Well Tirk, I;ll have to disagree wtih you on that one. US has had a pretty good defense the past 2 years and I'd say they won more with defense than with offense in that time span, creating turnovers especially. They gave up more total yards due to being in the PAC 10 and facing more and better passing offenses. And finishing 3rd in the nation in scoring D was pretty darn good.
i think we agree on the same things. i didnt see anything scheme wise that took teams out of the game. wait, i take that back, his defensive halftime adjustments were pretty solid which kept them in games. initially, it always seemed they were outplayed by the talented teams and even controlled at times. however, good coaches make the right adjustments, regardless how overrated that comment is. so i guess i gotta give petey cred either way.
I wouldn't call last year a rebuilding year, Saban actually said that last year was supposed to be his best team yet.
you are correct sir! though I could see why last year was supposed to be the best... with mike clayton and matt mauck being seniors... well you get the idea..
I could be wrong but I thought I remember someone (maybe Saban) saying that the championship came a year early. Saban saying something to the affect that he thought 2004 was his best chance at a championship since he's been at LSU. One thing though, I still wouldn't call last year a rebuilding year.
I don't think you ever heard Nick say that I-of-the-Tygrr, amny other have though. And they could have been right if Matt, Mike and Marquise had come back. USC actually beat OSU by 8 and without OT. But they sure didn't drill as many teams as many others think.
What I should have said was 'rebuilding year', spoken as to ostensibly translate the idea that we were having to replace a lot of key players, yet simultaneously insinuating that we overacheived. That was how talking heads generally complemented us for going 9-2 (reg.). Either way, the key point remains that, despite Sabans prior assessment, we did have a lot of big spots to fill due to the unexpected success of 2003. We were particularly in need of some leadership on the field. I believe that fact was exemplified not necessarily in the losses, but in the far-too-close wins over inferior competition.
