We have officially succeeded in having the nation's #1 offense, with the nation's last-ranked defense.

Hurrah!

>:(

Defense wins championships. Case in point: the 2002-2003 Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Funny!

[quote author=Hazard link=board=6;threadid=3288;start=0#msg25940 date=1067199771]
Defense wins championships. Case in point: the 2002-2003 Tampa Bay Buccaneers
[/quote]
Oakland was also the #1 ranked offense in that game.

NFL memochats will be banned, as will Lacrosse and other pussy sports.

That illustrates my point further. Defense will win you Championships. The number one defense vs. the number one offense and the defense prevailed.

Having the #1 offense sometimes means your defense sucks so badly that the other team scores in 25 seconds and gives you the ball right back.

Football is surely a game of balance. A stingy defense and an explosive offense is what you commonly see in Championship teams.

True. Even the Fun n Gun didn't win a championship until they had a awesome defense.

See also: the 1996 University of Florida Gators.

That's exactly the team to which I'm referring. They had a terrific defense that year.

Edit: A STOOPS defense, if I might add.

Also see the 2000 Oklahoma Sooners - ran the same offense as Texas Tech but with a punishing defense.

A strong offence is the best defence.

[quote author=Eibro link=board=6;threadid=3288;start=0#msg26111 date=1067283536]
A strong offence is the best defence.
[/quote]

Welcome to the college football discussion Eibro. I'll follow my own rule and not flame you. However, would you care to justify that assertion in terms of examples of teams having a strong offense where that makes a strong defense? I can easily rattle off teams that have super offenses that lose ballgames anyway, being unable to stop the opponent from scoring.

This year's perfect example is Texas Tech. Here we have a QB that throws for 661 yards in one game, and the team still loses the ballgame.

Oh, I thought this was a hockey discussion. Please excuse me.

The Pittsburgh Panthers being another example. Larry Fitzgerald is arguably the single best player in the NCAA yet they still loose football games, which is why his Heisman hopes are threatened.

Which is why the Heisman trophy is a big fucking joke.

It doesn't go to the best player, it goes to the best player on the best team. You can argue it until you vomit but that's the way it is.

How about players at D1-AA schools? I guarantee you that once in the next 10 years you'll find a player at a D1-AA school that is the best player in the nation, but he won't win the Heisman. Why? He's at a D1-AA school.

Take last year for example...if you watched any of the All-Star games and paid attention to the wide receivers, there was one receiver by the name of David Kirkus, that was EASILY better than 95% of the WR's taken in the draft. Some of the catches he made and the moves & speed he had were phenomenal. Yet...oh my god...he couldn't possibly be that great because he played at a D1-AA school. Give me a break.

I still had a glimmer of faith in the Heisman trophy until Eric Crouch won it in 2001.

[quote author=DarkMinion link=board=6;threadid=3288;start=15#msg26314 date=1067403459]I still had a glimmer of faith in the Heisman trophy until Eric Crouch won it in 2001.[/quote]

Haha. Oh please, the Heisman trophy has nobody fooled into believing it goes to the best player. Why get upset about it? Everyone pretty much believes the same as you do. It's not an NCAA award, it is a private award given by a private club. No big deal, no harm, no foul.