2004 Tigers - Best of All Time

[api1957 1,783]

Just so we don't forget how good this 2019 defense is. In 2004 the best offense we played was Tennessee, twice. This year, so far, we've played 7 teams with offenses better than that TN team. 

[AUChatman1971 15]

11 hours ago, Tigerpro2a said:

First off....Thank you for creating this thread. I love it and I love trying to get our minds to something good.

2004 is definitely the GOAT for me. I have not seen a more complete team in the SEC in my lifetime. JMHO.

I believe if 04 squared off against 10...it would be a route. Cam would be Cam and he would get 20 points, but not much more....and the 04 Offense with Jason, Ronnie and Lac with the great WR corps and OL would score at will against that 10 Defense. The game would look worse than the score indicates.

 

 

Carlos Rogers was an absolute beast.

[Mims44 1,867]

Man, the 2010 defense getting crapped on in this thread. That team had a good bit of talent on defense. Give it a better DC and I think they might whoop up on '04.

On the line you got (and I get some of them were young) Nosa Eguae, Zach Clayton, Corey Lemonier, Dee Ford, Nick Fairley. Thorpe, Bell, and Davis in the secondary. And Bynes (who doesn't get enough credit) holding down MLB. 

[SaltyTiger 7,790]

16 hours ago, leglessdan said:

They'll always be National Champions for that year in my mind. What an absolute dominant team. It most definitely has to be in the top 10 all time teams.

Same here. Eufala Tribune named us and good enough for me. Still have that paper.

 

[Tiger 8,819]

44 minutes ago, Mims44 said:

Man, the 2010 defense getting crapped on in this thread. That team had a good bit of talent on defense. Give it a better DC and I think they might whoop up on '04.

On the line you got (and I get some of them were young) Nosa Eguae, Zach Clayton, Corey Lemonier, Dee Ford, Nick Fairley. Thorpe, Bell, and Davis in the secondary. And Bynes (who doesn't get enough credit) holding down MLB. 

That defensive talent can't hold a candle to the 2004 one IMO. I don't know the exact numbers but I think the number of 04 players that had real professional careers vastly outnumber the 2010 team. 

What's crazy is that in 03 we had Karlos Dansby and Dontarrious Thomas. Whooowheee

[Tigerpro2a 5,650]

3 minutes ago, Tiger said:

That defensive talent can't hold a candle to the 2004 one IMO. I don't know the exact numbers but I think the number of 04 players that had real professional careers vastly outnumber the 2010 team. 

What's crazy is that in 03 we had Karlos Dansby and Dontarrious Thomas. Whooowheee

Thats it...2010 was a solid unit, but 2004 was elite. 

[Tiger 8,819]

5 minutes ago, Tigerpro2a said:

Thats it...2010 was a solid unit, but 2004 was elite. 

1 rushing TD given up the whole season or something like that? ELITE.

Nick Fairley and Josh Bynes made timely and game changing plays there's no doubt about it. But they were getting gashed quite often. That 2004 unit was incredible from start to finish.

[SaltyTiger 7,790]

12 hours ago, fredst said:

The ‘88 defense was so good that I would give them a chance

Will 2nd and 3rd that one. Have always wondered how our 2010 offense would have fared against that defense. Most points scored on that us year was by North Carolina at 21. Went through a stretch of 12 plus quarters without giving up a point.

[SumterAubie 3,031]

6 hours ago, AUght2win said:

'83 was a great team. But 2004 was clearly better. They were winners, plain and simple. Even if you put a pro team out there against 'em, I would feel pretty confident. They were just mature, driven men that knew they were going to win before each kickoff. 

The 2004 team played 13 games. 5 against top 20 teams. 2 against 6-6 teams. And 6 against teams with losing records,. Meaning over half the games were against .500 teams or worse.

While the '83 team, with 12 games, played 7 top 20 teams, beating 5 on consecutive weekends and only two of the remaining 5 had a losing record. 

Yet you believe the '04 team is clearly better. The bold sentence is pretty amusing.

[fredst 9,064]

51 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Will 2nd and 3rd that one. Have always wondered how our 2010 offense would have fared against that defense. Most points scored on that us year was by North Carolina at 21. Went through a stretch of 12 plus quarters without giving up a point.

The physical beating we put on Tim Worley and UGA that year was a thing of beauty. Held UF to <120 yds total offense at Florida Field too- only time that UF crowd was loud that day was for Mr. TwoBits. 

[fredst 9,064]

13 minutes ago, SumterAubie said:

the '83 team, with 12 games, played 7 top 20 teams, beating 5 on consecutive weekends and only two of the remaining 5 had a losing record. 

