Thursday, January 19, 2006

Thoughts on One-peat

Chances are if you are reading this you know what the One-peat billboard scandal. If you don't just click around on the ole blogroll.

My thoughts on this are mixed. As an LSU fan I love any jab at (F)USC. Yes, I realize Tiger fans stand on USC is totally insane seeing as we haven't played since the 80's, but they are SO easy to hate. LSU fans were the first (besides UCLA fans) in CFB who just wanted USC to go away. As this year came to a close many fans felt this way. As far as the actual "dynasty" goes, everyone agrees that things got out of hand by the end of this year. I wouldn't classify them as a dynasty yet even if they had won the Rose Bowl. Why? Well it isn't because I don't like them.... I just think it takes more than one set of players to establish a dynasty. Now if Pete Carrol keeps on rolling with anywhere near the success he's had the last four years in the NEXT four years than yes, that is a dynasty.

As far as 2003 goes I say its a split title. There's precedents for this obviously.... it happened three times in the 90's after all. Anyway plenty of schools claim titles which were in fact split. LSU won the Football Writers of America Association's national title in 1936, thus I say we have a title in 1936 on the top of my blog. I think the problem that many LSU fans have with 2003 is the way the title was portrayed by the media. It made it look like LSU was lucky to have gotten a shot at the title, like we fluked our way into it, like we were the odd man of the three contenders. Put it this way: if USC and LSU had switched bowl games and results would there have been a split title? I don't think so. The fact is both teams were equally deserving of the title. Yes LSU won the official title, and yes the standard for college football polling in the last however many years voted USC #1. That's okay. I don't have a problem with that as long as each team's national title is treated the same. One complaint: I do think that you'll often hear LSU's title referred to as a "co-championship" or a "split title" while USC just a "national title" or a "championship".

As far as the signs go: I think its amusing. But whatever some USC grad does to our campus or Baton Rouge or the Reveille or the Advocate or whatever.... LSU students will retaliate and it'll be even better than the "One-pete" sign.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home