on VY to have the Heisman and the hype at that point would be pretty intense. But then they still have to beat USC this year, and that isn't going to be an easy thing to do.

phil

by philroq on Dec 30, 2005 12:46 PM CST 0 recs

Phil, you keep spewing ignorance...

"If Texas beats SC this year and runs the table to another national championship next year then they certainly would belong in a discussion of all-time great teams."

Are you talking the best Dynesty or team? Because if team A beats team B, then Team A is better. I agree that UT will hav eto win the Rose Bowl and run next year too to be compared to USC's current run, but this Team is not the same as it was last year. You can only have one team per year. Or do you want to suit up last years players too?

by GoHorns on Dec 30, 2005 2:11 PM CST up 0 recs

Dynasty vs Team

I was talking more in terms of dynasty rather than team. In light of the complaints about the hype being voiced here, the fact is a team in a dynasty is going to be hyped more than a team on a one year championship run (check out what happens if the Patriots make this years Superbowl).

Yes, viewed strictly on the basis of this year's USC team the ESPN thing is ridiculous. Since both teams are so strong in this year's Rose Bowl the winner of this years game might deserve mention in such a discussion. If the game turns into a blowout then the winner would have a strong case.

Before the game it isn't even legit to consider this year's team the best USC team of all-time.

phil

by philroq on Dec 30, 2005 4:57 PM CST up 0 recs

trying to knock sc's NC's is chickenshit

Cut that weak-azz crap out.

There have been shared national championships for decades, and the BCS is hardly any more of an authority.

Anyone want to give back Texas' title in '70? Then shut up, because we shared that one.

The AP has been around for a hell of a lot longer than the BCS, and they will still be around when the BCS is dead. As far as I'm concerned the AP has as much legitimacy if not more.

sc was #1 IN BOTH POLLS before the bowls, and beat the #4 team in the bowl game. How can any rational fan of the sport NOT grant them a share of the title? To deny that is just petty and shows you are not a true fan of the sport.

And NO, that's not the same as auburn, who may have gotten screwed, but were NEVER ranked #1 in the major polls before or after the season.

Trying to discount another team's history is for p*ssies.
Let's focus on winning this year, shall we?

by Scott the bull Ware on Dec 30, 2005 6:32 PM CST 0 recs

You should give back '70

1971 Cotton Bowl: Notre Dame 24, Texas 11

Not playing the #2 team and beating the #4 team is not quite the same as losing to #6 and still considering yourself champions.

Fight On! Beat the Longhorns!

by kidomaha on Jan 4, 2006 10:07 AM CST up 0 recs

Dude

Why was the BCS formed? Remember why? The Big Ten and Pac 10 wanted a piece of the bowl alliance after Washington split a title in 1991 and Michigan had no shot at it in 1994. Then Michigan got the split in 1997. They wanted no more split titles.

So, the Rose Bowl conferences decided to join a system that pitted the top two teams against each other. The two major polls were only a fraction of the overall selection of the process.

Do I think USC shoulda been the team getting beat by LSU in New Orleans that night? Absolutely. OU shouldn't have even been there after getting their asses handed to them in their title game. Everybody except OU fans knew that.

Is the AP legit? Sure. Nobody ever said they weren't. Is the BCS legit? You bet your ass or it wouldn't be as big as it is.

And why wasn't Auburn not ranked No. 1 during the season? Because the "beloved" AP had USC/Oklahoma 1/2 just about all year and nobody was cracking that regardless of how good they were. We'll never know if Auburn really got screwed just as we'll never know if USC was truly the best team in 2003 or 2004? At least there'll be no doubt in 2005.

by FreedomDip on Dec 30, 2005 7:24 PM CST 0 recs

But their WAS a split title

Scott TBW is on the money here. LSU and USC split the title in 2003. The whole "USC/the AP/the media" came up with some new freakin' trophy to give the Trojans just to job the BCS is a bunch of hooey. The system was what it was and it's not USC's fault the BCS forgot to strong-arm the AP into rubber-stamping the winner of the BCS NC game as automatic #1 the same way they did with the UPI/coaches poll. The BCS itself acknowledges this fact on their own website (much to their chagrin, I am sure) and made yet another series of changes before the 2004 season to try and see that things didn't get mucked up again.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=timeline

by Defender90 on Dec 31, 2005 7:08 AM CST 0 recs

Get Your History Up

Because ALL college football is, is history and tradition.

The AP made up a trophy? That has been handed out for years. It was named after Bear Bryant after his death in '93.

Auburn got the situation it would've gotten in the 50 years before the BCS. If you're #1 and you keep winning then you stay #1. Never, on God's green earth would LSU have finished #1 in the Coach's poll and taken home that crystal ball if the BCS didn't exist. That is why people forget them, and rightly so.

The BCS is as legitimate as the AP poll? The AP poll is the most credible and longest running MAJOR means of deciding a national champ. The Coach's "poll" is a joke, having signed a contract to put the winner of the BCS game at the top of their "poll," without a vote, at the end of the year to add some legitimacy to the BCS.

I'll tell you this, in fifteen years people will talk about who won the AP poll in 2003 but the only mention of the LSU Tigers will be as a side note to USC. That is the greatest measure of legitimacy, how you hold up under time, and the AP poll has and will continue to do that. I'm not sure the same can be said about the BCS or the Coach's poll.

I'd spit on the crystal ball and hug the AP's 2004 trophy in USC's Heritage Hall if I could.

USC UTHSCSA

by txmed on Dec 31, 2005 8:38 PM CST up 0 recs

I think the BCS champ will retain legitimacy...

...over the years.

But not any more so than the AP trophy, which is the closest thing to a legit NC title that D1 college football has.

Bottom line- we all know the BCS will come and go eventually. But the AP will still be around long afterwards, and any true fan of the sport has to appreciate the historical significance of that.

by Scott the bull Ware on Jan 3, 2006 7:02 PM CST 0 recs