This. 2004 was incredible no doubt. The quality of competition for that ‘83 team was incredible and that was Bo at his most dominant (more than his Heisman year). Not sure it’s possible to say one was better than the other. Blessed to have seen both

[SaltyTiger 7,790]

28 minutes ago, fredst said:

Not sure it’s possible to say one was better than the other

You are correct in that. Three truly great teams were 83, 88, 04. 2010 was great and a result of the "Perfect Storm" in personnel, timing.....jmo.

[AUght2win 6,833]

4 hours ago, SumterAubie said:

The 2004 team played 13 games. 5 against top 20 teams. 2 against 6-6 teams. And 6 against teams with losing records,. Meaning over half the games were against .500 teams or worse.

While the '83 team, with 12 games, played 7 top 20 teams, beating 5 on consecutive weekends and only two of the remaining 5 had a losing record. 

Yet you believe the '04 team is clearly better. The bold sentence is pretty amusing.

Well considering '83 lost a game at home by two touchdowns, and '04 dominated practically their entire schedule, I'm inclined to believe 2004 was better.

'83 played only 6 top twenty teams. They also didn't beat 5 on consecutive weekends. Both 2004 and 1983 beat four top 10 teams, and 5 top twenty teams. Their resumes are practically identical, but 83 suffered a loss.

That said, looking at '83's schedule, it's an absolute joke they weren't named national champs. They handed undefeated UGA their first loss, as well as beating a 6-0-1 Florida team. Three straight wins over top 10 teams late in the year. If the SEC had the clout then, that it has now, Auburn would've easily taken every poll.

[SumterAubie 3,031]

5 hours ago, SumterAubie said:

The 2004 team played 13 games. 5 against top 20 teams. 2 against 6-6 teams. And 6 against teams with losing records,. Meaning over half the games were against .500 teams or worse.

While the '83 team, with 12 games, played 7 top 20 teams, beating 5 on consecutive weekends and only two of the remaining 5 had a losing record. 

Yet you believe the '04 team is clearly better. The bold sentence is pretty amusing.

 

46 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

Well considering '83 lost a game at home by two touchdowns, and '04 dominated practically their entire schedule, I'm inclined to believe 2004 was better.

'83 played only 6 top twenty teams. They also didn't beat 5 on consecutive weekends. Both 2004 and 1983 beat four top 10 teams, and 5 top twenty teams. Their resumes are practically identical, but 83 suffered a loss.

That said, looking at '83's schedule, it's an absolute joke they weren't named national champs. They handed undefeated UGA their first loss, as well as beating a 6-0-1 Florida team. Three straight wins over top 10 teams late in the year. If the SEC had the clout then, that it has now, Auburn would've easily taken every poll.

Correct on the one loss. To the number 3 team in the country that would go undefeated until losing, to a team Auburn beat, in the Cotton bowl. Not like the '83 team lost to weak team. 

3 Texas, 17 FSU, 5 Florida, 7 Maryland, 4 Georgia, 19 bamr, and 8 Michigan. That is 7 top twenty teams. Auburn beat 6 of them.And while not on consecutive weekends,  5 in a row. There is no comparison in the SoS. The '83 team had a much tougher schedule than the '04. 

[AUsince72 11,084]

5 hours ago, fredst said:

This. 2004 was incredible no doubt. The quality of competition for that ‘83 team was incredible and that was Bo at his most dominant (more than his Heisman year). Not sure it’s possible to say one was better than the other. Blessed to have seen both

Yes, I hate missing Sullivan to Beasley but I feel I was born in a nice sweet-spot for an Auburn fan.  I got to personally witness the 1983, 1993, 2004, 2010 & 2013 teams, not to mention the other really good teams over the years.  I've been blessed!  War Eagle!

[AUght2win 6,833]

1 hour ago, SumterAubie said:

 

Correct on the one loss. To the number 3 team in the country that would go undefeated until losing, to a team Auburn beat, in the Cotton bowl. Not like the '83 team lost to weak team. 

3 Texas, 17 FSU, 5 Florida, 7 Maryland, 4 Georgia, 19 bamr, and 8 Michigan. That is 7 top twenty teams. Auburn beat 6 of them.And while not on consecutive weekends,  5 in a row. There is no comparison in the SoS. The '83 team had a much tougher schedule than the '04. 

Florida State was unranked.

[SumterAubie 3,031]

2 hours ago, AUght2win said:

Florida State was unranked.

According to the Associated Press Top twenty poll, FSU was 17th when they played Auburn. The were not ranked in the UPI coaches poll. 

So we are splitting hairs here.

