Kurt Busch

Im not talking about schedules, Im talking about matchups head to head against each other. USC matched up with Oklahoma the way USC would likely matchup with Auburn. USC did improve in 04 because in 03, Reggie Bush was not the focal point of the offense, it was Colbert and Williams. Also, keep in mind, LSU was lucky to have gotten that 03 national title because USC was #1 in both the AP and Coaches Polls going into the bowls but the coaches were forced to vote for LSU as a result of their agreement with the BCS.

Auburn may have had the tougher schedule but comparing team A to team B head to head, Im taking USC. The 04 USC squad is widely known by most as one of the top 3-5 greatest teams of all time.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The 04 USC squad is widely known by most as one of the top 3-5 greatest teams of all time.
</div></div>

You are correct but as you may remember before Texas and VY ESPN ketp puting out that Idea that the 05 USC squad was the best collage football team ever.

Would Auburn have one the game in 04? Mabye we will never know
Should that have had a shot at playing the game? Sure thing

Collage football needs to get off there butt and get some type of playoff I would like an 8 team playoff but would be just fine 90% of the time with a 4 team Playoff

IMO great teams have to beat great teams in order to be considered great...and that is my argument...I think and always have thought that the 03-04 USC teams were a sham...ABC and ESPN (both owned by Disney) needed a great team on their affliiate and so USC was built up...(it's not a coincidence that the pac-10 and big 10 always have the teams that ABC and ESPN build up as the best in the nation year in and year out)..Who did USC beat in 03 or 05 to be considered great??..no one...I put about as much stock in USC as I did OSU last year. Any of 5 SEc teams could have the same record vs the same competition. They had some good receivers, and Bush is a good back...but there are many that could put up the same numbers vs. the lame-a$$ Pac-10....funniest thing I heard all year was Brent Musberger proclaiming "the road to the national championship is paved with Trojans"..(lol)..while they were beating up on Notre Dame....who got utterly obliviated by LSU...

we arent talking about 03 and 05 though, we are talking about 04 and Oklahoma was considered pretty darn good going into that game. In reality, Oklahoma had more NFL talent on their team than Auburn did.

Notre Dame beat UT in 04 so its pointless to even bring Notre Dame into the debate.

And Counts, ESPN didnt proclaim the 05 team to be #1. They listed them at 3 behind 95 Nebraska and 01 Miami.

I just dont understand the lack of respect for USC's accomplishments when they have taken it to the SEC every time they have had a chance. Arkansas was the 2nd best team in the conference last year, USC was not nearly as good as they have been and they still demolished Arkansas.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Arkansas was the 2nd best team in the conference last year</div></div>

You have to be kidding right?

They were.

Arkansas won the west...but overall they weren't in the top 3 IMO...they beat Auburn, but that was it as far as the SEC powerhouses. And really, what does NFL talent have to do with college football? I've seen teams over and over through the years that were practically unbeatable in college with minimal NFL talent..that means nothing.

LOL I see what they are saying I was taking the SEC as a whole

IMHO I think Florida, LSU, and Auburn were all better teams than Arkansas was last year (I wounder how the #4 Pac-10 School would have done against Florida last season)

The way I see it...comparing the Pac 10 to the SEC is like comparing Cumberland District Football with LPD football (no disrespect intended)...the PAC 10 has 1 dominant team (that struggles with 2-3 teams from the average conference EVERY year)..the SEC has 5-6 Teams that could compete to win any other conference in the USA year in and year out. So, when someone wants to hype some of these other teams (MICH, OSU, OKLA, MIA, USC, etc) I have to laugh. Anyone can walk all over NO COMPETITION and then whine to play for it all. But, the teams that have to compete week in and week out get looked down upon cuz they didn't post 70 points playin the sisters of the poor. I think it is a joke. It would be like the CD champ goin undefeated and folks talkin them up over an undefeated or 1 loss LPD champ. It's comical.

LOL reminds me of the RC team that went into the playoffs 10-0 and got spanked by a 3-7 Appy