I couldn't agree more, the two best teams met on the field. The BCS disqualified USC because of the BYU factor(didn't play anybody). USC didn't earn the right to play for the championship. The media hype and USC bias is what has people talking split championship. As far as snotrton's claim that LSU-USC would have been a better match up I couldn't disagree more. USC didn't have a defense anywhere near what Oklahoma had and USC's offense would have never crossed the 50 yard line against the LSU D. However it would have been fun to watch LSU absolutely annihilate the condoms on national tv. And yes a 4 team playoff would be better.:geaux: :lsug:
uh.......hate to tell you that is exactly what happened to oklahoma....they were anihilated.....so you could have had the same result without having to share a title......i think you've been robbed......
In 5 years, pick 20 people at random off the streets of LA and ask them who won the NC in 2003. I'll bet that 18 out of 20 will not say USC and will have no clue. I'll bet that 20/20 in BR will say LSU.
i agree......i don't think the people of california are as passionate about football as they are in louisiana........oh you didn't mention the titles in 2004-200x......there is a dynasty in lsu football in place........i just want it to be as memorable as it can be......