[AUght2win 6,833]

1 hour ago, SumterAubie said:

According to the Associated Press Top twenty poll, FSU was 17th when they played Auburn. The were not ranked in the UPI coaches poll. 

So we are splitting hairs here.

No they were not ranked in the AP. 

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

13 hours ago, bigbird said:

And we wouldn't have been left out, IMO

I think we would have sill been left out though. That was the days when you didn't move a 1 or 2 unless they lost and OU and USC were in those slots from day 1.

I still remember them using the Alabama game against us but defending USC vs UCLA with a similar score. Then the OU/Texas aTm and the OU/OSU games came down to final plays and the media (ESPN especially) played up the good teams survive and find ways to win against rivals angle with them. Every week at the end they said it... Auburn over GA we are moving in, Auburn over AL we are moving them in. Auburn beats Tenn again we are moving them in.

[fredst 9,064]

6 hours ago, AUght2win said:

Well considering '83 lost a game at home by two touchdowns, and '04 dominated practically their entire schedule, I'm inclined to believe 2004 was better.

'83 played only 6 top twenty teams. They also didn't beat 5 on consecutive weekends. Both 2004 and 1983 beat four top 10 teams, and 5 top twenty teams. Their resumes are practically identical, but 83 suffered a loss.

That said, looking at '83's schedule, it's an absolute joke they weren't named national champs. They handed undefeated UGA their first loss, as well as beating a 6-0-1 Florida team. Three straight wins over top 10 teams late in the year. If the SEC had the clout then, that it has now, Auburn would've easily taken every poll.

Our problem in ‘83 was Nebraska. They had been labeled all year as the greatest team of all time. Then Miami (that had lost by 25 to the Florida team that we beat) beats them in what was essentially a home game-bowl game in the Orange Bowl. Presto, Miami jumps from #5 to #1 and claims a national championship while we stay at #3 despite winning while #1 and #2 lose. What an epic screwing we got that year

[SumterAubie 3,031]

3 hours ago, AUght2win said:

No they were not ranked in the AP. 

You must be trolling me now. 

AP Polls

• Share & more
  •  

Wk	Date	Rk	School	Prev	Chng	1st	Conf
5	1983-09-26	1	Nebraska (4-0-0)	1		60	Big 8
5	1983-09-26	2	Texas (2-0-0)	2			SWC
5	1983-09-26	3	Arizona (4-0-0)	4	1		Pac-10
5	1983-09-26	4	Iowa (3-0-0)	7	3		Big Ten
5	1983-09-26	5	North Carolina (4-0-0)	5			ACC
5	1983-09-26	6	Alabama (3-0-0)	6			SEC
5	1983-09-26	7	West Virginia (4-0-0)	12	5		Ind
5	1983-09-26	8	Ohio State (2-1-0)	3	5		Big Ten
5	1983-09-26	9	Oklahoma (2-1-0)	8	1		Big 8
5	1983-09-26	10	Auburn (2-1-0)	11	1		SEC
5	1983-09-26	11	Georgia (2-0-1)	14	3		SEC
5	1983-09-26	12	Florida (3-0-1)	15	3		SEC
5	1983-09-26	13	SMU (3-0-0)	18	5		SWC
5	1983-09-26	14	Michigan (2-1-0)	17	3		Big Ten
5	1983-09-26	15	Miami (FL) (3-1-0)				Ind
5	1983-09-26	16	LSU (2-1-0)				SEC
5	1983-09-26	17	Florida State (2-1-0)	20	3		Ind
5	1983-09-26	18	Washington (2-1-0)	9	9		Pac-10
5	1983-09-26	19	Maryland (2-1-0)				ACC
5	1983-09-26	20	Arizona State (2-0-1)				Pac-10

 

September 26, 1983 AP Football Poll

Rank		Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (60)	Big 8	4-0	1200	W 42-10 H UCLA
2	< 2	Texas	Southwest	2-0	1138
3	< 4	Arizona	Pac-10	4-0	1001	W 27-10 H Cal Fullerton
4	< 7	Iowa	Big Ten	3-0	998
5	< 5	North Carolina	ACC	4-0	917
6	< 6	Alabama	SEC	3-0	880
7	< 12	West Virginia	Ind	4-0	750
8	< 3	Ohio State	Big Ten	2-1	709
9	< 8	Oklahoma	Big 8	2-1	695	W 28-18 H Tulsa
10	< 11	Auburn	SEC	2-1	693
11	< 14	Georgia	SEC	2-0-1	619
12	< 15	Florida	SEC	3-0-1	586
13	< 18	SMU	Southwest	3-0	385
14	< 17	Michigan	Big Ten	2-1	384
15	< NR	Miami (FL)	Ind	3-1	310
16	< NR	LSU	SEC	2-1	284
17	< 20	Florida State	Ind	2-1	215
18	< 9	Washington	Pac-10	2-1	179
19	< NR	Maryland	ACC	2-1	157
20	< NR	Arizona State	Pac-10	2-0-1	114

