San Jose, California

LSU looked better than USC, but . .

By Skip Bayless
Mercury News Staff Columnist

Cancel the coronation. Hold the Hollywood hype. Put the Trojan Horse back in the barn.

The Team Nobody Knew just rained on USC's parade. That team, Louisiana State, narrowly held off another team that looked slightly stronger than the Trojans -- Oklahoma -- 21-14 in Sunday night's Sugar Bowl.

Two more firsts for the most screwed-up sport in the history of the world: 1) A bandwagonful of analysts and columnists who despise the BCS system gleefully proclaimed USC a no-doubt No. 1 three days before the official championship game; and 2) America's least publicized one-loss team, LSU, looked suspiciously Sunday night like America's best.

What a glorious joke college football's postseason again proved to be. The punch line: We're probably no closer to the only solution -- a playoff tournament of four or (preferably) eight teams.

Please don't tell me it's wonderful for amateur athletics to have co-national champs. Please don't lobby for a return to polls deciding who's No. 1. And please don't think I'm saying: ``The BCS worked after all.''

No, I simply said LSU looked suspiciously like the best team. I believe LSU would be too fast and physical for USC. Ditto, OU. But I can't know for sure. Neither can you, USC fans.

That's the problem. Neither USC nor LSU nor OU nor any other bowl team that caught your fancy will ever get a chance to prove it's the best in a tournament.

That's also the trap that college football fans and critics can't help falling into.

We protest too much. The more we scream, the more we publicize an idiotic postseason format. The more we publicize it, the more we help preserve it by boosting the TV ratings.

I know: I'm again falling headlong into the briar patch I'm criticizing.

But how fair is it for LSU to be penalized in the public's eye for winning the national title game endorsed by the sport's coaches? For getting lost all season in Louisiana's swamp fog instead of playing in the nation's hype capital as USC did? For losing the publicity game because too many in the media failed to recognize how powerful this team is?

I was guilty, too. Until a month ago, I knew LSU only from a few highlights -- none captivating or convincing. So before the Big 12 and Southeastern Conference championship games, I called three NFL scouts who had evaluated USC and LSU for the draft and asked which would be the better test for Oklahoma.

At that point, of course, OU appeared invincible at 12-0 and was projected to be a seven-point favorite over USC in the Sugar Bowl. Yet all three scouts said LSU undoubtedly would match up better with OU.

You're kidding.

Mike Hagen, an Atlanta Falcons scout who had spent time at USC and LSU practices, said: ``LSU has better overall team speed than USC, especially its running backs. LSU has a better secondary. And LSU plays in a more physical conference.''

That's what I saw Sunday night.

When I asked the pro scouts about Michigan, all three said the Wolverines weren't in the same league with Oklahoma, LSU or USC because quarterback John Navarre and running back Chris Perry are good college players who won't be high draft choices. By Michigan standards, they said, this is just a pretty good team.

That's what I saw in USC's 28-14 Rose Bowl parade. The Trojans were sensational on offense -- against just a pretty good defense. The Trojans often looked sensational on defense because they hid their weakness (pass coverage) by sending cornerbacks early and often on blitzes. Shrewd scheme by Coach Pete Carroll: Go after the cement-footed Navarre and sack him into submission.

Nine sacks were the difference in the game.

Yet did it prove beyond debate that USC is No. 1 because it beat a Michigan team that lost at Oregon and Iowa -- and that it did so in a comfort zone of a stadium a half-hour bus ride from its campus? No way.

Have we conveniently forgotten that USC lost in triple overtime at Cal when the Bears were 2-3, having lost to Colorado State and Utah? That day, USC was 3 for 12 on third downs and was outgained 469-376. That day, USC looked like No. 100.

That day, Cal's Adimchinobe Echemandu, who rushed for 147 yards in 34 carries, said: ``I'm not knocking Matt Leinart or their running backs, but I don't see a whole lot of firepower from them. Mike Williams is basically their whole offense.''

Yes, LSU lost 19-7 at home -- but to a highly talented, poorly coached Florida. Have we forgotten that USC gave up 485 yards passing to Oregon State in its final regular-season game at home?

I'd sure like to see USC and LSU meet on a neutral field now.

How fair was it that the nation's two best defenses, LSU's and OU's, were forced to beat up each other in the wake of USC's ``we're No. 1'' statement? For that matter, how fair was it that OU was told all week it could lose the Big 12 title game to Kansas State -- in Kansas City, after the Wildcats had reeled off six wins in a row -- and still qualify for the BCS title game? How fair was it that, after getting leveled by Kansas State, OU was forced to play LSU an hour bus ride from its campus, in the New Orleans Superdome?

