They had 2 losses and they were Nick Saban's players. Nationally, that NC is less respected than Petey's AP Championship for the 2003 season. Sad but true.

too bad xavier carter didn't pan out.

Class wise this years will probably be better. Production wise we will obviously have to see, but its the three stars that define a class, and 04's certainly did as well as you can hope for.

Wasn't Hester a two-star?

Development is more important than class ranking. Thank God for The Hat.

While technically that may be true, the 2004 class is widely regarded as our most talented.

Hester is the exception, definitely not the norm.

Agreed, but the point is still valid. You can't judge a class by its average star ranking. Only results ON THE FIELD matter. Alabama should dessimate all in the next few years, according to thier class ranking and star power.

But when they don't...I'm sure it will be a "lesser" class that beats them.

Notre Dame is another good example.

I'm not nitpicking. I agree with you. I'm talking about perception. You would be hard pressed to find a non-LSU media reference to the 2003 NC without a mention of USC.

I agree that a class can't always be judged by it's star rating, but it's also no coincidence that the schools that are perennially at the top of recruiting polls are, for the most part, perennially at the top of the college football polls during the regular season.

Naturally, but my point is more valid when comparing LSU's classes. They have been nearly identical for the last decade in terms of incoming talent...with some outshining others on paper while some outshine others on the field. Last year, for example...our prime contributors were typically not our most prized recruits.

LSU's "best" recruiting class isn't truly determined until we see what they accomplish in the heat of battle. 2009 might smother the competition or they might not live up to the hype. We won't know for a few more years.