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_NCAA_Division_I-A_football_rankings#AP_Poll

AP Poll[edit]

 

	reseason Aug 28[1][2]	Week 1 Sep 5[3]	Week 2 Sep 12[4]	W   P eek 3 Sep 19[5]	Week 4 Sep 26[6]	Week 5 Oct 3[7]	Week 6 Oct 10[8]	Week 7 Oct 17[9]	Week 8 Oct 24[10]	Week 9 Oct 31[11]	Week 10 Nov 7[12]	Week 11 Nov 14[13]	Week 12 Nov 21[14]	Week 13 Nov 28[15]	Week 14 Dec 5[16]	Week 15 (Final) Jan 3[17]
1.	Nebraska (30)	Nebraska (1–0) (44)	Nebraska (2–0) (51)	Nebraska (3–0) (57)	Nebraska (4–0) (60)	Nebraska (5–0) (60)	Nebraska (6–0) (55)	Nebraska (7–0) (52)	Nebraska (8–0) (54)	Nebraska (9–0) (57)	Nebraska (10–0) (58)	Nebraska (11–0) (59)	Nebraska (11–0) (58)	Nebraska (12–0) (52)	Nebraska (12–0) (51)	Miami (FL) (11–1) (47 1⁄2)	1.
2.	Oklahoma (11)	Oklahoma (0–0) (3)	Oklahoma (1–0) (2)	Texas (1–0) (2)	Texas (2–0)	Texas (3–0)	Texas (4–0) (5)	Texas (5–0) (6)	Texas (6–0) (4)	Texas (7–0) (2)	Texas (8–0) (2)	Texas (9–0) (1)	Texas (10–0) (1)	Texas (11–0) (3)	Texas (11–0) (3)	Nebraska (12–1) (4 1⁄2)	2.
3.	Texas (3)	Texas (0–0) (2)	Texas (0–0) (2)	Ohio State (2–0)	Arizona (4–0)	Alabama (4–0)	North Carolina (6–0)	North Carolina (7–0)	North Carolina (7–0)	Auburn (7–1)	Auburn (8–1)	Auburn (9–1)	Auburn (9–1)	Auburn (9–1)	Auburn (10–1)	Auburn (11–1) (7)	3.
4.	Penn State (2)	Auburn (0–0) (1)	Notre Dame (1–0) (1)	Arizona (3–0)	Iowa (3–0)	North Carolina (5–0)	West Virginia (5–0)	West Virginia (6–0)	Auburn (6–1)	Georgia (7–0–1)	Georgia (8–0–1)	Illinois (9–1)	Illinois (10–1)	Illinois (10–1)	Illinois (10–1)	Georgia (10–1–1)	4.
5.	Auburn (2)	Notre Dame (0–0)	Auburn (1–0)	North Carolina (3–0)	North Carolina (4–0)	West Virginia (5–0)	Auburn (4–1)	Auburn (5–1)	Florida (6–0–1)	Miami (FL) (8–1)	Illinois (8–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Texas (11–1)	5.
6.	Notre Dame	Michigan (0–0)	Ohio State (1–0)	Alabama (2–0)	Alabama (3–0)	Ohio State (3–1)	Ohio State (4–1)	Florida (5–0–1)	Georgia (6–0–1)	Illinois (7–1)	Miami (FL) (9–1)	SMU (8–1)	SMU (9–1)	SMU (10–1)	SMU (10–1)	Florida (9–2–1)	6.
7.	Florida State (1)	Ohio State (0–0)	Arizona (2–0)	Iowa (2–0)	West Virginia (4–0)	Auburn (3–1)	Florida (5–0–1)	Georgia (5–0–1)	Miami (FL) (7–1)	Maryland (7–1)	SMU (7–1)	Georgia (8–1–1)	Georgia (8–1–1)	Georgia (9–1–1)	Georgia (9–1–1)	BYU (11–1)	7.
8.	USC	North Carolina (1–0)	Michigan (1–0)	Oklahoma (1–1)	Ohio State (2–1)	Oklahoma (3–1)	Georgia (4–0–1)	Miami (FL) (6–1)	Michigan (6–1)	SMU (6–1)	BYU (8–1)	Michigan (8–2)	Michigan (9–2)	Michigan (9–2)	Michigan (9–2)	Michigan (9–3)	8.
9.	Ohio State	USC (0–0)	Florida State (2–0)	Washington (2–0)	Oklahoma (2–1)	Florida (4–0–1)	Arizona (5–0–1)	SMU (5–0)	Illinois (6–1)	Florida (6–1–1)	Michigan (7–2)	BYU (9–1)	BYU (10–1)	BYU (10–1)	BYU (10–1)	Ohio State (9–3)	9.
