When I started thinking about this, I was initially quite torn between the two teams. Both have a nice staple of our favorite players like Mauck, Clayton,Spears, Hill , Webster, Lavalais, Davis,Landry, Skyler for 2003, and Flynn, Hester, Holliday, Doucet, Byrd, Keiland, Dorsey, Highsmith, Beckwith, Stelz for 2007. The first NC game win had a sweeter aftertaste at that time, but flawed by the split championship controversy. For the team, the 2003 defense was the more consistent and stronger suit. The team/season experience for the two teams was also different: In 2003 after the Florida loss, they hated it so much that they never turned back. For the 2007 team, there was definitely more hardship and a tougher road, with almost every team bringing their A games(prob. due to the high season round ranking), the team suffering more injuries, as well as emotional highs and lows (both fans and players:grin. But the team has the character of hanging tough, and grinding through the regular season with their injuries. Both offense and defense ARE GOOD, and are confident in themselves. The football Gods lend their helping hands in both seasons, particularly this season in view of their two loss record, and the near impossible odds before the final games of the season; it must be that the Gods think this team is truly deserving. Topping off the final game with a dominating and complete game is what makes this team more special. Therefore my vote is for this year's "SHIP":thumb: :geaux:
They all are great but the 1958 championship team was better for me cuz that's when I first learned about the LSU Tigers and how special they are.
That poll is not objective and realistic. Look at the bottom of the poll, where it says "not a scientific survey. Click to learn more." I guarantee you that most of the people voting in that poll are LSU fans. Regardless, even if a scientific poll was taken of random self-described college fans, you have to understand that your average college football fan is not going to consider who has the best winning percentage this decade, who has won their conference the most this decade, who has the most 11 win seasons this decade, who has the most 10 win seasons this decade, who has won the most BCS bowl games this decade, who has gone to the most BCS bowl games this decade, who has the most Heisman winners this decade, who has the most appearances at #1 in weekly and final AP Polls this decade, who has the most appearances in the AP Top 5 weekly and final polls this decade, who has the most appearances in the AP Top 10 weekly and final polls this decade, stuff like that. Even if a scientific poll was taken of random self-described football fans, LSU would do well. Your average person is only going to remember recent events, such as LSU's comfortable win over OSU in the National Championship last week, and LSU's high-profile blow outs of VT, Notre Dame, and Miami in recent years.
You are confusing me. Are you arguing that USC is the team of the decade because unlike the average fan, you look at the many different factors you listed above? Lets look at the facts: 1. I stated LSU was the team of the decade 2. You stated USC and OSU were above LSU in this category 3. I showed you a poll on a National Site that had 84 percent of 49,000 people voting that LSU was indeed the team of the decade 4. You state the poll is not realistic or objective, and most of those voting are LSU fans. 5. You then argue that the average fan does not use the criteria you would use. Here is my opinion on the matter. LSU is the team of the decade. Further, the large majority of college football fans would vote for LSU as the team of the decade. Why? 2 BCSNC trophies, first and foremost. Also because of 4 BCS bowl wins, and 3 SECCG wins (which is believed by many to be the best conference). History remembers and records champions. You put too much emphasis on getting to the big games. Will the Bills go down as the greatest team of the 90's in the NFL because of their AFC dominance? It is not where you are ranked during the season that matters, it is not dominating your conference that matters - on the national scene (as you argued earlier that FL was not the team of the 90's). The average fan is going to remember who has won the most NC's. I apologize if I misunderstood anything you stated. I just think that you put too much emphasis on the secondary statistics. It is OK for us to disagree on this. We are both Tiger fans and can enjoy these years however we see fit. I personally like to enjoy them as not just a top ten program, but as "the team of the decade!" Forever LSU!
One more point about this 1007 team: in the NC game, the offensive game plan and play calling was impressive and fun; they literally neurtalized a very good defense. It is a consistently high scoring offense, unlike previous teams. Pellini also called a good game, IMO. Nice closure.
You bring up a good point that the 1958 championship was the best. In my posts earlier, I tried to argue that the 2007 Tigers were as good as the 1958 Tigers, because they are the only two teams in LSU history to be undisputed National Champions. But honestly, the 2007 Tigers aren't even close to the The 1958-1959 Tigers. The 1958-1959 Tigers, led by Billy Cannon, had the best run in SEC history. They spent 15 consecutive weeks at the AP #1 spot. Since then, the only six NCAA programs to have longer streaks at AP #1 are Nebraska, Oklahoma, Ohio State, FSU, Miami, and USC. In all their great histories, neither Notre Dame, Michigan, or Texas had had a run as great as the one by the 1958-1959 Tigers. As for other SEC teams, the only team that has come close to the run by the 1958-1959 Tigers was Spurrier's 1996 Florida team (10 weeks at #1). In all his great years at Alabama, Bear Bryant never had a team that had a run as great as the 1958-1959 Tigers (Bear Bryant's Alabama's longest run was 7 weeks at AP #1). The next best runs by SEC teams were by Tennessee and Georgia (both spent 6 consecutive weeks at AP #1).