This year sure would have been a great year for a playoff tournament, starting in early December. LSU looked best to me. But we'll never know.


January 5, 2004

Tigers go worldwide: The LSU Tigers national championship victory is getting
play around the world. Google's news engine has a whopping 1,570 mentions of
the game. Sports Illustrated's Phil Taylor takes a shot at the BCS, saying that
he would rather be Oklahoma this morning because the Sooner players have
certainty, whereas LSU and USC do not. "A real competitor would rather have a
real answer, even if it's no. Anything is better than maybe," he writes. ESPN
senior writer Gene Wojciechowski says Nick Saban should stay at LSU. "The NFL
will pay him more, but how can it duplicate what happened Sunday night?" The
San Diego Union Tribune's Tim Sullivan praises LSU's defense. "With all of its
wondrous weaponry, maybe USC would have fared better (than Oklahoma). Or maybe
that's a question better left unanswered," writes Sullivan in his column. In
his take, The San Jose Mercury News' Skip Bayless says LSU is better than USC,
and so is Oklahoma. "I believe LSU would be too fast and !
physical for USC. Ditto, OU. But I can't know for sure. Neither can you, USC
fans." And ESPN has the obligatory poll, which asks which team would win
between USC and LSU and other questions. To vote in that poll, click here.

Our two cents: "Wow! What an incredible experience to witness LSU win the
National Championship in the Superdome. All eyes in America were on the Sugar
Bowl and LSU showed why they are the best team in the country. Every
Louisianan and LSU alum is busting with pride over the success of Coach Nick
Saban, his coaches, team and Chancellor Mark Emmert, who took the risk to hire
Saban. Forgive me, but I watched the USC vs. Michigan game and yes, USC had a
good quarterback, but he was no Heisman Trophy winner. LSU showed what
happened when the best quarterback in the land goes up against the No. 1
defense. Trust me, USC doesn't want any of LSU ? just ask Oklahoma (who I
believe would also whip the Trojans.) You can also ask Arizona, which LSU beat
handily. Arizona also played USC, and one of their players said candidly, "LSU
was the best team we faced all year." So forget the New York Times headline,
"Louisiana State Squeezes Onto Throne with Southern Cal." The LSU Tigers!
sit on the throne alone and reign supreme as the Official BCS National
Champions ? and they have the lone trophy to prove it. Hey Trojans, go work on
your tan. (Rolfe McCollister Jr. )

Kevin Massey
1 LSU.........5.060
2 USC.........4.756
3 Ohio St.....4.604
4 Georgia.....4.572
5 Miami OH....4.550

Jeff Sagarin
1 LSU..........98.21
2 USC..........95.56
3 Georgia......92.01
4 Miami OH.....91.89
5 Miami FL.....91.21

NY Times
1 USC...........1.000
2 LSU...........0.996
3 Maryland......0.934
4 Ohio St.......0.927
5 Miami.........0.909
(Note: Maryland #3......hmmmmmm....makes you wonder about this poll)

Billingsley
1 LSU.........309.977
2 USC.........308.769
3 Oklahoma....295.654
4 Miami FL....291.686
5 Ohio St.....290.926
(Note: LSU started the season 30 points behind USC in the first polling for Billingsley)

Anderson-Hester
1 LSU........0.792
2 USC........0.774
3 Miami OH...0.758
4 Oklahoma...0.746
5 Ohio St....0.744

Peter Wolfe
1 LSU........7.634
2 USC........7.252
3 Miami OH...6.910
4 Georgia....6.904
5 Oklahoma...6.766

Colley Matrix
1 LSU.......0.93172
2 USC.......0.91873
3 OHIO ST...0.87783
4 Oklahoma..0.87058
5 Miami FL..0.84364

I guess you're a fan, huh?

Unless they play each other we'll never know.....or care.

"Unless they play each other we'll never know.....or care."

OK, sure, whatever you say. Big 10 had a really off year so I guess you are a little cranky. I'd bet it would matter if Michigan State were being discussed.

I should clarify the take the C out of BCS and that's the way I feel about it, have playoffs charge big money and reveal the true champion, not leave the schools at the mercy of a bunch of alcoholic wannabe sports writers.

It's a rip off to the players.

Or we could move on to something more important and much more entertaining like NCAA Basketball!