10.	Michigan (1)	Georgia (1–0)	North Carolina (2–0)	USC (1–0–1)	Auburn (2–1)	Arizona (4–0–1)	Miami (FL) (5–1)	Michigan (5–1)	SMU (5–1)	North Carolina (7–1)	Ohio State (7–2)	Ohio State (8–2)	Iowa (9–2)	Iowa (9–2)	Iowa (9–2)	Illinois (10–2)	10.
11.	North Carolina	Arizona (1–0)	Georgia (1–0)	Auburn (1–1)	Georgia (2–0–1)	Georgia (3–0–1)	Alabama (4–1)	Illinois (5–1)	Washington (6–1)	Oklahoma (6–2)	Maryland (7–2)	Iowa (8–2)	Florida (7–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	Florida (8–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	11.
12.	LSU	Florida State (1–0)	Alabama (1–0)	West Virginia (3–0)	Florida (3–0–1)	Miami (FL) (4–1)	SMU (5–0)	Iowa (5–1)	West Virginia (6–1)	BYU (7–1)	Iowa (7–2)	Florida (7–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	Florida (7–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	SMU (10–2)	12.
13.	Alabama	LSU (0–0)	Iowa (1–0)	Notre Dame (1–1)	SMU (3–0)	SMU (4–0)	Michigan (4–1)	Arizona State (4–0–1)	Maryland (6–1)	Michigan (6–2)	Boston College (7–1)	Clemson (8–1–1)	Alabama (7–2)	Boston College (9–2)	Boston College (9–2)	Air Force (10–2)	13.
14.	Arizona	Alabama (0–0)	USC (0–0–1)	Georgia (1–0–1)	Michigan (2–1)	Michigan (3–1)	Iowa (4–1)	Washington (5–1)	Oklahoma (5–2)	Ohio State (6–2)	Florida (6–2–1)	West Virginia (8–2)	Ohio State (8–3)	Ohio State (8–3)	Ohio State (8–3)	Iowa (9–3)	14.
15.	Georgia	SMU (1–0)	Florida (1–0–1)	Florida (2–0–1)	Miami (FL) (3–1)	Iowa (3–1)	Oklahoma (3–2)	Maryland (5–1)	BYU (6–1)	Iowa (6–2)	West Virginia (7–2)	Washington (8–2)	Boston College (8–2)	Pittsburgh (8–2–1)	Pittsburgh (8–2–1)	Alabama (8–4)	15.
16.	Iowa	Iowa (0–0)	Washington (1–0)	Pittsburgh (2–0)	LSU (2–1)	Maryland (3–1) т	Maryland (4–1)	Oklahoma (4–2)	Ohio State (5–2)	Boston College (6–1)	Alabama (6–2)	Alabama (7–2)	Pittsburgh (8–2–1)	Maryland (8–3)	Air Force (9–2) т	West Virginia (9–3)	16.
17.	Maryland	Maryland (0–0)	Maryland (1–0)	Michigan (1–1)	Florida State (2–1)	Washington (3–1) т	Washington (4–1)	Ohio State (4–2)	Iowa (5–2)	West Virginia (6–2)	Clemson (7–1–1)	Pittsburgh (8–2)	Maryland (8–3)	Air Force (8–2)	Maryland (8–3) т	UCLA (7–4–1)	17.
18.	Washington	Florida (1–0)	SMU (2–0)	SMU (2–0)	Washington (2–1)	Arizona State (3–0–1)	Arizona State (3–0–1)	BYU (5–1)	Alabama (4–2)	Notre Dame (6–2)	Washington (7–2)	Boston College (7–2)	Air Force (8–2)	West Virginia (8–3)	West Virginia (8–3)	Pittsburgh (8–3–1)	18.
19.	SMU	Washington (0–0)	Pittsburgh (2–0)	Boston College	Maryland (2–1)	Illinois (3–1)	Illinois (4–1)	Arizona (5–1–1)	Boston College (5–1) т	Alabama (5–2)	North Carolina (7–2)	Missouri (7–3)	West Virginia (8–3)	Alabama (7–3)	East Carolina (8–3)	Boston College (9–3)	19.
20.	UCLA	Penn State (0–1)	West Virginia (2–0)	Florida State (2–1)	Arizona State (2–0–1

[AUght2win 6,833]

2 hours ago, SumterAubie said:

You must be trolling me now. 

