I think our '03 team would beat OSU's '02 team. That team won ugly, and wasn't even thought to be anything colse to being a great team then.
I agree the 02 Ohio State team should not have even been considered over the 03 Tigers and probably many others. They only won the NC because the refs made one of the worst calls in the history of football allowing Ohio State to beat Miami (interference call in the endzone). That controversial call alone should have disqualified OSU.
Can't lose to a Ron Zook-coached team at home and expect to be included among the best 32 ever. Most of the teams on there are undefeated. This is not a snub by any means.
Also, these all-time tourneys are stupid. I realize the point of sparking discussion and blah, blah, but there is no way that a team from the 50s or 60s wouldn't get blown off the field by the bigger, faster, stronger teams from the 90s and 2000s. Complete waste of time and another good example of getting worked up over nothing.
Too bad. But, pound-for-pound, I believe the 1958-59 squads would BOTH give you one hellacious battle during any era. Those teams could compete defensively with ANY of your modern day teams today - your choice! :geauxtige :lsup: :helmet: :crystal: 1958 Championship was Greaaaat! Using today's rules during 1959, Cannon would have scored by TWO football lengths even without replay versus Tennessee. They later won the Bourbon Street Bowl (night before) but not the Sugar Bowl in 1960 in Ole Miss re-match in which Cannon had everything to lose and nothing to gain due to pre-game signing with newfound AFL (same with Robinson and Rabb).
No way, dude. Teams today are much bigger, stronger, and faster than back then. I'm sorry, but I don't see a white guy like Billy Cannon running the gauntlet today like he did back then.
I believe I said regarding the teams. And where in hell do you think that weight training programs in college began? Your age is akin to fine wine - don't sip the sauce before its time. Same thing goes for wisdom. BTW, at the time, Cannon was generally regarded as the either the . . . . . . . (1) strongest sprinter (2) fastest shotputter (3) all of the above Never sell your daddy short - he just might be gaining on you!
Okay, so just because weight training programs began back then (which is what I'm assuming you're getting at), it means that they're going to be bigger, faster, and stronger? I think you need to lay off the fine wine. :yelwink2: And again, Cannon may have been regarded that way at the time, but I think any linebacker or defensive back that starts for a major D-1 school today would run him down. Two different eras, two different styles of play. I stand by my reasoning that today's teams would whoop up on yesterday's teams.
But, "yesterday's teams" were smarter and tougher than today's teams. LBs would probably catch Cannon, but could they tackle him? I watched Tommy Banks break a 70 yd TD against Carencro in the Dome in 93. No one caught Banks. I'm pretty sure Cannon was faster than Banks as well as Carencro's DB's. Carencro's DB's COULD have caught him, but they didn't WANT to.
Tougher: I can see that angle when you consider a lot of guys played both ways. Smarter: I really doubt it. Why do you think so?