AP Polls

• Share & more
  •  

Wk	Date	Rk	School	Prev	Chng	1st	Conf
5	1983-09-26	1	Nebraska (4-0-0)	1		60	Big 8
5	1983-09-26	2	Texas (2-0-0)	2			SWC
5	1983-09-26	3	Arizona (4-0-0)	4	1		Pac-10
5	1983-09-26	4	Iowa (3-0-0)	7	3		Big Ten
5	1983-09-26	5	North Carolina (4-0-0)	5			ACC
5	1983-09-26	6	Alabama (3-0-0)	6			SEC
5	1983-09-26	7	West Virginia (4-0-0)	12	5		Ind
5	1983-09-26	8	Ohio State (2-1-0)	3	5		Big Ten
5	1983-09-26	9	Oklahoma (2-1-0)	8	1		Big 8
5	1983-09-26	10	Auburn (2-1-0)	11	1		SEC
5	1983-09-26	11	Georgia (2-0-1)	14	3		SEC
5	1983-09-26	12	Florida (3-0-1)	15	3		SEC
5	1983-09-26	13	SMU (3-0-0)	18	5		SWC
5	1983-09-26	14	Michigan (2-1-0)	17	3		Big Ten
5	1983-09-26	15	Miami (FL) (3-1-0)				Ind
5	1983-09-26	16	LSU (2-1-0)				SEC
5	1983-09-26	17	Florida State (2-1-0)	20	3		Ind
5	1983-09-26	18	Washington (2-1-0)	9	9		Pac-10
5	1983-09-26	19	Maryland (2-1-0)				ACC
5	1983-09-26	20	Arizona State (2-0-1)				Pac-10

 

September 26, 1983 AP Football Poll

Rank		Team (FPV)	Conf	Rec	Pts	Last Week
1	< 1	Nebraska (60)	Big 8	4-0	1200	W 42-10 H UCLA
2	< 2	Texas	Southwest	2-0	1138
3	< 4	Arizona	Pac-10	4-0	1001	W 27-10 H Cal Fullerton
4	< 7	Iowa	Big Ten	3-0	998
5	< 5	North Carolina	ACC	4-0	917
6	< 6	Alabama	SEC	3-0	880
7	< 12	West Virginia	Ind	4-0	750
8	< 3	Ohio State	Big Ten	2-1	709
9	< 8	Oklahoma	Big 8	2-1	695	W 28-18 H Tulsa
10	< 11	Auburn	SEC	2-1	693
11	< 14	Georgia	SEC	2-0-1	619
12	< 15	Florida	SEC	3-0-1	586
13	< 18	SMU	Southwest	3-0	385
14	< 17	Michigan	Big Ten	2-1	384
15	< NR	Miami (FL)	Ind	3-1	310
16	< NR	LSU	SEC	2-1	284
17	< 20	Florida State	Ind	2-1	215
18	< 9	Washington	Pac-10	2-1	179
19	< NR	Maryland	ACC	2-1	157
20	< NR	Arizona State	Pac-10	2-0-1	114

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_NCAA_Division_I-A_football_rankings#AP_Poll

AP Poll[edit]

 

	reseason Aug 28[1][2]	Week 1 Sep 5[3]	Week 2 Sep 12[4]	W   P eek 3 Sep 19[5]	Week 4 Sep 26[6]	Week 5 Oct 3[7]	Week 6 Oct 10[8]	Week 7 Oct 17[9]	Week 8 Oct 24[10]	Week 9 Oct 31[11]	Week 10 Nov 7[12]	Week 11 Nov 14[13]	Week 12 Nov 21[14]	Week 13 Nov 28[15]	Week 14 Dec 5[16]	Week 15 (Final) Jan 3[17]
1.	Nebraska (30)	Nebraska (1–0) (44)	Nebraska (2–0) (51)	Nebraska (3–0) (57)	Nebraska (4–0) (60)	Nebraska (5–0) (60)	Nebraska (6–0) (55)	Nebraska (7–0) (52)	Nebraska (8–0) (54)	Nebraska (9–0) (57)	Nebraska (10–0) (58)	Nebraska (11–0) (59)	Nebraska (11–0) (58)	Nebraska (12–0) (52)	Nebraska (12–0) (51)	Miami (FL) (11–1) (47 1⁄2)	1.
2.	Oklahoma (11)	Oklahoma (0–0) (3)	Oklahoma (1–0) (2)	Texas (1–0) (2)	Texas (2–0)	Texas (3–0)	Texas (4–0) (5)	Texas (5–0) (6)	Texas (6–0) (4)	Texas (7–0) (2)	Texas (8–0) (2)	Texas (9–0) (1)	Texas (10–0) (1)	Texas (11–0) (3)	Texas (11–0) (3)	Nebraska (12–1) (4 1⁄2)	2.
3.	Texas (3)	Texas (0–0) (2)	Texas (0–0) (2)	Ohio State (2–0)	Arizona (4–0)	Alabama (4–0)	North Carolina (6–0)	North Carolina (7–0)	North Carolina (7–0)	Auburn (7–1)	Auburn (8–1)	Auburn (9–1)	Auburn (9–1)	Auburn (9–1)	Auburn (10–1)	Auburn (11–1) (7)	3.
4.	Penn State (2)	Auburn (0–0) (1)	Notre Dame (1–0) (1)	Arizona (3–0)	Iowa (3–0)	North Carolina (5–0)	West Virginia (5–0)	West Virginia (6–0)	Auburn (6–1)	Georgia (7–0–1)	Georgia (8–0–1)	Illinois (9–1)	Illinois (10–1)	Illinois (10–1)	Illinois (10–1)	Georgia (10–1–1)	4.
5.	Auburn (2)	Notre Dame (0–0)	Auburn (1–0)	North Carolina (3–0)	North Carolina (4–0)	West Virginia (5–0)	Auburn (4–1)	Auburn (5–1)	Florida (6–0–1)	Miami (FL) (8–1)	Illinois (8–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Miami (FL) (10–1)	Texas (11–1)	5.
6.	Notre Dame	Michigan (0–0)	Ohio State (1–0)	Alabama (2–0)	Alabama (3–0)	Ohio State (3–1)	Ohio State (4–1)	Florida (5–0–1)	Georgia (6–0–1)	Illinois (7–1)	Miami (FL) (9–1)	SMU (8–1)	SMU (9–1)	SMU (10–1)	SMU (10–1)	Florida (9–2–1)	6.
7.	Florida State (1)	Ohio State (0–0)	Arizona (2–0)	Iowa (2–0)	West Virginia (4–0)	Auburn (3–1)	Florida (5–0–1)	Georgia (5–0–1)	Miami (FL) (7–1)	Maryland (7–1)	SMU (7–1)	Georgia (8–1–1)	Georgia (8–1–1)	Georgia (9–1–1)	Georgia (9–1–1)	BYU (11–1)	7.
8.	USC	North Carolina (1–0)	Michigan (1–0)	Oklahoma (1–1)	Ohio State (2–1)	Oklahoma (3–1)	Georgia (4–0–1)	Miami (FL) (6–1)	Michigan (6–1)	SMU (6–1)	BYU (8–1)	Michigan (8–2)	Michigan (9–2)	Michigan (9–2)	Michigan (9–2)	Michigan (9–3)	8.
9.	Ohio State	USC (0–0)	Florida State (2–0)	Washington (2–0)	Oklahoma (2–1)	Florida (4–0–1)	Arizona (5–0–1)	SMU (5–0)	Illinois (6–1)	Florida (6–1–1)	Michigan (7–2)	BYU (9–1)	BYU (10–1)	BYU (10–1)	BYU (10–1)	Ohio State (9–3)	9.
10.	Michigan (1)	Georgia (1–0)	North Carolina (2–0)	USC (1–0–1)	Auburn (2–1)	Arizona (4–0–1)	Miami (FL) (5–1)	Michigan (5–1)	SMU (5–1)	North Carolina (7–1)	Ohio State (7–2)	Ohio State (8–2)	Iowa (9–2)	Iowa (9–2)	Iowa (9–2)	Illinois (10–2)	10.
11.	North Carolina	Arizona (1–0)	Georgia (1–0)	Auburn (1–1)	Georgia (2–0–1)	Georgia (3–0–1)	Alabama (4–1)	Illinois (5–1)	Washington (6–1)	Oklahoma (6–2)	Maryland (7–2)	Iowa (8–2)	Florida (7–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	Florida (8–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	11.
12.	LSU	Florida State (1–0)	Alabama (1–0)	West Virginia (3–0)	Florida (3–0–1)	Miami (FL) (4–1)	SMU (5–0)	Iowa (5–1)	West Virginia (6–1)	BYU (7–1)	Iowa (7–2)	Florida (7–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	Florida (7–2–1)	Clemson (9–1–1)	SMU (10–2)	12.
13.	Alabama	LSU (0–0)	Iowa (1–0)	Notre Dame (1–1)	SMU (3–0)	SMU (4–0)	Michigan (4–1)	Arizona State (4–0–1)	Maryland (6–1)	Michigan (6–2)	Boston College (7–1)	Clemson (8–1–1)	Alabama (7–2)	Boston College (9–2)	Boston College (9–2)	Air Force (10–2)	13.
14.	Arizona	Alabama (0–0)	USC (0–0–1)	Georgia (1–0–1)	Michigan (2–1)	Michigan (3–1)	Iowa (4–1)	Washington (5–1)	Oklahoma (5–2)	Ohio State (6–2)	Florida (6–2–1)	West Virginia (8–2)	Ohio State (8–3)	Ohio State (8–3)	Ohio State (8–3)	Iowa (9–3)	14.
15.	Georgia	SMU (1–0)	Florida (1–0–1)	Florida (2–0–1)	Miami (FL) (3–1)	Iowa (3–1)	Oklahoma (3–2)	Maryland (5–1)	BYU (6–1)	Iowa (6–2)	West Virginia (7–2)	Washington (8–2)	Boston College (8–2)	Pittsburgh (8–2–1)	Pittsburgh (8–2–1)	Alabama (8–4)	15.
16.	Iowa	Iowa (0–0)	Washington (1–0)	Pittsburgh (2–0)	LSU (2–1)	Maryland (3–1) т	Maryland (4–1)	Oklahoma (4–2)	Ohio State (5–2)	Boston College (6–1)	Alabama (6–2)	Alabama (7–2)	Pittsburgh (8–2–1)	Maryland (8–3)	Air Force (9–2) т	West Virginia (9–3)	16.
17.	Maryland	Maryland (0–0)	Maryland (1–0)	Michigan (1–1)	Florida State (2–1)	Washington (3–1) т	Washington (4–1)	Ohio State (4–2)	Iowa (5–2)	West Virginia (6–2)	Clemson (7–1–1)	Pittsburgh (8–2)	Maryland (8–3)	Air Force (8–2)	Maryland (8–3) т	UCLA (7–4–1)	17.
18.	Washington	Florida (1–0)	SMU (2–0)	SMU (2–0)	Washington (2–1)	Arizona State (3–0–1)	Arizona State (3–0–1)	BYU (5–1)	Alabama (4–2)	Notre Dame (6–2)	Washington (7–2)	Boston College (7–2)	Air Force (8–2)	West Virginia (8–3)	West Virginia (8–3)	Pittsburgh (8–3–1)	18.
19.	SMU	Washington (0–0)	Pittsburgh (2–0)	Boston College	Maryland (2–1)	Illinois (3–1)	Illinois (4–1)	Arizona (5–1–1)	Boston College (5–1) т	Alabama (5–2)	North Carolina (7–2)	Missouri (7–3)	West Virginia (8–3)	Alabama (7–3)	East Carolina (8–3)	Boston College (9–3)	19.
20.	UCLA	Penn State (0–1)	West Virginia (2–0)	Florida State (2–1)	Arizona State (2–0–1

Source is wiki, same as you.

Something is messed up, though. Digging a little, FSU was apparently ranked 9th two weeks prior to us. They lost to Tulane the week before us (TU would actually have to forfeit that game later). They were never 20th prior to us, as those polls claim, so idk where wiki is getting its numbers from. 

Edit: I see now. FSU lost to a pitiful Tulane team, dropped to 20, then had an off week and rose 3 spots to 17. 

[AUpreacherman22 3,885]

I meant to post in this thread before it got derailed.  Oops, I missed that opportunity.   
 

“The best” AU team is obviously subjective, so I’m not trying to enter into a futile argument.   
With that said, the 2004 team is easily MY FAVORITE AU team ever!!!  That defense was nasty!   The offensive backfield had 3 1st rounders!  But what makes the 2004 team stand out is their team leadership, team unity, confident swagger, and the “IT” factor.  That team was just a different kind of special!   They will always hold a special place in my heart!

[WarEagle1982 449]

On 11/21/2019 at 9:16 PM, fredst said:

The ‘88 defense was so good that I would give them a chance

If the 88 team had not crapped the bed at LSU they probably would have played ND in the Sugar Bowl for the title.  I think they would have won.  This year’s defense reminds me a lot of that defense.  The “big name “ guys were up front and the guys behind them were not considered stars but were very tough and hard-nosed players.

[fredst 9,064]

24 minutes ago, WarEagle1982 said:

If the 88 team had not crapped the bed at LSU they probably would have played ND in the Sugar Bowl for the title.  I think they would have won

Agree completely. That defense just physically punished people. The two games lost we gave up a total of 20 points. Still think that was Dye’s best AU team, even better than ‘83